Watch 30 for 30 espn "the real rocky" Don king had the sanctioning bodies rank Chuck top 10 so he can fight Ali.
So you're basically saying that a 40 something year old Foreman in the 1990s was better than a 20 something year old that Ali fought?atsch. You act as though being the first man to beat a prime Moore was a small feat. Mind you foreman didn't just win some trinket, he beat the real heavyweight champ Michael Moore who had just defeated Evander Holyfield. Foreman also beat Bart Cooper, Jerry ****ey whom past his prime or not would have put Furey into critical condition if they fought, and Shannon Briggs whom many felt got gift decision against Foreman.
Ali was so good that his sparring partner Larry Holmes refused an enswell to the swelling that Ali gave him in sparring so he can brag to his homies that he had just shared the ring with finest heavyweight boxing have ever seen. Ask any heavyweight today who their favorite fighter is, and chances are they will say Muhammad Ali. Even smaller fighters like sugar ray Leonard wanted to be like Ali. You may not wanna take my word but listen to the fighters themselves tell how great Ali was.
His extraordinary size, strength, decent skills and fighting spirit would have carried him to the very top as a contender. Needless to say, he would have struggled with Ali, Holmes, Foreman, Lyle, Norton and Frazier. That's not to say he wouldn't have beaten a couple of them, but these would have been tough, TOUGH fights. His aforementioned attributes(first sentence) would have probably gotten him past everyone else in the division, however.
Your point was foreman came back and beat the bigger and improved fighters of the new era then give me his best win as a former lhw who was exposed on more than one occasion as being not so great at heavyweight.then bring ****ey who was washed up recovering drug and alcohol abuser who was at least 5 years out of his prime and Bert ****ing cooper.come on now son wake up will you
It's funny because the majority of the '70s fighters were constantly in worse shape than Tyson Fury, and while being 10 inches shorter and 40-50 lbs lighter. They also fought like ****, go watch their fights, the entire ones, not just the highlights. Incredibly amateurish, constantly open, slow, terrible workrate, never sitting behind punches but always arm punching and slapping. People that worship the '70s dont know **** about boxing, or have never seen more than some youtube highlight.
What does that prove ? For 1 ali couldn't knock anyone with a decent chin out,that Fraziers power wasn't all it was cracked up to be as he nailed ali with hundreds of his best shots or lastly that they were both super human ?
we know if wlad hit frazier with them sort of shots, frazier would of been ko'd round 5. And if tyson hit ali that many times, Ali ko'd in 3. :bbb
What a bunch of nonsense. Everything you wrote in your list is fictional and holds no real value. "x is said to be" "x is tought to be" "x was probably" While in reality, Frazier's ONLY notable win is against ali. Frazier was featherfisted, like his ko percentage suggest, and like his ko percentage screams when you remove sub-heavyweight opponents. He was also blind on one eye, sloppy, uncoordinated, small, FAT (he had an hanging belly). "George Foreman- Olympic gold medalist. Considered by many as the hardest punching in heavyweight heavyweight in history (check his knockout ratio)" Nonsense. How many olympic gold medallist are out there? Considered by many means nothing: his ko percentage is similar to the one of many other hw boxers, and some even have an higher one. Remove sub-heavyweight opponents and bums and his ko percentage drops. And in his "fantastic" comeback he carefully avoided the entirety of the hw division, only cherrypicking small featherfisted cruiserweights.
Maybe the record of slaps and pitty-pats. And by that reasoning, Ibeabuchi-Tua shows that modern heavys are better, giving also how both of them were bigger.