Is Ali the No.1 h2h Heavyweight?

how could ali have the best record if he wouldnt have won as much cause the skill level he only did so good cause nobody could match him in skill and it has nothing to do with if you say he was felloff with joe he would always have a hard time so it doesn't matter which state he was in

 

I really cant follow a lot of this tbh. I reject your claim that Alis peers in the 60s and 70s division weren't skilled.

I really dont understand how you're like "he only beat everyone around him bc he was so skilled" after saying hes not that skilled.

Yes he would always have a hard time with Frazier and Norton and yeah probably even tyson but he found ways to sometimes beat guys that he was always gonna have a hard time with.

So in a round robin hes gonna always beat guys like patterson foreman liston the early 80s rotating champs and have some wins and some losses against guys like frazier Norton Tyson Lewis the super heavies who will either be stylistic nightmares or have huge size advantage. Overall that would be a very good record

 

Tyson fighting Ali would have been beat far worse than he did against Douglas. Ali was 10X the fighter Douglas was in Tokyo, no comparison. Prime Holmes would have stopped him, too (though Holmes may have suffered a knockdown). Douglas on his best day couldn't tie either of those guys' sneakers, most knowledgeable boxing people know that.

And yeah, I'm talking about the same, early twenties Mike Tyson. He was great, borderline sensational, but he was far from h2h greatest. He had one speed and one style. Anytime he tried to change his fighting style to fit his opponent he got put in his place...often badly. Even Liston was able to acclimate himself to an opponent's style, he was never a pure swarmer exclusively. Mike couldn't do that.

 

I never said ali wasnt that skilled that was a lie how could ali have a chance vs big hws when he had multiple flaws those hws could take advantage of

he didnt get away with those flaws with joe or ken ali is overrated bad he would be great still but he wouldnt be dominate the same

 

H2H I don't think so
Hard to gauge given the guys he fought were mostly cruiserweights by today's standards

 

60s Ali vs.
Johnson Ali UD
Louis Ali SD
Charles Ali TKO 11
Marciano Ali UD
Patterson Ali TKO 13
Johannsen Ali TKO 6
Liston (prime) Ali TKO 9
Frazier (non-FOTC) Ali SD 15 (FOTC) Joe always takes a UD
Foreman Ali KO 6
Norton Ali UD 15
Holmes Ali SD 15
Weaver Ali KO 3
Tyson Ali KO 8
Spinks M. Ali ko 6
Holy (this one is very tough)...I can't call it
Bowe Ali SD
Pre-Steward Lewis Ali wins UD
Post-Steward Lewis...too tough to call
Wlad Ali TKO 8
Fury Ali TKO 12
Wilder Ali TKO 5
Joshua Ali TKO 6

 

I feel the same but like I told philly he was used to out matching everybody except joe who gave him trouble

 

it's not a "lie," you aren't using punctuation and you are missing words from sentences. i literally said "i'm having a hard time following."

if i'm misunderstanding your posts it's your own fault. but when you say "how could ali have the best record if he wouldnt have won as much cause the skill level" i take that to mean he wouldn't have won as much because he wasn't as skilled as many of his hypothetical opponents.

Ali had flaws, yes, but also had natural gifts that allowed him to do things like lean back or keep his guard extended too much. prime he had hand and footspeed of a welterweight in a hw body. he also had an ATG chin so when he did get caught bc of his said flaws he always got up (if he even went down which he only did a few times in his career) and several times stopped the guy who dropped him.

Ali "got away" with the flaws in several fights with Norton and Frazier enough to win some fights with those guys, despite both of them having all the stylistic advantages. And, for the fourth or fifth time, the Ali I am envisioning in this imaginary scenario is even more athletic than the Ali from FOTC or the Norton fights.

 

Who can really.

 

I think ali would have a tougher time with norton Frazier holyfield louis tyson and possibly Marciano and prime patterson but I still think he has a good chance to beat all of them.

I truly believe ali decisions Lennox every time though. Probably a disappointing fight from an entertainment perspective since I think ali would have to be very evasive and do a lot of lead rights and then be out of there. But lennox wouldn't be able to adjust to win the rounds and alis chin and foot speed and ring iq too good to get ko by Lewis.

As far as the really huge guys I just dont know. Greatness is one thing but h2h fighting someone as large as vitali or fury esp since ali liked to tie up on the inside and wrestling with guys. But ali wasnt heavy but he wasn't small. Foreman talked a lot about how ali not being a puncher and his personality would make him seem diminutive bc it seems like compensating. but then when u got face to face you realized "oh this is a big strong guy"

 

Ali is unbeatable if you ignore all the fights he lost.

H2H modern heavies with a good jab would beat him. Ali did not have the firepower or the skillset to fight as the smaller man.

Never convincingly beat Norton but ofc his ring IQ was "too good".

 

No fighter is absolutely unbeatable. Even the greatest of all can lose to someone on a given night but if we put all the great heavyweights into a league points scenario then Muhammad finishes on top of the league as he would lose less than any other heavy.

 

He is not beating Lewis, Klitschko or even Holmes.

 

no way he beats these names or others

 

I dont use punchuation and dont have to just like I told the other troll days ago your brainwashed I talk how I want so I dont have to talk the way you was told was the right way and no it's not my fault your brainwashed

nothing is hard to understand
a person doesn't have to talk the way you was taught in school to understand that's a problem with you not me or anybody else

ali in his 60s form moved good and was quick but like you said he had flaws and he wasnt as skilled as mutiple dudes in the 90s