Muammad Ali's Bum-of-the-Month challengers

I would say Coopman and Dunn. The others all figured in The Rings annual ratings one time or other.

Chuvalo and Lyle was quite solid contenders, so they don't belong in this company IMO.

 

I'm pretty sure Coopman is generally considered the worst fighter to ever have a title shot.

Wepner wasn't a very good fighter, but he was a longtime contender. London wasn't a great fighter either, but he was an English champion, and he had a number of wins over other early Ali opponents like Henry Cooper. No reason for him to be viewed so much lower than Henry.

Chuvalo was a very solid gatekeeper, and a guy who was probably robbed of the title at one point. (After Ali announced his conversion, the WBA stripped him of the title and had an eliminator for it between Chuvalo and Terell. Everyone thought Chuvalo had won, and all the reporters and photographers were in his corner after the fight, then had to go to the other side of the ring when it was announced that Terrell was the winner). Particularly in the 60s, when he and Ali fought for the first time, there's no way to say he didn't deserve it.

Lyle was a legit challenger. He tended to fall short against the top guys in the division, but he was legit.

So pick Coopman or Dunn. Most of the others don't belong there.

 

Coopman takes it for me ,he was reportedly drinking Champagne in his dressing room before the fight.Ali is said to have told ringside executives to get all their adverts in early as "I cant hold this bum up any longer".Dunn was a modest challenger ,not too durable ,but he gave it his best shot and tried his damndest,in contrast to the "Lion Of Flanders " who fought like a well fed ***** cat.

 

Rudi Lubbers is another one we could of done without !
( even if he was saving the right hand for Frazier !)

 

Chuvalo and Lyle were decent contenders

 

Ruddi ****rs, Jurgen Blin,Alvin Lewis, Chuck Wepner,J.P.Coopman,Evangelista,Richard Dunn, even though Spinks had 6 fights he was still more alive than these guys.....Ali did not always look for quality but he fought his share of both the best and the worst

 

Rudi Lubbers, Jurgen Blin and Al Lewis wasn't contenders for the title. Ali wasn't champ when he met them.

 

Absolutely.

Chuvalo gave Ali the best fight of all his title oponents pre Frazier and Lyle eminently deserved a title shot.

 

Dunn period. He was awful as a boxer, a fine man, but he did suck as a fighter.

Ali fought some terrible fighters, but I do not see Dunn beating Evangelista, Coopman or Spinks.

 

Just for the record.
Brian London LOST al his three fights against Henry Cooper. P15 twice and once stopped in the first round.

Nice guy Chuvalo won the last 3 or 4 rounds against Terrell, but unfortunatly he lost the first 10 when he was outjabbed by Terrell. (I have the fight)

Woller

 

i hate the saying bum of the month because when it was first coined it was for louis and most of these bums was goof fighters and if i remember right billy conn was a bum of the month and he nearly beat louis

 

Of course while we may be disapointed by some of Ali's choices of title oponents it is easy to forgive given the number of dangerous challengers he took on.

 

Yeah, and where was ever the perfect title reign? Johnson, who I've have huge respect for, avoided the most dangerous challenges, Dempsey's wasn't that impressive either, Louis had a lot of bums, Marciano had Cockell (even if he took on the best otherwise) Patterson's reign was one of the very weakest as was Frazier's (if you only count him as champion after FOTC), Holmes's wasn't extremely impressive etc. etc..

Tyson's reign was possibly the best. Only credible opponents. Ali's first reign was one of the best, but you have your Londons, Williams and Coopers there.

 

he was still Ali and they were not even known by boxing insiders...Blue Lewis was but he lost every big fight and was not a threat but a build up but opponents did not matter when Ali fought most fans were not boxing experts just Ali fans or haters.......These guys had no chance