When did Muhammad Ali start being considered a all time great ?

I'd agree with those citing the victory over Foreman. Nothing quite catches the imagination like a 'seemingly' faded legend, facing near-certain defeat but somehow overcoming insurmountable odds.
Remember Howard Cosell's lament on the impending doom of Ali?
"The time may have come to say goodbye to Muhammad Ali because, very honestly, I don't think he can beat George Foreman..."
Very few thought Ali could win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

a hook for hall of fame on beating LIston twice, and a berth on ATG after his first furious reign as a youngster that could really only be stopped outside the ring.

By Foreman, he has shifted up to top five ATG

 

I think the idea had crystallised before the Foreman fight to be honest.

Nat Fleischer was criticised for not including Ali on his top ten heavyweight list, which he penned in 1971.

If people thought that Al was in the top ten, or perhaps just outside the top ten, then it is reasonable to infer that they thought that he was great.

 

Some did prior to his comeback. Underline SOME. The majority did not feel he proved himself as an ATG. This feeling was cemented when he came back to lose to Frazier and then Norton. His comeback to beat Frazier, Norton and then Foreman revived the thought he was an ATG and his win over Frazier in 1975, in a bruising battle convinced even the most die hard skeptics.

 

Fleischer penned his top ten list in the 1950's within "50 years at ringside". Nat Loubet revised this list in 1974 dropping Johnson to No 2 and raising Jeffries to No 1 while including both Ali and Frazier (9 and 10) and dropping Schmeling and Tunney from the list.

 

People started to believe it after his destruction of Liston and Williams.

He was doubted after being taken down by Frazier.

He solidified it by conquering Foreman.

 

As mentioned......SOME. Experienced historians know it takes TIME to prove a fighter as an ATG. Ali had really not proved himself as an ATG HWT CHAMPION prior to his comeback. Most understood this as the case.

 

Let's put things into perspective here...

Ali, when he was exiled had defended his title nine times, was undefeated, dominant and had beaten the following: Sonny Liston twice, Floyd Patterson, Archie Moore, Ernie Terrell, George Chuvalo, Karl Mildenberger etc.

WHAT exactly did he not prove? His resume, even at that point was top tier. Jack Dempseys resume was laughable in comparison to Alis and yet he was still rated not only as an ATG but as the GOAT by many...how come the standards are so different for the two of them? Ali had to prove some mythical qualities to the experts...even though he destroyed his competition with ease?

 

After the Foreman fight.

Before that, Ali lost to Frazier and Norton.

 

Pug. You obviously did not live through that period in time or were not as close to the sport as I was.

Seasoned boxing people do not, no matter how good a fighter seems to be, jump on the bandwagon proclaiming ATG status until the fighter unequivocally proves himself long term. After Ali came back and lost to Frazier and then Norton the predominant thought was that Ali was a fringe ATG. Some "fans" of Ali thought differently but these predominantly were "fans.

After Ali best Foreman and in retrospect avenged both of his defeats many seasoned boxing experts felt Ali proved himself as an ATG. He showed the fortitude of past ATG by coming back to win against high odds. Those still on the fence were convinced once Ali in a life and death struggle came back to defeat Frazier in a battle reminiscent of Jeffries Sharkey in its intensity and conditions.

Those are the facts of that time period. It takes allot to prove oneself as an ATG to those who understand what that phrase means.

 

I'd bet people at the time were saying, "Sure, he looked good against an ancient Liston & Moore, a fragile Patterson, and a bunch of other stiffs. But what'll happen when he gets tested?"

Most of the time we never think the current era is as good as those of the past. It's human nature.

As far as being tested, Ali had been decked by a 192 pound fighter in Banks and a 186 pound fighter in Cooper. He wanted to quit when his eyes burned against Liston (I'm playing devil's advocate here...). I can understand why people not have recognized Ali's greatness at this point.

 

It has nothing to do with jumping on the bandwagon. Ali was a champion the same amount of time Marciano was, and he made MORE defenses. In fact, he defended his title more consecutive times than anyone other than Louis. He DOMINATED Liston and Patterson who were both excellent fighters, Liston being considered one of the best heavies ever when Ali got into the ring with him.

Ali was proven. More so than the vast majority of past champions. Realistically, which pre-70s champions do you rate ahead or on par with Ali after he was exiled?

Louis...Johnson...Jeffries...Rocky...maybe Dempsey...and that's it.

 

You are missing the point. It takes much more than title defenses to be classified as an ATG. It's a very high class. The highest class of fighter. Most who understand the term hold their standards very high. An ATG has to prove he ranks along side those that came before him in all pertinent categories. These include toughness, will to win.....intrinsic attributes that may not be evident by just winning fights or making successful title defenses.

 

This whole "toughness", "will to win" shtick is nonsense. A fighter shouldn't be degraded because he didn't struggle with his opponents. Dominating Liston is much better than going life and death with Liston.

 

Hmmm,

So you can win the world title and defend it 6 times in 2 years and be an ATG, but if you win it and defend it 9 times in 3 years your not.

Must be a white thing.