Which Heavyweight Champion benefited most from weak competition?

Very well, if you feel that Lewis ducking Byrd is a huge scar on the face of his legacy, then sobeit.

 

I do not think Lewis ducked byrd. Byrd was never good enough to be considered "ducked". Lewis may had sidestepped Byrd in order to fight someone more dangerous and more important.

 

If one is going to claim Lewis seeked out the best of his era, and fought better competition than Ali..surely, him ducking one of the better names of his time should be brought up.

 

If anyone has any questions on heavyweights from the 1990s, I recently ordered and bought a whole slew of Ring Magazine and KO magazine issues from 1990-2000, so I might be able to answer a particular question.

 

If anything,

Lewis ducked Wlad. Wlad was the # 1 ring magazine contender for two straight years and never got a title shot. Was Byrd ever # 1 contender?

 

Wlad was still cleaning out prospects and fringe fighters at this time despite Ring being high on him, he was not an official contender to Lewis yet. He was being groomed as a potential future challenger but the Sanders loss couldn't have came at a worse time.

Yes, Byrd was officially number one after defeating Tua, becoming Lewis' mandatory IBF challenger as well. After claiming the title he remained in the Ring's top 2 for a few years before Wlad finally knocked him off again.

 

That is all speculation. Simply fact is that Liston got a rematch.

This 15 would be all ranked contenders at the time? Ali fought everyone. Often at their home turf. How is that weak?

How would you say for example Marciano's defences stand out as more impressive?

He was given a decent chance. Ali was the favourite, but not an overwhelming favourite. Bottom line is that Terrell had beaten most other contenders and had gone undefeated for some 5 years. Can you say that about any of Marciano's or even Tyson's challlengers?

He was 29, coming off some of his best wins and would continue beating contenders for another 7 years. How is that 6 years from his prime? By such a reckoning how many years past their primes were for example Walcott, Charles and Moore?

And as for the back: Patterson had a shot back, Liston had a torn shoulder, Terrell got thumbed, Ellis was overtrained, Quarry was shellschocked from seeing his brother being KO'd, Foreman was drugged, voodoed - you name it - etc, etc.

What's your take? Was Ali the luckiest fighter in history or did these proud competitors just have a hard time accepting losing in the manner they did?

But that was Ali being good rather than Folley being poor. As I said he came off his best streak. Sure, he was 33 or 34, but for example all of Marciano's challengers except one (the poorest one) were as old or older.

He was a ranked contender long before he met these men. Shouldn't that count for something?

No one said he was great, just a decent contender. His Ring rankings justify this.

Pacheco says a lot of things. Fact is that Ali defended against him. At what other time could he have done this and it would looked better to you?

After recapturing the crown he defended it against guys like Lyle and Frazier within the coming 12 months. What a coward!

So? Ali defended against him.

Whatever you think of the outcome he did defend against these guys. That's what the thread is about.

What a lot of tripe. He defended against some 15 ranked opponents all in all (at least 3 of them commonly seen as ATG:s), but this counts for nothing? In some cases you don't count them because he won too easily and in some cases because he struggled too much. Doesn't really make sense.

Ali defended against opponents of all styles and often on their own home turf. The only worthy opponent you can argue that he didn't defend against is Foreman, a man he had previously beaten. Now I want hear who (except perhaps Louis) looks better in this regard?

Certainly not Johnson or Dempsey, nor Marciano. Dito Holmes,Tyson, Holyfield and Lewis. If you disagree, please tell me just how you come to the conclusion that they defended against better and more deserving opposition.

 

Nice post..

I really can't think of any reasonable argument that would support putting any other heavy weight champion ahead of Ali in terms of comp quality..

 

**** Byrd we already saw what would have happened in that fight twice when Byrd was destroyed by Wlad. I do not blame Lewis for ''ducking'' Byrd.

 

I think a reasonable argument could be made for Louis, but outside of him...

