no. 4 on my all-time list behind armstrong, duran and robinson (in ascending order) no.1 on my HW list
Post exile Ali doesn't have the depth OR head to head ability to overtake Louis. I'd pick Louis, Frazier (prime) Tyson, Liston, Lewis to beat post exile Ali. I'd still maybe rank him at number 2-3, but Louis would have to be the number 1.
P4P The only guy that I could put in front of Ali is Archie Moore maybe Joe Louis and Sugar Ray Robinson. As far as all time Heavyweight I do believe that the the answer is obvious.
I see Lennox Lewis a lot in the top ten lists, I've seen him up as high as four, I have nothing against that, but if I compare post exile Ali to Lewis, for example Ali never got himself knocked out, that just wasn't going to happen in his mind, he like Lewis, avenged his losses, and still beat the better crop of fighters, but I guess that's also a tribute to the times, it was such a special era for the heavyweight division... but if you have Lennox Lewis in top five, post exile Ali alone should be above that anyway... great fighter.
I rank Muhammad Ali no1 HWT of all time.... I rank Muhammad Ali no2 p4p of all time.... (Most dont rank him as high p4p, thats fine but he was a truly brilliant fighter in my eyes with the resume, achievements etc to back his talent up)
Ali of the 60s would be top 15-20 p4p & no2 to Louis at HWT probably. Ali of the 70s would be top 20-25 p4p & no3 to Louis & 60s Ali at HWT probably. The reason Ali is ranked so high is because he had TWO ATG careers mixed into one with a `little` 3 yrs, 7 months break in between..... & the man thouroughly deserves his ranking IMHO. :good :good :good
Pre exile- You could still have a case for him being the greatest because he'd be undefeated with 9 title defenses with wins over Liston (2x), Patterson, Williams, Terrel, Jones, Folley, Moore and Cooper(2x) Post Exile- He would be in the top 5, losses to Norton, Frazier and a bit of inconsistency would have diminished him a bit and Louis would get the edge.
Pre Exile. While he was the greatest fighter ever here, He would have retired with a very quetionable jaw (having been dropped by Cooper and Banks). His lack of proven KO punch and power, low guard, lack of body attack and general unorthodox stance would be very widely criticised. In fact, many Foreman KO1 posts would be everywhere when he was matched with Foreman, Tyson and others. His career really would be nearly identical with that of Gene Tunneys! The only difference being that Ali wouldnt have the loss to Greb, although this is balanced by Tunney having the more traditional technique and having a more proven chin (never dropped). I think that most people would rank him about where they rank Tunney. Post Exile. Frazier would have been the champion, but would not have the Ali signature fight. When Foreman blew him out, his ranking wouldnt be the same. This means that Alis two wins over Frazier would not mean too much. You then consider his loss to Norton (also blown out by Frazier). The Foreman win, would be very highly considered still, and i do think that his defences, despite some criticism would still get a lot of credit and i think this would definitely still rocket him to ATG status. By my accounts assuming he won the title with about 20 fights, his record would be 49-5. I think that this places him at roughly the same level as maybe a Lennox Lewis. In fact it is hard to think of someone's career who would have spanned as long and consistently as Ali, but the losses to Norton and Frazier would still be on his record albeit both avenged. I also think that ali would not have the same legendary speed persona as he has now. Lennox would have his size argument which propels him up the ATG rankings, but Ali would not have the chin arguments to drive him down. All in all, most would rank them about the same. As a consensus, i think that Ali (pre and post) would be ranked by most people right near where they currently rank Tunney or Lewis. I guess this probably means that most people would rank post Ali as the better fighter! Probably a top 5-10 fighter as opposed to a top 10 -20 fighter. Interestingly, i think that the way things really transcribed, it proves pretty much that Pre exile was a lot better than post exile. So quite likely many of our current oppinions are quite a bit out. In fact, perhaps Tunney (generally regarded as not having a heavy chin nowadays) is one of the fighters who is the most underated nowadays. Incidentally, for those (if any) who disagree with the Tunney and Lewis comparisons, i would be interested to see which fighter you would compare the careers of the versions to.
I like post exile Ali over pre exile Ali... 1970's Ali hits harder, fights smarter, and takes a better punch... If we could match one against the other, I think 1970's Ali beats 1960's Ali, easily... Granted, the young one jabs the **** out of the older one, dazzles him with speed, outpoints him, especially in the early rounds, but I think here, experience and wisdom beats youth, energy, and fear-induced enthusiasm... 1970's Ali ko by 8
MUHAMMAD ALI: "If you put the Muhammad Ali who fought Cleveland Williams and Zora Folley against the Muhammad Ali who fought Joe Frazier and George Foreman, the young Ali would win. I was more experienced when I was older. I was stronger. I had more belief in myself. Except for Sonny Liston, the men I fought when I was young weren't near the fighters that Joe Frazier and George Foreman were. Williams and Folley were light work. But I had my speed when I was young. I was faster on my legs, and my hands were faster. The young Ali would dance, move, get in and out. He'd beat the older Ali all around the ring. The older Ali wouldn't quit. When I was old, against a young version of me, I'd use the rope-a-dope, make charges, and try to knock him out. But I was better when I was young."