Let's flip this, though. I don't think it's necessarily a given that Louis lasts the distance against Ali. Ali wasn't necessarily a one-punch bomber, but he could snap off a very effective right hand, and he was a very good finisher when he had an opponent in trouble. Louis certainly has the tools to take out Ali, but he would have to be careful, 'cause Ali could certainly take him out as well.
Folley was Ko'd in 7 by Doug Jones, in 3 by Liston,Alejandro Lavorante Ko him in 7,Cooper and Terrell UD him And he was stopped in 5 by Young Jack Johnson....Louis and Marciano would have had him out of there in 3-4 RDS
Foley was ko'd about 5 or 6 times prior to Ali fight, about once a year. He was saying what was popular to say, or maybe he believed it. Maybe he took too many shots to head.
People wont agree until they really get in a ring with him or have seen him up close and see the speed difference Pre draft ALi of course
Well, Bert Sugar discussed the same topic with Larry Holmes and George Chuvalo on ESPN Classic. Sugar believes Louis was the greatest HW ever, but Chuvalo and Holmes looked almost incredolous when he made this claim. They couldn't see how Louis would have a chance against Ali in his prime. As they both put it, Ali was a lot faster as well as being bigger. So, three fighters that fought Ali had him beating Joe Louis, and another, Ken Norton, picks him as the greatest HW ever. I have a hard time seeing how someone who had a lot of trouble with Conn could possible defeat Ali in his prime. He certainly wouldn't knock him out or stop him and I can't see him getting a decision. How would plodding Louis, who didn't bob and weave, possible not get messed up by Ali's razor-like and significantly longer jab? Louis was a great fighter, but I just can't see him pull this off.
You'd probably say the exact same thing about Norton and Jones if Ali never fought them. They didn't bob and weave, how can they not get messed up by Ali's razor-like and significantly longer jab? And what's the point of bringing up opinion of Ali opponents? Of course they're going to praise him, it enhances their feeling of self-value. Ask Louis or his opponents what they think of Ali. Many of their time didn't consider Ali to be a true fighter because he ran; they favored aggression much more. Rightfully or not, everyone has his own opinion.
I remember maybe a year or so ago, about Gil Clancy making a reference to how well George Chuvalo performed against Ali in their first fight. It was about the time they put out a documentary on that fight...Clancy speculated that Marciano may have done better than expected due to the fact that Chuvalo resembled Marciano somewhat stylistically, and George did give Ali a good fight...and Marciano hits alot harder than Chuvlao did...
If you listen to Archie Moore who fought Marciano and Ali and was around a lot of guys who fought both....Ali was overated and Moore hit him often
Zora Folley's comments are interesting but they need to be taken in context. I would suggest : 1. Folley wasn't saying that stuff BEFORE he fought Ali. And 2. Folley, if he fought a prime Louis (or Dempsey or Marciano) would have a completely different perspective on the subject. Zora Folley obviously gained a great appreciation of a great athlete, upon sharing a ring with him. A perspective that none of us have. On the flipside of that, Zora Folley obviously LACKED any EQUIVALENT PERSPECTIVE in regards to Joe Louis et al. The same can be said of Chuvalo (who fought Ali twice), Holmes (who sparred him hundreds of rounds) and Norton (who fought Ali three times) - these guys have no idea what sharing a ring with a prime Joe Louis was like, they may even have less experience of watching Joe Louis on film that WE do. Having only shared the ring with one legend may actually make these guys comments less informed (ie. Less balanced) than we who never shared a ring with either of them. What's interesting and significant about Folley's comments is that Folley was hugely impressed by Ali's style and speed. Folley, an experienced top-flight fighter, gives the impression that Ali is like nothing he's s encountered before, a true phenomenon. That's what I take from the comments. The stuff about Ali beating Louis etc. is relatively meaningless.
Folley fought Ali, but then he never fought Louis. So he knows what Louis would be up against, but he doesn't know what Ali would be facing.
People want their hero’s to be what they ve been told all these years. But here is a top guy fought over different periods telling you what he sees first hand. He fought all the top fighters of late fifties. He faught into late sixties and fought Ali and is telling you these guys don’t compare but you know better. You know who said the same thing Walcott. Fought from 30s thru 50s fought Louis twice refereed Ali fight was a boxing official. He said no way he wasn’t defeating all these guys soundly. He was taller heavier longer reach faster and better boxer. He would be moving too fast for them firing hard bombs at them. So you push him aside also? And anyone who says Tunney and Conn etc were boxing same as Ali has never studied the film or is lying. Take a look at Ali Liston 1 and the Conn Louis 1 and tell me Conn had the ability of Ali. That he was a dancing master with the athletic ability of Ali. Not even close and he was 30 pounds lighter!!