Who's more skilled: Ali or Usyk?

Great post and yes, that’s because I agree with it 100%.

Ali did some relatively unconventional things but he did a lot of conventional things also.

The former observation shouldn’t disproportionally eclipse or overshadow the latter observation.

I love the first Liston fight - with a guy like Sonny, Ali wasn’t going to indulge in ****ing around at all and did a lot by the book - one of his most complete “conventional” displays of boxing by imo.

Also, as I’ve read, in the early days, Ali would stay at the gym after everyone else had left, training until late, tirelessly perfecting his punches on the heavy bag - aka honing one’s skills.

 

And yet he couldn't defend a left hook to save his life..........

 

Because its scarliage. How dare a modern boxer be an ATG who's able to compete with any past great and be a handful for them. That's why people are going out of there way to discredit him while also propping up past greats as shown in this thread. Usyk is objectively more skilled yet how many people went out of there way to try and justify why Ali is better despite conceding Usyk is more skilled? The cult of Ali is really something

 

Ali is a ladder climber he was a cult member now he’s the leader… smaller scale then NOI but there are probably people here who’d drink the Koolaid for Papa Ali.

 

"Who's more skilled: Ali or Usyk?" is not a fair question, really. It depends on what one considers as "skilled", as well as how they measure the same.

Ali transcended conventional boxing skills. Fundamentals and technique served only as the platform for him to invent and express his own unique abilities. So, there's an attempt here to compare someone who redefined how the game was played with another someone who, save for his southpaw stance, excels at traditional best practice.

Usyk is a classical technician - a good one - something we've not seen in the heavyweight division for a while. This circumstance lends itself to the enthusiastic idea that he is somehow a never-before-seen novelty. Perhaps, in some ways, he is - Usyk applies his craft with sophistication, and this proficiency might be perceived as being preternatural due to his southpaw stance. However, he is comprehensible.

But Ali (along with Louis) is one edge of the Sword in the Stone, while Usyk is a rapier in the pell.

 

The can of wormy semantics you can open up on this thread is bottomless. And if something has no bottom, there isn't even any cushion for pushing into it.

 

Without getting into who is and isn't more skilled, at his absolute peak there must have been ten, fifteen quarterbacks who could run faster, throw farther, and throw with more accuracy than Tom F---ing Brady, yet he's the consensus quarterback GOAT. More skilled =/= better?

 

I find it difficult to judge Usyk, he’s great but it is a really bad era of heavyweights, I’m glad he came along to expose this super heavy myth.
Ali was more gifted, does that he mean he was more skilled ?

 

Cope, most HW contenders from this era would dominate most HW contenders from Ali's era the supposedly "strongest era"

 

Most heavyweights

 

True

 

Contenders , so not the champions you mean ?
I find it difficult to believe an era of Norton, Ali, Frazier, Liston and Holmes as champions has worse ‘contenders’ than an era of Fury, Wilder, Joshua , Ruiz and Usyk
weren’t they all contenders at one point ?

 

This is a joke?
I’m picking Shavers or Young over Chisora or Zhang…

 

Skills is Usyk, physical talent is Ali.

 

I was being generous. My point is it's absurd to call the modern era weak when most of its top fighters would be top 5 contenders in the 70s.