Yes. That's about how I see it. Even in his late years he was stopping difficult challengers in rematches. It's debatable though. Louis had some tough fights too.
You are correct about the use of circular logic but Ali deserves credit for different reasons. Ali turned professional in 1960, Foreman turned professional in 1969. Ali was 6 or 7 years older. In boxing terms, Ali really had no business beating the top heavyweight of a youger generation, unless he was great. And whether or not Foreman was truly great is besides the point. Foreman was a very good, very destructive, strong, heavyweight champion of the world. Likewise, Frazier, Norton, Quarry, etc. ... they were all younger than Ali, fresher, turned professional years after he did. In fact he was world champion before they were even professionals. For him to compete and being champion against younger competition like that proves his quality.
Ali did show impressive longevity. The sheer period of time he was in the top 10 as well as the sheer number of top contenders he beat are impressive. By my count Doug Jones, Billy Daniels, Sonny Liston, Floyd Patterson, George Chuvalo, Ernie Terrell, Jerry Quarry, Oscar Bonavena, Jimmy Ellis, Joe Bugner, Ken Norton, Joe Frazier, George Foreman, Ron Lyle, Jimmy Young, Earnie Shavers, and Leon Spinks were all top 10 so he beat at least 18 guys ranked in the top 10.
Was Ali perfect? No, but the thing is there is nobody that blows him out and nobody that he can't beat.
Well Joe Frazier won the Olympic Gold Medal in 1964 as a Heavyweight. He was the first American to do so. That achievement stands on its own separate from Ali. As a pro Joe dominated a decent crop of heavyweights in the late 1960s. There is no confusion he was the best of that time. Jerry Quarry and Jimmy Ellis would be at least even $ against Jersey Joe. Maybe one or the other could be slightly favored. They fall into the good but beatable category. I don't think Ken Norton was a great fighter but good. Foreman? Well just the fact that he was able to come Back 20 years later and even be competitive should be a clue he wasn't just another good fighter. He won the friggin title back at 45. I don't care who says what about it. It's not normal.
You can apply this to any fighter who ever lived. Who did Lewis beat PRIME ? Who was his best win ? Washed up little Holyfield ? Little Tyson 15 yrs past his best ?? I have Lewis h2h no1, but sometimes you have to look a bit further than resume, use a bit of common sense. If 13 stone Cooper can jab with Ali and nearly switch his lights off completely, then Frazier Shavers and Foreman destroy him don't they??? Foreman goes through Louis's competition like a hot knife through butter 99% of the time. The real Foreman wasn't there v Lyle or Young, mentally he was going through the motions imo
Ali and Louis are the standout top 2, like has been said you could go either at the top but Muhammad Ali edges it for me. As for Tyson, he's definitely not top 3, I have him at 8, personally
Is Ali the greatest HW of all time? It is, arguably, something to be debated. But, IMO, the greatest HW of all time would have been that brash HW champ who was stripped of his title for refusing to be inducted into the military and, unfortunately, we couldn't see this ATG between the summer of 67 thru the summer of 70.
Personally I would ask who Tyson actually beat, he seems to have lost each time he stepped up to face top talent (Holyfield and Lewis). His best win was against Ruddock? An out of shape returning Holmes? Not sure. I would be looking at Tyson not making the top 10 of all-time, he would have made it if he had beaten Douglas then continued his winning ways with Holyfield, Lewis and Bowe over the 90's. Never easy to rank fighters over the different eras.
