No Fighter In Heavyweight History Could Outpoint 67 Ali

Since this is the old fantasy discussion I generalize. The 67' Ali could and in IMO would beat any heavyweight in history. Very few could and IMO probably would not, beat Ali. I would never bet against Ali.

Prime fighters:
1) Dempsey: Ali KO's him late
2) Louis: Ali by UD
3) Marciano: The only other fighter I would not bet against
4) Fazier: Ali by UD
5) Norton: Ali by late TKO
6) Holmes: Ali by UD or late TKO
7) Tyson: Ali by late TKO
8) Bowe: Ali by UD
9) Lewis: Ali by UD
10) Holyfield: Ali by UD
11) Klitchko's: Vit, Ali by UD / Wlad, Ali by mid round TKO

 

1964 - 1967 Ali didn't hit nowhere near as hard as the post-exile 1970's Ali. I will agree that pre-exile Ali was faster on his feet and had quicker hands. However, all the talk of his skills seriously diminishing after 1967 is very exaggerated IMO. Ali wasn't as far past his prime in the FOTC as many people suggest. Even during the pre exile years, Ali didn't "dance" for every round against every opponent and I can't understand why people conclude he couldn't dance for fifteen rounds post-exile when he never did during his first reign. Ali sat down on his punches in the 1960's just like he did in the 1970's. The only difference like I said is that he hit much harder post-exile. If he and Frazier fought in 1967 or 1968, I think Ali would win a close decision based on the advent of the scoring at that time. Judges favoured boxers over punchers, so Ali's 3 or 4 jabs to Frazier's 1 left hook probably wins most rounds. This wasn't the case in the FOTC even though Ali landed more jabs and right crosses. Frazier landed more power shots that were significantly harder and he had Ali backing up more in the fight which counts in the scoring. I think Frazier could win a decision against 1964-1967 Ali because he gets no credit or respect for the quickness of his pressure. Too much emphasis is placed on George Foreman's two round KO in 1973 against a Frazier that was out of shape and nowhere close to the fighter from FOTC. In fact I would conclude that both Ali and Frazier weren't at their very best in the FOTC. Don't compare the left hook shot that Henry Cooper landed against Ali with Frazier's hook. Ali took a punch much better in the 1970's and Frazier's hook in the 1960's would have hurt him far more than what Cooper did.

Mike Tyson could probably catch the young Ali and hurt him early but I still think pre-exile Ali still out-points him over twelve rounds and most certainly wins a fifteen round fight. Only Jack Johnson, Marciano and a 230 lb Lennox Lewis give pre-exile Ali a tough fight and could possibly beat him.

 

I think half of thsos fights would be pick ems with Dempsey, Louis, Fraizer, Norton and perhaps Lewis.

Not sure on the Kilts though. Ali or any one before Ali never face a Kilt with the skills they had.

 

well Ali's KO ratio in the 60s was a lot better than the 70s so how could that be if he couldn't punch as hard. 70s Ali was more flat footed so he could sit down better and yeah he did fight better opponents in 70s but his 2 best opponents in the 60s Liston and Patterson he stopped. Ali knocked Big Cat down 3 times in round 2 of their fight. He KO'd Folley with one shot. KO an opponent for Ali was based on correct timing and speed. Ali threw many combinations of 8 punches in late 60s. He never got near to throwing the same amount in his fight with Frazier or other 70s fights. I think they counted he threw 12 or more in one combo against Big Cat in round 3. The films don't lie. Ali had more speed and snap in his punches in the 60s plus he threw more in combinations.

 

You're absolutely right that Ali ko'd more opponents pre-exile than post-exile, but I don't think that necessarily was because his power was greater then. For one thing his if you look at his resume you'll se that his opponents in the 60's was much smaller. Very few of them was 200+ pounds. In the 70's he had a lot of opponents that was 200+.

Another reason is probably that he had a lot of trouble with his hands after the exile and therefore was more loathe to really put maximum power in his punches. And of course, you're right when you say that he didn't use as many combinations in the 70's as in the 60's, but that was down to lesser stamina, not power. I do think, though, that he preserved his hand-speed until the middle 70's at least. Look at his fight with Foreman and also some of the punches he hit Lyle with. Those were extremely fast punches, and powerful as well.

 

I think Ali hit as hard as ever against Cleveland Williams, Zora Folley, Karl Mildenberger.

His power varied a lot though, often he'd just flick away or throw those wild fast wide uppercuts that had no real power.
It's not really a case of 60s Ali v. 70s Ali.
Sometimes he threw solid shots, really followed through with them, but more often he didn't.

 

Mayweather?

 

My number 20 has no chance against my number 1

That's the reality.

 

IMHO: Obviously, Swarmers, in general, have the best chance against a prime Ali. Other than those, I think Louis and Holyfield are apt to win some fights in a 10 fight series. I do rate Ali at #1, at Heavyweight, Legacy wise as well as head to head. Some pure boxers could possibly pick up a win, in 10 fights. In general, Prime Ali is poison for Sluggers/Punchers.

 

There must have been a reason that Yank Durham did not want his fighter Joe Frazier in the ring with Muhammad Ali in 1967 following Ali's lopsided win over Ernie Terrell. I have always said that that move was very shrewd on Yank's part. They waited for Ali's legal issues with the selective service to play out. On March 8 1971. Ali had boxed 18 rounds in 43 months prior to his greatest bout against champion Joe Frazier, Ali had hand speed but his legs were gone by 1967 standards. He played too much on the ropes, too much horse play. As champion from 1964-1967, Ali never was decked, was very active, had incredible hand speed and foot work, not to mention quick catlike reflexes. His stamina was incredible, no Rope A Dope. He was also a very active champion, not like the standards of today, every election. The only person that would have defeated Ali is the undefeated Father Time.

 

Frazier has the best chance

 

Ali didn't fight anyone who was that good in 66-67 so he looks better in relief of the poor competition.

I have Lennox and Wlad of the more recent crew taking him in boring fashion, maybe Holmes.

Frazier must always be in the discussion, tho I would put Tyson there too.

Not too many others.

 

Good Post, but in reality you can only fight the competition that is in your era, not any in the past or future. Those other fighters fighters you mentioned, they lost to each other, 1964-1967 Muhammad Ali never lost his title in the ring, he was stripped of it, legal issues. But I respect your opinion.

 

Lol most people think Ali lost by decision to Doug Jones a natural 180 pound fighter for crying out loud. Various boxers could out box and out point the (67) version of Ali. Ali was never technically as skilled as the clueless boxing fans who believe whatever ESPN tells them. I could not imagine Ali out point any version of Larry Holmes. Guys like Henry Akwinande could out point Ali. A in shape motivated Buster Douglas could do it. JImmy Young could do it. Lennox Lewis could do it. Ken Norton would do it any day of the week. The list goes on.

 

You know my friend, I did not watch Muhammad Ali on ESPN like a lot of youngsters, I have watched Ali since 1965, on live television, ABC's Wide World Of Sports or closed circuit television. These guys you have mentioned, they are from your era. But different strokes for different folks.