Peak Lewis vs 70's version of Ali

By the way, i think Ali stated that weight lifting was useless for boxing as he liked speed over power, so i think taking steroids to bulk up would not have been on his mind. Guys like Foreman, Norton etc would be far more likely to be users.

 

Carl Lewis also later admitted to taking speed during the 1980's.

The bottom line is that Ali DID take drugs, was open to the idea, even if we do not know entirely how many or which drugs.

Lewis reigned during an era in which drugs were TESTED for and never tested dirty. He had never even been the object of professional innuendo, a term that I would never use in reference to keyboard jockies on an internet forum such as this.

Anything else is pure speculation and agenda-laden. Now move on.

 

The opinion of "keyboard jockies" on this forum is as valid as almost anyone's public opinion on this particular subject, certainly when they back it up with what seems like a reasonably sound estimation of the subject. People here have no need to tip-toe around the subject, you'll get more honest talk here about steroids than you'd get from Olympic commitees, the boxing bodies, and the vast majority of professional journalists. As long as we dont pretend to be experts and know things that are unknown. But there's less hypocrisy and blatant dishonesty here than those in career-sensitive positions. Performance enhancing drugs are part of modern sports, and are acknowledged by anyone who's head is out of the sand as no minor issue.

Who would you class as the "professionals" whose "innuendo" would carry more credence ? Journalists and TV presenters are often ignorant and restricted by fear of litigation anyway. Rival athletes can be dismissed as "jealous", or "deflecting" the suspicion from themselves. The officials, promoters and politicians who run sports are absolutey not interested in the truth.
Keyboard jockies on ESB may be full of ****, but the professionals are probably more so.

I think everybody apart from the TESTING INDUSTRY who's jobs and salaries rely on a perception of some success, accepts now that drugs testing in sports is bound to have a miserably low success rate. The Marion Jones's and Tim Montgomerys passed every test if I remember rightly.

Obviously, Lewis may well never have taken the drugs, so, yes, it is speculation.

To say that steroids, growth hormones, "designer steroids" and other performances enhancers are part of modern professional heavyweight boxing at the elite level is NOT an "agenda-laden" statement at all, IMO. It's just an awareness of the scientific advances made in the modern era. Many elite athletes use drugs, drugs that work. To suspect them all and to publicly state that the best in the world are the MAIN SUSPECTS seems like a reasonable position to hold.

To bend over backwards to defend one of your favourites from the suspicion, and to try to discredit those people who suspect, is a bit childish and certainly a bit "agenda-laden" IMO.

 

Ali needed more than drugs for the Holmes fiasco. So now Ali was a steroid user all his career - what depths they will sink to - haha you gotta love it

 

Peak Lewis UD over 70's version of Ali. Might look a bit like the Holyfield fight.

 

I'm in the minority, but this type of win wouldn't surprise me.

 

Norton, and Frazier beat Ali in the 70's. Lewis is better than either of them. Also Lyle was up on the cards vs Ali in round 11 until Ali landed one of his best crosses ever. Jimmy Young and Ernie Shavers gave Ali tough fights. I want to re-score the Shavers fight one day.

Ali was beatable in the 1970's, and style wise would have a hard time with Lewis.

 

A very peak Lewis vs 70s Ali is a good fight. Lewis has the size, strength advantage and is very skilled for a big heavyweight. Ali obviously has the speed, quickness, and chin edge here although I dont think he could stop Lewis anyway.
Like some posters already pointed out, Lyle was able to outpoint Ali for the majority of the fight before Ali landed what was pretty much a miracle punch. Lewis is a vastly bigger, better, and more skilled fighter than Lyle, and I see him being able to win by a very close decision.

 

Picking the BEST of 1970s Ali we have to assume he'd be fully prepared, up for the fight, taking Lewis seriously, of course.

Ali certainly didn't take Ron Lyle seriously, it was a "filler" fight, considered only a little step up from the Wepner fight.

We need to assume the Ali who fought Frazier, Norton 2, Foreman etc. would show up.

Obviously, some of you here seem to think Lewis can imitate Norton's or Frazier's styles as and when he pleases to trouble Ali !

But realistically, what version of Lewis are we gonna use ? The peak Lewis that blasted fighters out in 1 or 2 rounds would be utterly unproven against Ali, who would certainly not be blasted out in 1 or 2 rounds. So, it would be wise to pick a Lewis that fought a decent distance fight. The one who fought Mercer, Mavrovic, Holyfield, Tua or Tyson for example.

I think Ali would school him with hand speed. Lewis wouldn't press the fight, he'd try to slow the pace down and keep Ali on the outside, hoping to bang out a decision with left prods and the occasional big right, and some messy mauling. But Ali would just open up on him more and more as the fight progresses.
I dont think Lewis is in Ali's league.

 

I think a peak Lewis would trouble any version of Ali. His combination of size strength and skill would stand him in good stead against Ali. Hell if Chuck Wepner could make into the 15th against a still sharp Ali then A skilled giant like Lennox could at least do as well and probably a lot better. Lennox wouldn't be awed by the Ali mystique like other good big men like Bugner was. Joe had all the tools to beat Ali except balls and Lennox certainly had those. Plus Lewis was patient and could box very well unlike the version of Foreman that flailed uselessly at Ali for 8 rounds before exhausting himself and being KOed in 8. I see an Ali/Lewis fight as being something akin to a chess match, probably a boring one at that which ends in a decision for either one. If I had to bet my life savings on it then I'd pick Ali via close decision with hand speed being the deciding factor but I'd still be sweating the outcome.

 

I'm not saying that at all. Jesus ****ing Christ.

The 1970's were an entirely different era. There was no broad understanding of or stigma towards substances that could potentially give you an edge. It was considered being a modern athlete to look for vitamin boosts, hormone treatment or stimulants. What I am stating is that Ali was an aging athlete in the 70's who by all evidence was looking for anything that would help him prolong his abilities or delay the decline of said same. Winstrol, Stanozolol? I seriously doubt it. Testosterone or testosterone precursor injections given by a doctor he trusted? I would believe it. Those were considered cutting edge therapies at the time. Did it help him? Maybe to look a little better but not performance wise. WHAT IS FACT IS THAT ALI IN THE MID TO LATE 70'S WAS WILLING TO TAKE SUBSTANCES TO IMPROVE PERFORMANCE.

Likewise, Lewis- during an age of increasingly intensive testing- NEVER TESTED DIRTY.

These are facts, not speculation or innuendo. I am sorry some carry such a burden in dealing with them.

 

Good post, Jim.

 

Holyfield got done, so lets try to smear Lewis and Tyson too

:roll:

 

Ali knocks lennox out with one right hand. I will go with Zakmans logic.......if B level fighters like Mcall and Rahman can knock lennox out with one punch, imagine what an ATG like Muhammad ALi would do.