Top 10 Heavies from best to worst

[Scott9945]

Thunder is no great fighter I included him to show Byrd can handle himself against hard hitters and knock them out. He can out box Tua all night and Evander.

Ha, The 60's Ali stands greatest chances against Byrd, I would tip him to beat Byrd in fact by UD because he is faster and has greater range and Byrd has not the power to crunch him.

Against all others I think the 70's Ali stands best chances, Rahman, McCall would knock pre-exile Ali out! They can really ****ing brawl and **** and they are certainly skilled+fast enough to catch this Ali.

The Ali of the 60's did nothing to suggest he could beat them, NOTHING!

Liston,
Terrell,
Chuvalo,
Cooper,
London,
Mildenberger,
Patterson.
Moore

Where is the competition?

Take a look at McCall and Rahman, look how tough they are when they fight. Then take a look at Floyd Patterson, considered a "great opponent" for Clay? Nothing but a sick joke!

There are two kinds of fans these days. The ones who research boxrec, and the ones who watch boxing matches. Anyone who saw a prime Ali fight and would have any doubt about him beating McCall or Rahman doesn't know spit about boxing. Those fights wouldn't even be competitive once Ali stepped on the gas. Any idiot can breakdown resumes based on records. What really matters is how good of a fighter someone really is. And that takes an experienced eye, which you obviously lack.

[GeneralZod]

Right so you put demonstratably the worst natural HW of all time Liston who has beaten absolutely no fighters worth mentioning, a blown up middleweight who did absolutely nothing back in 1950's HW Moore and an ancient boxer who won his title by beating an oaf and lost it to a career bum! You put these guys ahead of Rahman and McCall, good boxers, slandered because they were only 2nd tier champs in an era full of tough contenders and a selection of shining stars.

That's a sad and shameful outlook and I think Rahman and McCall would spit at that! Yet you can give Frazier and Foreman who received and lost their titles immediately and even Max Baer and Patterson credit and not draw any comparisons here?

I know for a fact Rahman and McCall would belt the piss out of that level of competition and would bet handsomely. Ali maybe give them trouble but not bums like that!

Yeah. Muhammad would whip them both badly. Sonny boy, Foreman, Max Baer, and Joe Frazier would all KO both of them. Archie could also handle them. Floyd was rather underdeveloped though.

[Tommo1]

Wrong Scott, I have seen them all fight and I gotta tell ya it's when you watch Ali closely that you realise his opponents were crap. You realise he made a lot of mistakes. You realise against decent opponents he couldn't be nearly as effective like that. There is a reason fighters don't run around the ring sparring like that in preparation for fights. It doesn't work! I know!

You like to position yourself as some kind of old timer who notices subtle things he does that would bamboozle a modern boxer but have you actually watched Rahman and McCall's performances? And analysed how good they really were? Of course you haven't. You are just another sheep and blind follower. Because let me give you a hint mate, there is NOTHING particularly special about the performances of Clay, it's just a hype job. And a very successful hype job but that's what it is nonetheless!

[Tommo1]

Well Zod, your favourites are no different from your Superman anti-hero, "fictional characters". The versions of the fighters you are claiming never existed. And just because Ali defeated Superman in a comic strip does not make it so! lol

Foreman can KO Rahman and McCall, ok that maybe true. Rahman and McCall are better boxers and I doubt Foreman would crack that chin of McCall's.

The others have definitely no chance with the exception of Muhammad himself. But I give the 60's skinny version of Ali as little chance as Patterson really. He's a walking KO waiting to happen against a 90's HW of decent ability!

HENRY COOPER, BUM, 185lbs, remember that guy???

[GeneralZod]

Well Zod, your favourites are no different from your Superman anti-hero, "fictional characters". The versions of the fighters you are claiming never existed. And just because Ali defeated Superman in a comic strip does not make it so! lol

Foreman can KO Rahman and McCall, ok that maybe true. Rahman and McCall are better boxers and I doubt Foreman would crack that chin of McCall's.

The others have definitely no chance with the exception of Muhammad himself. But I give the 60's skinny version of Ali as little chance as Patterson really. He's a walking KO waiting to happen against a 90's HW of decent ability!

HENRY COOPER, BUM, 185lbs, remember that guy???

Until i beat Kal-El that never happened.

HENRY COOPER, BUM, 185lbs, remember that guy???

Hasim Rahman also got knocked out twice by Oleg Maskev, and i'm still not 100% on who that is. McCall also lost to people i've never even heard of. Do those people not exist? You just wiping those off the record?

[Tommo1]

Oleg Maskaev is a former HW champion of considerable skill himself.

The point with Henry is that by comparison the guys who beat McCall and Rahman up are, if nothing else, GENUINE HW's!

Henry Cooper vs Muhammad Ali was a HW fight in name only! Cooper today would not even be able to fight at CW at 185lbs! He would drop 10lbs to the LHW division and likely still get his face smashed today! Yet this guy knocked chinny Clay down! That's right chinny Clay! Only the strong version of Ali in the 70's had a proven chin!

McCall and Rahman... WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO KNOCK SUCH OPPONENTS OUT!

And what would happen if they lined up half of their opponents on their records to be CW's or LHW's like Cooper? They would knock every single one of them straight out, raise their KO ratio to near 100%, improve their records to the greatest of all time and hold their titles for as long as they could cherry pick their opponents. Exactly what in fact DID used to occur back in the day pioneered by Sonny Liston.

Now just accept that McCall and Rahman are good boxers and cannot really be didmissed just because you "haven't heard of their oppoennts"? What the hell does that have to do with it!

[Scott9945]

Wrong Scott, I have seen them all fight and I gotta tell ya it's when you watch Ali closely that you realise his opponents were crap. You realise he made a lot of mistakes. You realise against decent opponents he couldn't be nearly as effective like that. There is a reason fighters don't run around the ring sparring like that in preparation for fights. It doesn't work! I know!

You like to position yourself as some kind of old timer who notices subtle things he does that would bamboozle a modern boxer but have you actually watched Rahman and McCall's performances? And analysed how good they really were? Of course you haven't. You are just another sheep and blind follower. Because let me give you a hint mate, there is NOTHING particularly special about the performances of Clay, it's just a hype job. And a very successful hype job but that's what it is nonetheless!

If we both watch the same things and are that far apart on it, then there is no point in debating it further. But you are not a sheep and a blind follower. You are simply clueless.

And yes, I have seen many Rahman and McCall performances and have "analyzed how really good they were". That's why I'm so damn sure about what I'm talking about.

[Tommo1]

Again, I don't consider Ali a poor boxer, I rate him in fact. I just don't see anything particularly special that he deserves to be promoted over Rahman for doing.

Ali played in a very weak era and became champion several times fine. Rahman played in a very strong era and STILL managed to capture the title once! You see! Relative to the competition they are a good match I would say!

[GeneralZod]

Again, I don't consider Ali a poor boxer, I rate him in fact. I just don't see anything particularly special that he deserves to be promoted over Rahman for doing.

Ali played in a very weak era and became champion several times fine. Rahman played in a very strong era and STILL managed to capture the title once! You see! Relative to the competition they are a good match I would say!

Didn't you put Wlad and Vitali in your top three?

[Tommo1]

Sure I did, how the hell could you have a toplist without 2 of the best fighters near the top Vitali's opponents on the whole may be a little lacklustre but Wladimir's despite the usual criticism are decent opponents! Some of them are great opponents. Of course he fought a few bums too but who has not!

Vitali did fight Lewis though, something Wladimir did not do, and avenged his Sander's loss, another dangerous opponent.