Who is the ATG Heavyweight Champ and why?

I thought you just held that era against Marciano saying the fighters were inferior and the sport was entirely different. Now you just named a fighter from that era as the best ever...........

 

Amsterdam, you hold that very minority opinion of old fighters shouldn't be rated. This is not a discussion that would go anywhere, since we are on entirely different pages. :good

 

Certainly, but guys that would have crushed Joe Louis. I rate Ken Norton as more of a threat than Walcott. Likewise, Ali would have never even have an ounce of trouble with a joke like Galento, wouldn't have lost to a Schmeling level fighter and wouldn't have struggled with LHW's like Walcott or Charles.

Ali dealt with a similiarly good LHW in Foster with ease, as well as Patterson.

Hell, I'd pick Patterson and Foster over Joe Louis any day of the week even in an era/era situation.

Louis lacks Ali's resume and H2H situation, he's quite overrated, even with gift decisions, Ali's resume is without a doubt standing on it's own in comparison to all other HW's, hell, he has 3 top 12 ATG HW's on his wins. I'm not a fan of Ali, in some ways he's extremely overrated, but for resume he's got an intense one that Louis doesn't even come close to.

 

Yes, but you consider Louis opposition inferior because of time. Nothing to do with what they actually did.

 

Even if I am being fair and comparing era's, nobody is as good as a peak Roy Jones on the notion that we're judging the best, as in who was really the ****ing best fighter ever filmed at their best.

I don't care who anybody beat, Roy Jones in the mid to late 90's was the best I have ever seen, there is nobody ever filmed who can compare to the stuff he was capable of.

Bob Foster would have gotten him at LHW though, nasty.:yep

Moorer too.:yep

But Charles and Walcott would have fallen even sooner to those two LHW monsters. But the classic fans are impressed by lack of speed, bad footwork, bad defence and un-precise punching....:yep

 

No, not at the time, even comparing era/era, giving Louis full credit for what he did in his time... Ali's resume smokes his 2x over.

Give Louis full credit for Walcott, Charles, Schmeling, Baer, B. Baer, Conn etc.

Compare to Ali's -

Liston, Patterson, Frazier, Foreman, Norton, Shavers etc.

That is not even comparable, in the slightest.

Even if you just have Liston, Frazier and Foreman.... 3 top 12 ATG HW's, Louis has victories over NOBODY in the top 10 ATG list. So this is all resume relevance.

 

Yet he has wins over the best of HIS era. He also was very consistant, a textbook fighter with great skill. Louis for me is the best ever overall.

 

no i agree with my firist point but listen to this there is suh a difference from having 49 fights to 206 fights, but the boxing world was all corrupt back then owned by the mafia! the majority of his losses of Sugar Ray Robinson came near the end of his career, he was something special in the mix of a white dominated boxing era! SRR has had a incredible career with great wins while marciano was in a league which was to currupt he was placed against to many weaker opponents than SRR was!

 

Sure, but his era is long gone and new era's arise. The best of Ali's era were bvetter than the best of Louis, just like they were better than the best of Tyson's era.

Tyson crushed the best of his era in the 80's more impressively than Louis and was consistent until his life unraveled, can't rate him over Ali.

And I find Louis horribly lacking in skill, thus shooting his H2H ability way down the drain.

 

Marciano was

This content is protected

against weaker opponents? He fought the HW's who were there to fight. Who did he miss?

And if the Mafia owned boxing (and it did), and this is your reasoning against Marciano, are you saying the mafia owned every weight class but SRR's, or they only owned the HW division? It seems to me you are picking and choosing based on who you like and don't like.

 

Tyson wasn't consistant. He has the shortest prime EVER according to his fans. Impressive? Sure, for a bit he was the most impressive ever. And I agree Ali fought in a better era. But he also wasn't as consistant.

We fundementally disagree to begin with because you think one of the most skilled HW's ever has no skill.

 

Ali; best resume at the weight. Proved he could change how he fought. Won a title way out of his prime. Ranks very highly H2H also biggest impact on the sport of any boxer ever.

This content is protected

:good.

 

hey u asked for my opion n i gave it! but the heavy weight division was were the money was back then not welterweight they made more money in heavyweight fights than they did in welter, they had a hell of alot of money invested in marciano back then n they won a hell of a lot of money back then

but im not that old im just going from what ive read on internet sites, n in boxing books

 

That's fine by me that anyone gives an opinion and sticks to it. However, if you say something inconsistant, most here are going to point it out, and most are going to call you some vulgar names to make sure you get their point (even if they don't have one).