Would Ali go Undefeated Vs Lennox Lewis Competition

You were were quite absolute in stating that Ruddock beats a '63 Ali.

Anything is possible, so a "chance" Ruddock might have, and I think it has already been mentioned that he would have had the proverbial Puncher's Chance. But it's a long shot.


Prone to mistakes? Just how many mistakes was '63 Ali making?

Ali was the number-1 contender by July '63, after which he beat Cooper and then challenged for Liston's Championship in his very next fight. How many mistakes did Ali make against Liston?

Betting on the basis of a Puncher's Chance is unwise and Ruddock simply doesn't have the quality on his resume to make his prospects in a bout with Ali (in '63 or otherwise) any more than that.

 

He was actually given that award too. Its full title being "The Cleveland Williams Most Protected Rating of the Decade" trophy (named after its inaugural winner). Brian London presented Dokes with the award at an exclusive ceremony attended by like-for-like contenders. Alfredo Evangelista clinched the 1970s award, much to the frustration of Lorenzo Zanon, who offered him a bare knuckle 'straightener' in the hotel car park at the end of the night.

 

Another thing to factor into is that Ali was incredibly confident vs Cooper, infact over confident Cooper was supposed to be a walk over for him.

I tend to think Ali would've took a KO artist like Ruddock with some reputation more seriously.

 

Why are we moving the goal posts ? if Lewis never fought prime versions of Tyson Holyfield, then why should Ali ?

Also Lewis fought professionally for 13 years correct ? 1989 to 2002 ? So wouldn't it make logical sense for us to choose Ali between 1960 to 1973 without the exile ? Since Ali turned professional in 1960. And obviously there would be no Vietnam war in the 90s, so we could disregard the 3 or 4 years absence from the sport.

So Ali would be facing Holyfield after being professional for 10 years ? Just like Lewis did. So Ali would be facing Holyfield with the 1970 version of himself.

And Lewis fought Tyson after being professional for 13 years ? So Ali would be fighting Tyson with 1973 version of himself.

And in all honestly I favour Ali in both fights.

 

Yes - I tried to convey, earlier in this thread, that the shape of a fight between Ali and Ruddock would have been quite different to Ali's fight with Cooper.

Generally, I don't think these comparative career overlays work too well anyway. But a fight-on-fight overlay, where the stolen moment of one fighter becomes the given opportunity of another, completely different fighter in a speculative match-up, seems more than just a little misguided to me.

 

Welcome back Conteh! I've always enjoyed your posts in past threads. All due respect to you, I can't say Williams ratings was protected at all. When he was shot he made it as high as number 3 or 4 in The Ring ratings only behind Ali, Liston, Patterson, and Terrell iirc which was very fair. At the time of his shooting, he'd just beaten Billy Daniels, who'd just upset WBA's number one contender Doug Jones as a last minute replacement, and qualified as a finalist in the WBA championship tournament against Ernie Terrell in a very winnable fight for him. He'd previously knocked out Terrell, before being very narrowly split decisioned in the rematch where he came in injured.

I'd say Mac Foster has a far better claim for the most protective rating of the decade. He somehow became the number one contender without beating a single top tenner in his career, which was absolutely absurd.

 

Thanks mate- and great call on Foster. I shall write to the committee post-haste to change the name of their award!! Brian London will be spinning in his grave! Y'know the romantic in me loves that fact that 'Cat finally got his shot at the crown but his 66 ranking was bogus to say the least, i'd say his ranking was protected (or maybe 'on ice' is a better description) for what he'd done a couple of years before. His sudden emergence in the top 10, including a roundly booed decision vs Sonny Moore, didn't really merit a top 20 slot, never mind top 10. That's why he sprung to mind, but as you say Foster is a better shout.

 

Mac Foster was 24-0 when he fought Quarry, Foster had only beat 5 fighters who had won their previous fight before fighting him. He was rated as the top contender? Unbelievable! He was the most protected fighter on paper I've seen.

His management probably knew what his ceiling was and decided to cash in his 24-0 record against Quarry for a big payday? I would guess that there were a lot of contenders who would have welcomed the chance to fight an unproven guy who was rated as the top contender like Mac Foster for a big payday. For Quarry that was an early Christmas present.

 

Yeah I agree his rating upon his return from the shooting was disgusting to say the least. Iirc he was dropped by Turnbow as well. It was obvious he was a shadow of himself and Ali said as much. I'd agree it was even worse than Foster's. Foster at least was beating washed up relics. Williams was going life and death with obscure fighters.

Similarly, Machen also somehow became the number 2 contender upon his return from the mental institution which was nearly as bad imo. He was beating a string of unrated washed up has-beens or never-wases. To put it in context, his best win was probably a 9th round KO, (which he was fined for intentional cheating by the boxing commission) against former contender Alonzo Johnson) who'd been blasted out by Cleveland Williams in a round 3 years prior. It was a joke.

 

I agree. If his record was any more padded, he could've been a mattress salesmen.

It's still absurd to me, he was seen as such a huge favorite against Quarry.

To be fair to Foster though, he put up probably his career best performance, but seemed to give up after 3 rounds when he realized Quarry wasn't going anywhere.

 

Quarry had been knocked out by Chuvalo and struggled with Scrap Iron Johnson in the last 6 months, and maybe Quarry was already partying too much or showing signs that he was not disciplined in his lifestyle, so Foster's management might have thought he was as shot as Foster's other opponents. The thing about Quarry was that he was still only 24-25 years old. Foster probably made a good effort because he was 24-0 and didn't realize he could lose yet, when he saw that Quarry was not like his other competition it probably came as a big surprise. It is hard to believe that Foster was a "huge favorite" against Quarry but in those days there was no internet, not much video was available, it was much easier to create a "prospect."

 

I make Ruddock favorite against 63 Ali, so he has way more than a puncher's chance.

 

In your opinion, which is fine.

However, making Ruddock a favorite against an Ali who would go on to beat Liston in his very next fight looks like irrational punditry, at best.

 

Liston was 40, did not train properly and had a shoulder injury.
Also, Ali was 1 year older in 64 and Liston was slow.
Plus, styles make fights.

 

Liston was coming of two of the best wins of his career.
Ali was a massive underdog.
Ali's victory over Liston is a better win than Ruddock was ever going to achieve in 100 careers.
Styles do, in part, make fights and Ruddock doesn't have the style to beat Ali.