FOTC is a more important win than Schmeling Vs. Louis 1. Schmeling's "zero" is not worth mentioning; Wlad's "zero" is the same. Bowe and Holfield took each other's "zero". Tyson's "zero", the biggest surprise in HW history, is not a more valuable win than FOTC. Foreman took Frazier's "zero", and Ali took Foreman's. Lewis' "zero", Holmes' "zero", Fury's "zero".... Whose "zero" is more valuable than Muhammad Ali's "zero" and FOTC? P.S. "Zero" = the first defeat of a boxer
Not on the poll, but I'd defo have said Ali V Frazier 1. That fight was massive. Mike Tyson was literally the epitome of a literal monster when he was undefeated. The fact he was undefeated made him seem invincible. He looked like a monster, he fought like a monster, he was truly the undisputed champion and the number 1 P4P fighter then. Was the upset of the century losing to Buster, as he seemed invincible to many.
My zero is worth the most! Kidding. Its not just the 0 its how you took it. This is why Foreman v Frazier. Frazier v Ali was won by a couple of rounds. Tyson nearly won his fight with Buster Douglas. Spinks barely defeated Holmes. Chagaev v Valuev is one I nominate. Greb v Gibbons and Tunney is the best combo for sure.
I’m a bit confused by the question. Are you asking whose first loss had the most cultural impact, or are you arguing that Ali’s first loss to Frazier is inherently more valuable because of his status as an ATG heavyweight? If it’s the latter, isn’t that a bit circular—saying the loss is more significant because Ali is great, rather than evaluating it on its own merit?