Was Ali's second tier list better than some first tier lists?

Certainly there would be contenders, with possibly a couple of exceptions like Mathis. He gassed after five or six rounds. I don't think he would have gotten close to a championship fight in those days.

My point is I don't pick anybody on that list as a favorite over the four I listed, and these are contenders, not champions, and their resumes are better than Ali's second string resume.

 

Bob Foster? He never beat a top ten heavyweight. Not exactly the same as these men.

Peak? So what. You can come halfway down Mt Everest and still be much higher than your local hill, even if the hill looks pretty tall if you're standing next to it. These guys weren't that good nor that big. Ellis, possibly actually the best of them, as he beat Patterson, Quarry, Bonavena, Chuvalo, and Martin, had been an ordinary middleweight who never cracked the middleweight rankings and had a losing record against rated middleweights.

 

And what happened when Foster fought "Average Joe"-heavies ? No ****ing contest.

 

Earlier lightheavies--Loughran, Moore, and Johnson did well, Later lightheavies, Spinks, Roy Jones, Toney, did well. Foster, in my estimation, is not a paradigm of what happens to lightheavies who move up.

Foster lost to Doug Jones, and Jones gave Ali a very close fight. Harold Johnson beat Jones easily. I think you can only push the Foster business so far. He lost to most of the best fighters he fought other than the 39 year old Tiger. Ali, Frazier, Jones, Terrell, Folley, and Mina all beat him.

 

These oponents would make up a prety solid resume but it is important not to build them up to more than they were as OLD FOGEY has pointed out.

While Ali's A teir is unmatched his B teir might not necisarily be the best of any heavyweight champion. If you took Joe Louis's A teir to exclude Baer Schmeling and Walcott you would still have a lot of talent.

Where dose Floyd PAtterson fit in by the way?

 

Where would you rank these on your top HW lists?

I think Young & Quarrey maybe around 30/40 mark. Lyle around mid 40s. Shavers & Ellis top60.

 

I honestly don't think that Bob Foster would have done any better in the heavyweight division of the early 50s than in his own era. He just did not have the style to be an efective heavyweight.

If you want a practical demonstration that the top contenders of the Marciano era would have been efective in Ali's era look at Harold Johnson. He fought a few of the same oponents as Muhamad Ali and Sonny Liston while past his best and did better against most of them.

 

The key word here is could beat. I did not say would beat for sure. Yes, Shavers could KO Walcott or Charles. Yes Jimmy Young could out box anyone Johnson beat. Yes Quarry could beat anyone Dempsey beat. Yes Lyle could KO Schmeling or UD Baer.

If you want to tally up the W's and L's of Ali's tier two opponents, then compare them the W's and L's of the fighters Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, and Marciano beat, I think Ali's opponents will look a bit better.

Yes Quarry, Young, Shavers and Lyle as a group have lost fights to: each other, Lynn Ball, Gerry Cooney, Ossie Ocasio, Ken Norton, Bob Stallings, Bernardo Mercado, Randall Cobb, Eddie Machen, Jimmy Ellis and George Chuvalo. However Walcott and Chalres by themselves lost a lot and in some cases to lesser men than the above names. The same can be said for Louis or Dempsey opponents.

There have been quite a few weak lineal champions. Hart, Braddock, Spinks, Rhaman, ect..... For sure Quarry, Lyle, Shavers, and Young were just as good, if not better.

 

Ali fought a number of top contenders in his second reign though the decisions in the Norton and Young fights are controversial. Foreman was not the top contender for a long time so Ali hardly can be accussed of ducking him. Foreman is also not as difficult for Ali stylistically as Norton.

 

:good

 

Beg to differ. Terrell and Zora Folley were not average joe heavies.

 

They would not have been dealt with conclusivley by Charles or Moore.