Who do you consider the best heavyweight of all-time?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Rumsfeld, Jul 21, 2008.


  1. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,166
    48,402
    Mar 21, 2007
    Despite all the shouting i've done about Ali being the clear choice for #1 I have Louis stopping Ali!

    I think Ali would do better overall against the field though.
     
  2. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,166
    48,402
    Mar 21, 2007
    I tend to beleive that Tyson was to quick and explosive for Louis to get through a trilogy with him without dropping one. I agree that he would have dominated the 70's though, and he would been a serious favourite to beat post-prison Tyson 2 for 2, so it's quite possible he would dominate the 90's too. I think Bowe presents a stylistic difficulty for him though.
     
  3. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,166
    48,402
    Mar 21, 2007
    This is interesting, why? I've always dismissed any chance for Evander based upon the fact that he can be drawn into punching with an opponent.
     
  4. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    Mcgrain u make some wonderful points........but take this into considation. while joe louis in his first year as a pro took on the worlds very best heavyweights/linear champions.........ali literally did not fight any top rated dangerous contenders until 4 years after being a pro. Fighters like harold johnson, C williams, folley, machen, ali avoided fighting all these men in the early 1960s for smart management. Louis however was thrown against the wolves early on.
     
  5. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,166
    48,402
    Mar 21, 2007

    It's true, but i'll say two things about this -


    One, Louis and Ali had around the same number of pro fights when they stepped up to the very highest level, it was only the time frame that favoured Muhammad

    Two, Ali took a risk in fighting ancient Archie Moore so early. Of course he should win with the age Archie is but I don't think he gets enough credit for that win, it's just the type of fight a prospect comes undone in, the physically overmatched but crafty craftsman out for one last payday.

    I was looking through photographs of Moore this morning. There's an astonishing array of pictures of him throughout the years, not a punch he didn't have, what a warrior.
     
  6. Hatesrats

    Hatesrats "I'm NOT Suprised..." Full Member

    60,376
    241
    Sep 28, 2007
    "The Brown Bomber"
    This content is protected
     
  7. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,775
    312
    Dec 12, 2005
    Cox has the best boxing videos on youtube. So yes, I've seen it. More to the point -you have seen it... so let's join hands and sing of the superiority of Joe's skill over Ali's:

    Alleluia! Alleluia! [I don't hear you McGrainy!]
     
  8. natonic

    natonic Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,581
    83
    Jul 9, 2008
    Thanks for that awesome clip McGrain. Awesome stuff. I saw Lennox Lewis thrown in to the conversation at some point. I think a problem we encounter when comparing different generations is the size factor. Lennox was huge compared to Louis and it's the only reason he'd have a chance. All things being equal, I can't imagine Lennox navigating 15 rounds with Louis given his suspect chin.
     
  9. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    I do agree Mcgrain. since the patterson loss, Archie had gone 40-2 in his last 6 years without being knocked out and archie recently knocked unconsious 6'4 212lb contender alejandro lavorante putting him in a coma and drew with Champion Willie Pastrano. moore moved up to # 4 in heavyweight rankings. Moore even at 46 was still a dangerous fighter, althought with clays speed youthness and movement he was a stylistic nightmare for archie by 62. But I think its an underated win.
     
  10. guilalah

    guilalah Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,355
    306
    Jul 30, 2004
    I picked Ali. I have no problem with anyone picking Louis. I'm fonder of Louis, and I'd pull for Louis if they fought.
    I have the feeling that, at their best, other top 15 heavies have a little better chance against Louis at his best, than against Ali at his best.
     
  11. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,178
    13,177
    Jan 4, 2008
    You could put together a pretty good video of Ali's skills as well.

    Him somehow not letting Liston set him up for the finish while having him blinded, him knocking down Williams while going backwards, him KO'ing Folley with "punches I had no reason getting hit with", him schooling Quarry in their second fight - tormenting him with the jab and keeping him from coming in with short, sharp hooks and uppercuts -, him hitting Foreman with right hand leads in the first round, not letting Foreman positioning himself in a comfortable position to let go at Ali and finally taking him out with a devastating pinpoint combination after almost eight gruelling rounds. Etc, etc.

    Now, that would be a good video.
     
  12. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,626
    27,316
    Feb 15, 2006
    I think that Louis had the kind of backing that no previous fighter had up to that point, in terms of resources and suport, and I think he was given adequate time to recover between bouts.

    He was brought along at a ridiculous pace though. Ali was still fighting guys with loosing records 9 or even 14 months into his career. Louis was fighting former champions.

    His backing came at a high price. His backers expected a puick return.

    In fact can you name any fighter from any era who beat two former champions in their first 18 months as pro let alone two who had been "the man" only a few months earlier?
     
  13. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,626
    27,316
    Feb 15, 2006
     
  14. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,178
    13,177
    Jan 4, 2008
    If Louis's skill was so superior Ali's he should have done better after the lay-off than Ali. He not only had his supposedly superior skill to fall back on, but his most important physical asset - power - is also the last go. Ali's most important assets - speed and reflexes - are on the other hand the first ones to diminish.

    So Louis should have been much better off after his lay-off, but in reality the opposite seems to be more true.
     
  15. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,626
    27,316
    Feb 15, 2006
    There are a whole raft of factors at work.

    Louis's decline is atributable not just to the layoff but also to shopwear. He had been fighting a ridiculous schedule for many years by the time the war broke out, and his profesional fights were just the tip of the iceberg. He fought litteraly dozens of exhibitions between his title defences which were basicaly four round fights that usualy ended in a knockout. During the war alone Louis fought 93 exhibitions to raise money for the army/navy releif funds and other charities.

    It is dificult to pinpoint exactly when Louis's decline took place but it can be atributed to a combination of shopwear and intermitent layoffs. I think that even if the war had not happened he would have started to loose a little over the next years. Louis himself thought that the Maurellio fight post war was the last time he felt his former self, but it dosnt tell us much because of how it unfolded so quickly.

    By the Walcott fight Louis had lost his timing and reflexes, and had to fall back on his power and technical fundamentals.

    It has to be added that one asset that Ali had to fall back on when his skills eroded which Louis didnt was his ungodly durability. Once Louis had to soak up as much punishment as his oponents he sudenly found himself on a level playing field.