Aaaah right, yeah Ali was good at freestyling i guess and there was me thinking u was referring to boxing :smoke
ali was the greatest by far. he was the fighting the best fighters past his best. 60s was his best - his speed of footwork made him a class above any heavy past or present. 70s was the rope-a-dope - the more flat-footed version - 60s ali woulda done much better against the 70s lot. it's like mayweather now trying to make pac man wait until he gets past his best before he fights him. desparate.
great post, of course i think that cassius clay/ muhammad ali is special, he was very strong mentally, ali would have destroyed tyson mentally before of the fight,and he was too fast for anybody, he had great chin, he had everything to beat tyson. prime tyson was an athlete with mind of kid, ali was the master, i can´t see no boxer winning on a prime muhammad ali 1966.and we never saw really the best ali. i think that the very best ali would have been in 1968. but i want to say that larry holmes talked with rancor, a prime tyson would have been a great rival for ali, tyson would fight better than holmes said, and larry know it. but he never will recognize it because tyson destroyed him. holmes will be a ****ing envious forever
Holmes does come across as a bit of an ******* Do you think Bill Cayton was right calling Tyson the second greatest?
I'm bemused as to the idea that Ali would win easily & Atlas was ridiculously hated-filled as usual. However, I think Kevin Rooney has altered my opinion of calling it an even fight, now i'd favour Peak Ali ('65 Patterson-'67 Folley) with a 55-60% chance of decisioning Peak Tyson ('86 Berbick-'88 Spinks). That said, I still maintain the belief that Peak Tyson has the highest chance of beating Peak Ali though, with Peak Frazier a close second.
Totally agree, Tyson had a much better chance than Louis, Marciano, Dempsey. Nobody gives a **** what Atlas thinks, Rooney was right, it would be a close fight. Interesting to note that Ali said Tysons footwork was slow. What do you think of Bill Cayton saying Tyson is the 2nd greatest but hes no Ali?
Definitely. Peak Tyson had impressively fast footwork, I just think Ali considers any footwork slower than his (Peak) own relatively "slow", which is a fair enough comment, until Tyson-haters spew out nonsense such as: "Tyson wouldn't be able to catch Ali". I hope he means in Peak H2H terms. Tyson had phenomenal potential, but he seriously blew it.
He defo blew it big time and even after blowing it the fact that he is still regarded so high speaks volumes about what he could have done if he stayed on track. Did you know they had to hypnotize Mike for all of his fights with the Catskill team? Ill post that later on, its from the Tyson book. Only a small section
Mine? depends on my mood 2bh. I dont tend to number them, i put them in tiers. I have Ali at number 1, because did it all, won the title 3 times, had a quality resume and in his prime looked magical. Then it gets a bit icky. I have Foreman quite high purely because of what he did to Fraizer, Norton and what he was doing to Ali for 8 rounds. Think about it, if that was any other heavyweight in history fighting George in TRITJ, would they have survived THAT Foreman? i dont think so. I have Lennox quite high because like Ali, He more or less did it all, Lennox has probably the second greatest resume after Ali. He could do it all, he could outbox, he could brawl. Very scientific and intelligent fighter. His KO losses does hurt him, but only by a little bit, because he was winning both of those fights and got careless and he also avenged them. Tyson in his prime was just great at everything, a lot of people keep saying he had problems with taller fighters....obviously! he was one of the smallest heavyweights and even with his disadvanatage he did well. This is unfairly overlooked sometimes. He could KO you in the first, or he could outpoint you over the 12. Had problems with disicpline and frustration, but you cant expect anything less from a guy who had problem with anger management. The second tier is the guys who would give people big problems, but IMO wouldnt beat the guys above if they both fought at their best. Larry Holmes Joe Frazier Sonny Liston Third tier Jack Dempsey Rocky Marciano Joe Louis Evander Holyfield Klitsckos belong on the lowest tier because a) they dominate a very weak era b) VK holds the distinction of not beating Lewis for the passing of the torch, which all the other ATGS did. c) they have a severe size advantage over their opponents and still win in very boring fashion. I dont know where to rate Johnson because ive never really watched much of him. This is my list, pick it apart if you want
ali or lewis as 1 and 2 liston foreman holmes tyson frazier louis a klitskco witherspoon holyfield bowe something like this
