This thread is a spin off of the who could out point a prime Ali thread. Take the poll. You may vote twice. Which of the below heavyweights was the hardest to defeat on points? I'll list a few.
I thought I list a quick bio on the fighters in the poll. All of which in my opinion are very hard to beat on points. Jim Corbett - Never lost a fight on points, even in exhibition matches. Was 59-0-3 at one point. Lively footwork and quick jabs made him tough to catch up to and score on. Corbett also had the ability to bend over and deliver quick body shots, then get out of the way. Corbett could move and box well for 15+ rounds. Jack Johnson - Lost a few fights on points, but had a way of smothering the other fighter’s offense. Johnson also had the ability to taunt cause a fighter to lose focus. Historians are high on his defense. Gene Tunney - Only lost one fight in 80+ matches. Only a true master boxer could do this. Most of his points wins were clear cut. Tunney's stamina was amazing, and he was one of the few fighters who could land punches while moving laterally or backwards. Liston was a good technical boxer who was accurate with the jab, hook, cross and uppercut. His reach was never ending. He could intimidate too. Liston only lost 1 match on points in 50+ ring appearances, though he did have a few close calls, and was a bit foul prone and could be docked points. Muhammad Ali - Ali was perhaps the fastest heavyweight with his hands and feet. Ali had great range, and could throw punches when he appeared to be off balance. However he some technical flaws on defense, and lost a few matches on points. Ali had a few close calls too. However, Ali did face plenty of good fighters. Larry Holmes - Holmes was one fight shy of tying Rocky Marciano's un-defeated record. Holmes in his prime was rarely behind on the score cards. Holmes might have had the best jab of the contestants. The jab is the key to piling up points. Holmes also had good footwork. Evander Holyfield - I don't think he should get many votes here, but I wanted to list 10 guys, so Holy’s good skills, and girt makes the cut. Lennox Lewis - A skilled super heavyweight with even greater speed and clinching ability than Liston. Lewis was only down on the cards in 3-4 of his fights, and never lost a decision in 40+ fights. His power was highly feared, and prevented many from engaging. Sometimes he was a bit passive though. Vitali Kltischko - Vitlai's had an unorthodox style that combined towering height, a high punch out put, and make them miss and counter type of defense. Vitlai was never down on the cards after three rounds, and never lost a decision. Since Vitali was never floored in a fight, and never docked points, out pointing him would be very difficult. Vitlai out pointed three excellent boxers in Lewis, Byrd, and Donald, though he did lose the two of these matches to TKO injuries. TKO's though are not losses on points so consider that when you vote. Wladimir Klitschko - Wlad might be the best combination of speed, reach and power in the history of the ring. His jab is very good, and he can hook off it, or throw a laser like right hand. It is unlikely that Wladimir will ever lose a decision, but he does lose a few rounds ever now and then because he can be cautious at times, and knocked down.
Why are Joe Frazier and Rocky Marciano not on this list? I know, they're not "boxers", they don't rely on the jab, but let's face it; they were extremely hard to outpoint. Frazier outpointed a near-prime Ali comfortably. That's more impressive than anyone Holmes or Tunney ever outpointed (to name a few). Marciano was only down on point after 12 once, having fought master boxers like Walcott, Charles , LaStarza and Moore. Anyway, i voted for Ali and Lewis.
I'll agree and say both Klitschko's are pretty hard to outpoint. I rate Wladamir pretty high actually. His chin is obviously shakey but for a big man his skills are amazing. His power is also incredible. I don't see him losing on points as his skills are better then most if not all. He needs to be knocked out to lose.
Because Frazier was behind on points a few times too many, could lose points from being knocekd down, and was somewhat of a one handed fighter. Marciano was down on points a few times, and had little in terms of a jab, limited range, and less speed than most guys on the list. Rocky was down on points more than once, and ad soem close calls go his way in LaStarza and Lowry. I suppose I could list Tyson too, and in my opnion he's even harder to out box then Fraizer or Marciano. In the end, I only had spots for ten fighters. I opted to pick good boxers over puncher or swarmers.
Jack Johnson and Gene Tunney would both be ridiculously difficult to out-point, especially if we are talking about peak versions. Conversely, it reasonable to pick a slew of all time greats to KO them both (though I don't personally see it with Jack).
I expect Ali to win the poll here. If the judges were spot on, Ali loses a few more fights than he did. Ali was down on points or even vs the following fighters: Copper, D Jones, Frazier, Norton, Lyle, and Young. All of these fights were pre 1977 or if you perfer when Ali was 34 years of age or less. In additon, Ali gave up some rounds in the 1960's vs guys like Chavalo, Mildenberger, and Folley. While there no doubting Ali's speed, he lacked big time power like some of the other boxers listed here. He also lacked punch variety ( not much of a hook or body shot ) . Perhaps this is why other fights could win some rounds vs him, while the same fighters would likely win less rounds vs a guy like Liston or Lewis. My $.02
This thread has potential. I do think Tunney was tough to out point. Tunney was only down once in his career of 80+ fights. As of right now, ever fighter has a vote. Interesting I welcome all opinions, however if you watch Johnson's fights or read the results / news reads on Johnson I do not think he was a guy who shut the better fighters out on the score cards. Johnson had a low punch out put / cautious style and that gave away plenty of rounds.
I'll admit I may be off; if i'm biased about a heavyweight, Johnson would be the one after maybe Braddock - but I see Johnosn as a gears fighter, a guy capable of shifting up and down as was absoltutley neccesary. He did what he had to do, almost regardless of what was neccesary. Even at the end, versus Willard, almost any reasonable ruleset might have see him win that fight - only the fact that he HAD to score a KO out did him. If you come for Johnson, he'd KO you. If you don't, he might out-pick you. When you look to the fighters that are hardest to out-point, look first to ring-generalship. Here, Johnson may be without peer, and certainly ranks alongside Ali, Tunney and Langford.
He KO'd McVea in 1903, I think it was in 20. He also KO'd the washed up Jeffries (i'm not handing him much credit for that one, but it serves as a decent example of what you get if you bull Jack), he KO'd Jim Flynn shortly after that, not a big man though. But Jack was rarely charged. Men were terrified to do so.
McVea was very young and green, and it was very late, I think in the 20th round or so, he was death tired, it wasn´t because of Jack´s murderous power or so. I don´t count that so much like the Jeffries-fight you correctly mentioned. IMO Johnson´s power was just mediocre at the world level, but I agree he had a style who was difficult to fight against, but I have to agree with Mendoza, it would be much harder to outpoint Vitaly for example than Johnson IMO...
I think that Johnson did not have great power, but he seemed a fantasticlaly accurate puncher as well as a wonderful, wonderful timer of the counterpunch. When this is true you do not need great power, good power is terrifying enough, and certainly enough to score KD's. I think that Jersey Joe Walcott had some of the same stuff, you know? To out-point Vitali, IMO, you need great self discipline and great speed. A great jab would be helpful, but if not, very fast hands would do. Self-discilpine would also be key to out-pointing JOhnson. But I honestly beleive that if you win the first round against Vitali, and don't get stupid, you could beat him if you have grea skills. That is not true of Johnson because he can show you something a little different in the next round. Again, a bit like Walcott. Hey, maybe Johnson and Walcott have quite a bit in common, never thought of it before.