Why is Muhammad Ali HW ATG #1 and not Joe Louis?

And Liston and Foreman?Both feature in most top ten all time lists.

 

I’m more perplexed at why the OP seems perplexed that people have Ali at number one!
For me it’s plain and simply resume.
If you look up the Ring Magazine top 10 end of year heavyweight rankings from say 1962 to 1979 it’s quite remarkable how many year in year out of those ranked he beat.
Some years it’s all ten most years it’s 6,7 or 8 and sure there are a couple of calls when he was on the right side of the decisions especially against Jimmy Young who I though beat him, but really he cleaned out two separate decades.
Having said that I have absolutely no issue at all with people having the great Joe Louis as number one or Lennox Lewis or Larry Holmes, they all have a shout.

 

How many have crushed an undefeated champion who has cleaned out at the top? At HW only Foreman has done that, and that would have been true even if Ali never game back.

Frazier would still be undefeated and have dominated the division for the last half decade before being crushed by Foreman. Would still be unique in the division to winbthe title like that. So of course it would carry big weight.

 

Not taking anything personally Friend . You can criticize Ali I'm not his Dad, he had his faults, both as a fighter and as a man.If one wants to pick Louis based on his longevity that's fine by me.I just think Ali has better names on his resume.

 

Stop trying to use titles and what not to play parlour tricks it’s silly. Frazier’s best win would be Quarry and want level does that put him at? I can watch Joe Frazier fight, George Foreman too and see with my eyes neither was a great fighter.

 

Heavyweight is as shallow as a “blonde” with fake lips and pronouns in there Instagram bio.

 

A parlour trick to say that he clearly beat the best of that half decade before Foreman smoked him? Which hasn't been done before or since. What are you on?

Those are facts. You are now down to solely "but I think .." and just your own subjective take is never going to get you anywhere.

 

Those guys Frazier beat, great fighters YES or NO? Not including Muhammad.

 

I see peak Frazier beating any version of Ali, even 1960s version.

Yeah, I think Louis from Walcott fight would dominate Norton. Different styles, different fights.

 

What are you not getting? Just like Louis's best comp they were good but not great. Few of the top HWs have beaten a great fighter anywhere close to prime.

För example Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, Marciano, Holmes, Tyson, Wlad didn't. It's a rare thing.

But Frazier legtimately dominated for five years, which not many have done. That in itself would make him special, Ali or not. Therefore Foreman's utter destruction of him would be unique even with no Ali in the picture.

This isn't rocket science.

 

….

 

Okay I'm out because I think you're just looking for an argument and don't make any logical sense.

 

I have Ali 1a and Louis 1b and that could flip on any given day. There's really nobody else allowed in that gated community.

 

Ali fought better opponents but the thing that tips it for me is the work he put in from '71-74. Shortly after losing to Frazier in a brutal fight. Nobody could really have blamed him if he had retired. It was a vicious fight.
He had the desire to get all the way back to his best form. It took alot of fights vs the Fosters, Quarry, Mathis, Blin etc but he got the feel of the ring back. It was uncommon and to me showed the true desire to be the best.

 

Competition