p4p who is better?

Its all the same man though, Foreman gets credit for his second career when it comes to analysing legacies, Ali should too. I agree with Brooklyn here, depends on how we're looking at 'p4p'. I normally base p4p on ability, except when talking about retired ATGs, then its normally about overall legacy and resume, a mix of the 2, but the resume aspect holds more water , for me anyway

 

It was the same man, but it wasn't the boxer that is depicted here. There never had been a hyper-nimble Ali, who could dance with a jab for 15 rounds, and at the same time was very tough and durable to punishment and mentally. There was either the first (with so-so chin/durability) OR the second (with not very impressive speed and with stamina problems).

 

Yea, good point actually Senya, the first Ali was a h2h monster though imo. Im not an Ali fan or anything, this is something that i have come to grips with overtime, i understand you may not agree, i think you'll see where im coming from though

 

Pre-exile Ali never really had his chin tested that much, but he took some really good shots from Liston and Chuvalo without seeming too bothered. He showed against Chuvalo that he definitely stood up for good bodyshots. The KD by Cooper was at a point were his body wasn't fullt matured yet, but even there he showed very good recuperative powers.

But why would the 212 lbs Ali who fought Williams, Terrell and Foley have that much worse chin than the 212-216 lbs Ali who fought Frazier and Foreman?

As a side sidenote I think Ali often showed very good speed even in his second career. Light heavy Bob Foster was impressed by 220 lbs Ali's speed when they met. "He was still to fast for me." How many HWs have showed the overall speed he showed in the rematches against Frazier and Norton?

 

Ali must have had the better record, though, didn't he?

 

I've Ali higher, just outside my Top 10 P4P. RJJ is somewhere in the 20's on my list.

 

Looking at record is the least pseudo of any argument, because it shows what really happened. How RJJ would have looked if he was a HW in Ali's era or the other way around, that is pure speculation. It can be fun, but really it's just grasping at straws.

Ali's record tells us that he was very dominant even though he didn't go much to the body and had an unorthodox defense (as did RJJ). Whatever you think of his style there's no denying that it worked very well for him, and of course that must mean something. He had an unblemished record during his first career, beat everyone there was to beat and did it emphatically almost every time. Then he was away 3,5 years and came back to dominate an era many thinks was the most competitive in the divisions history. He bested punchers, boxers and swarmers. I don't really know what more you can ask.

But RJJ:s record looks impeccable as well. Before 35 he only had one loss, a DQ, which he reversed with a 1 rd KO. I have a hard time seeing why both men shouldn't be in the top 10 p4p.

 

What are the arguments for not having RJJ in the top 3 or 5 p4p?

From what I've seen he had great defense and power coupled with tremendous speed. Yes, he wasn't textbook like SRR, but what he did worked for him, just like it did for Ali.

His record doesn't seem to have any real cracks either. A lot of great fighters have suffered embarrasing losses when they're 35+, so I don't attach too much importance to that. His victory over Ruiz is very impressive, as well. Is there a case to be made that names are missing from his record? Toney, Hopkins and McCallum are there after all. He seems like a very good candidate for the very p4p elite to me. Anyone who disagrees?

 

I disagree, he wouldn't get into my top 25 I don't think. He was a fantastic talent, but he never beat enough great fighters. Infact he never beat enough good fighters.
Yes he beat Toney and Hopkins, but neither were at their best and McCallum was far past his prime. He possibly could've beat all three prime for prime too, but it never happened.
The Ruiz win is decent, but Ruiz was probably the worst HW champion of all time.
Plus add the 2 shocking ko defeats to fighters he never should've lost too, and there is no way he can be P4P elite. You can say he was 35+ which is fair, but did he ever look like losing before them fights? It's not like when Ali was old and you could see the Parkinson's kicking in, Jones got bombed out in two successive fights by fighters that even at 35 everyone was expecting him to walk over.
He's a very good fighter and obvious HoF material, but overall he falls way short in my book.

 

But until he was 35 he beat everyone there was to beat, didn't? That should count for something. Also, SRL was blown out by Norris when he was 34 and Hearns had some bad losses at that age to, didn't he?

 

Red, what do you make of the difference in mettle between Ali and Jones?

Jones might have been the bigger talent, but Ali's balls were at least twice the size of Roy Jones'.

 

Yes but they both fought way better competition.
By age 35 Thomas Hearns had lost to Barkley twice, SRL once and Hagler once.
By 35 SRL had lost to Duran and Terry Norris.

 

Jesus Chris, Ali is about 50 spots ahead of Jones on my list. Absolutely no comparison.

Ali has the advantage in pretty much every regard.

 

Tell me again how Ali's chin and durability suddenly leapt forth in leaps and bounds during the 3 year period he didn't fight? His last 3 fights pre exile he weighed 212 and fought Frazier just 3 pounds heavier at 215. Obviously the 3 pound didn't just appear around his neck via muscle so where do we look? Personally i TOTALLY disagree with the notion Ali's durability was better in Frazier 1 than it was in 1967. Just because he took more punishment vs Frazier than he ever had doesn't mean he could not have worn it in 66-67.