Every reign can dissected. Great as Louis' was you can still shout "bum of the month" and point to the colour line. Marciano only defended against one challenger under 30 and against only one natural HW. An article here on ESB made a strong point for Tucker being the best challenger Tyson beat, taking form at the time in consideration. Etc, etc.

 

That's no reason to deny a man his hard earned title shot, nor does it validate the original claim of "Lewis seeking out the best during his reign." All I'm seeing now are arrogant excuses for not fighting the best. Nobody wants to argue facing the winner of the Tyson/Nielson farce over Byrd/Tua as seeking out the best....because they'll realize how ****ing stupid they sound.

And seriously, Rahman couldn't solve Oleg's left hook/right hand and he still got his title shot...worse, he pulled off the upset.

 

Mendoza says:Mendoza [url]

This content is protected

[/url]
McVey doesn't like to admit or talk about it, but Burns was not 100% for the match. Indeed he was at a very low weight of 168 pounds ( low 180's was Burns ideal weight ), and reports suggest he was suffering from a jaundice. It is fact that Burns asked the promoter HD Mcintosh to delay the match, but his request was denied when HD Mcintosh said all the tickets were sold and you better fight as scheduled if you want to get paid.

As we know, Johnson had some uneven performances just before he became champion, and as champion. He lost to Hart. He might have been edged by O'Brien in a 6 round match. And IMO, Jack Johnson got a gift draw in a championship match vs Jim " battling Johnson/ Battling Jim clearly won according to the press, yet the result after 10 rounds was a draw. There is some debate as to the scheduled length of the fight. The Cyber Boxing Zone says it was scheduled for 20 rounds, which makes sense as Johnson's fight vs Moran in France was also 20 rounds. If Jack quit in 10, he should have lost via TKO.

Anyway, Burns defeated Hart, O'Brien, and was surely better than joruneyman Battling Jim.

Had Burns been given a re-match with Johnson at 100%, I think he does better. I would not pick Burns to win the re-match, but judging by Johnson numerous un-even performances, he could have shot for the upset.

Based on what I read, Burns was on a clear decline prior to the police stoppage. At his low weight, and illness, a comeback for in this fight for Burns was unlikely. Johnson was in the shape of his life for this match. Had the match gone on, I think Johnson would have scored the stoppage in the next few rounds.

I have seen a few rounds which are not in the order ESPN claims. I can post the fight report here if you want to read it.

 

Again you misinterpreted my entire point - just calm yourself - Ali is as open to criticism as anyone else - especially as he benefitted the most by ending up with the most nut-huggers such as yourself:good

 

I think you are right with not expecting Burns to win. He was totally dominated. But in the article i posted a while back, burns himself said that he was still confident of winning when the police stopped the fight. I have to say, that was very strange thing to say, if he was indeed jaundiced and underperforming because of this. He didnt seem to take the excuses line in that article or in any i have seen. The jaundice claims you refer to (unless i am mistaken which i could be) actually come from someone other than Burns.

And full Credit to Burns for not adopting this line (Fitz, Jeffries, Corbett, Johnson, Wlad and many others all seemed to clutch to the wild Fix, drugging, iron spike and other wild tales). Burns in reality handled his reign with dignity and was true champion in every sense of the world. In many ways, it is a shame that he wasnt better than Johnson on that night. I think he would have revolutionised the Color line much quicker than it was actually wiped out.

And another interesting thing that i read, (not sure if it was in that article or another) which may add weight to Tommys comeback series, is that Johnson actually had to attend hospital for a rib injury, after the fight. Johnson said it was just a routine check up that he always does after a fight, and i think i would definitely believe him, but if this were also true, maybe just maybe Tommy was closer than we think to a comeback.

I must say, given the shellacking Tommy appeared to take first time around, it is actually pretty impressive that Tommy actually wanted a rematch.

 

Not True Bokaj,

Roland Lastarza and Don Cockell were both 26 years old when they fought Marciano for the title.

Not True Bokaj,

Roland Lastarza and Jersey Joe Walcott, both were natural heavyweights throughout their careers.