would have been ali undefeated in the era of marciano?

It isn't. But I think we should note two things about Jones: 1. He was a pressure fighter (Ali's poison at all stages in his career) 2. He was at his absolute peak, coming off his without comparison greatest win at HW (a KO win over Folley).

In a way Jones was Ali's Buster Douglas. But with the one crucial difference that Ali emerged victorious.

 

Ali would shine in any era. marcinao only fought for about 9 years. ali fought for about 7 years then had a break of 3years before having another 8 unbroken years. ali would have finished in the same era he started in, his last fight could have been sonny banks or doug jones!

In the late 1940's ali would have made it to madison square garden a little quicker and would have been in demand there. Alis extensive amatuer pedigree meant he was beter equiped anyway. Marciano was a local atraction in providence where he could develop as a house fighter. as a black guy in marcianos era without the olympic tag ali would have been forced on the road from day one. Its not a cake walk.

As well as the guys marciano fought like vingo, lastarza, layne, savold, mathews, renolds, shkor there was a lot of other tough fighters out there like baksi, mauriello,brion, agramonte, bivins, turkey thompson and maxim that were as tough as the guys young ali fought on the way up in the early 1960's like alonzo johnson, alex miteff and sonny banks. The champions Louis, walcott and charles would have been more competative for ali than patterson and terrell, remember liston was a disapointment against ali in both fights and walcott and charles were beter then jones and cooper.

The talent pool of both fighters eras in their first 7 years were comparable. I would expect both fighters to do as well in each others era.

 

If it's the peak 64-67 version of Ali, yes. I slightly favor Marciano over the post-layoff Ali.

 

why in the world would the boxing world be shocked at what it witnessed?

He might do what Maricano did ie win every fight. He is not going to be as impressive, because he is not going to win by as many KOs (is He?)

He might fight on longer (though you would expect a young Liston to wreak havoc on an old Ali), but he is not going to put up a more impressive 49-0 than Marciano did. And if he fights on too long, it is only a matter of time before the 0 goes, and with it goes the magic and mistique of marcianos records.

As others have said, he is still going to be one of the greatest, though it would be interesting to see how his internet rating looks without the technicolour dreamcoat. Sugar Ray Robinson seemed to survive okay. i suppose

 

Depends on how Ali starts imo.

Does he get the gold medel and protected like he did in the 60's? Or does he get thown in to the wolfs at 4-0 vs guys that have 25-0 records.

Its could be possible that Ali's quest to the record could end in the early stages.

 

Tsk, too bad it's the marciano era because i think younger Walcott and Charles give any version of Ali a bad headache. They're both smarter boxers and had the speed to compete. How does Ali fight as the aggressor? How great is his performance against the smaller, cagier dudes in the division?>

 

Are we assuming that Ali and Marciano meet, or are we displacing Marciano to put Ali in his era? :think

 

if ali got either louis, charles, moore, maxim even layne or baksi in his first fight the 0 would go. but that is the same with marciano. The route to the title for the greatest of fighters has to be perfect for the record to be perfect. Alis original coach wanted ali to launch himself as a pro with a gold medel because he didnt want his youngster "geting killed in the clubs". He wanted him matched as a main event prospect.

 

Nonsense.

Patterson - TKO. Folley - KO. Answer your question?

 

The premise of the question was placing Ali in an apples to apples comparison to Rocky, fighting the same men and same number of times. A huge part of Rocky's legacy is his retiring undefeated. How would Rocky have made out if he matched the schedule you projected for Ali above ?

 

-I don't think its fair to say he ruined Liston and Foreman.

-Fraizer III and Terrell of course. But I can't see Ali laying vicious career changing beatings like that on Charles or Walcott; both top notch spoilers that could make fights close without taking much flush punishment against just about anybody. With Frazier we all know the story while Terrell...a good boxer but had absolutely no answer for Ali's aggresson...you just can't compare him to the 50s cuties.

 

Psychologically I think you can make an argument he did. Certainly when it comes to Foreman. In fact, that argument is often made here. I wouldn't expect anything like that for Charles and Walcott, though.

Terrell was a good boxer, spoiler and big, durable and strong. For me it's not a huge leap to think Ali could do something similar to a past prime Charles. He laid on just as vicious a beating on Patterson and had Floyd been more shopworn at the time it could well have been a career ender.

I'm not saying it would happen to Charles, but I wouldn't exclude it. Charles was very skilled, but not as elusive as Walcott. Personally I think the aging Charles who fought Marciano would have a very tough time with Ali's superior reach and speed.

 

I'm in agree here .. Marciano dished out far more punishment than Ali ... Ali would win as he won, with speed and likely outpointing or out lasting ... Rocky hurt people.

 

The problem with those very late-40's and early-50's fighters, nobody was getting
a title shot with only 20-bouts or so, and not at age 22.

Casius Clay, then, would have had to go through the ranks of the many, and not
big money fights either.
He'd be looking at 35+ fights before he would have even been considered for a shot at the title.

 

-Plenty of have made that argument, I never saw much substance in it. It always struck me as a fan made apology for Foreman's short comings at the top; the truth being he simply failed to learn from his mistakes and continued to bank on his overwhelming power and nothing more until his second career.

-Sorry, it is a big leap for me. Terrell was exposed as being completely helpless once his jab failed him and Ali was at his most cruel on that night, toying with him and looking to dish out as much punishment as possible. A fighter as dynamic and dangerous as Charles would never be exploited so effortlessly..not even by Ali.

-I think Ali could sweep Charles, but they would be competitive fights. Charles held his own against the fast long arms of Johnson, who actually did very well against some common opponents of Ali.

Even in 55, Charles may not have had the physical gifts of Liston, Foreman, Patterson, or Frazier but he would be one of the smartest boxer/punchers Ali ever faced. I can't see Ali beating him to the point that rematches would be out of the question.

We are talking about an era where Walcott/Charles fought 4 times, Moore/Charles 4 times, Charles/Layne 3 times and Moore/Johnson like 5 or 6. Ali could outpoint Walcott or Charles two straight times and still end up facing them two more unless he totally knocks them out of the game like Marciano did..and really, few ruined fighters like Rocky..a very bad combination of damaging power and volume punching that broke these men down and discouraged them like no other fighter managed to do in their long careers.