Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BEST POUND 4 POUND CHAMP EVER? and top 10

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #71
    Originally posted by Brassangel View Post
    Ali had a great physical swiftness, and could therefore lean away from punches, but as Joe Louis would point out in his autobiography:

    (Louis p 260), “Ali’s a great fighter, (but) he made too many mistakes, his hands are down a lot, and he takes too many punches to the body. I know what I’m talking about.

    "Technically, Ali wasn't a very good fighter; it was just that his physical gifts (speed, reflexes, and chin) were so astonishing that he was able to get away with things that would have gotten most fighters beaten up. Some may argue he did end beaten up when his career was over. George Foreman noted on his web-site () that after Ali’s speed diminished “it became apparent that he never really learned defense.”"

    I, for one, would listen to Joe Louis, one of the greatest boxing brains in terms of solving opponents, before Nat Fleischer. Not that he doesn't know what he's talking about, but still; Joe's experience in the ring speaks for itself, and he spent a lot of time with Ali and studying him on film.

    George Chuvalo, who was slow footed, lacked pure punching skill or speed, managed to find success to Ali's body, setting up flush shots to the chin in the 13th round of their fight while Ali was in his prime. Doug Jones, a small heavyweight with modest ability was able to be competative with Ali because he had quick hands and a good jab of his own. In both fights with Henry Cooper, Ali was hit cleanly by jabs. Even though he went on to win these contests, very average opponents were able to give him trouble while he was at his quickest. A well-passed-his-prime Sonny Liston was less than centimeters behind Ali when he threw a jab, but instead decided to go for the kill in a fight that he didn't train seriously for. I can guarantee Liston would have landed that jackhammer jab to counter Ali's jab were he[Liston] any younger. Even if Ali's speed would have saved him, there's a good chance that Liston's jab would have forced a different strategy from the young, dancing Clay.

    I never said that Ali didn't have a good jab, just that his jab left him open to counterpunching. Unfortunately for this theory, he never faced a top-notch contender who possessed this ability until later in his career. When he did, he got hit a lot.

    Ali also used right uppercuts to try to catch incoming opponents, which often left the right side of his face wide open. Regardless of his time spent away from the ring, this is one reason why Frazier and Norton were able to catch him cleanly so often. His chin saved him in these fights, not his defense. Were it an opponent with faster hands and an ability to finish, such as Joe Louis or Mike Tyson, for example, Ali may not have recovered.

    He was very difficult to hit from 1960-1967, because he never fought anyone with more than adequate ability to accomplish the simple measures for beating him; short of an over-the-hill Liston, or a quickly fading, suffering from back injury-laden Patterson.

    Nonetheless, I still rate Muhammad Ali as my #2 all-time heavyweight (sometimes #1, depending on the day). I'm just making clear that a critical eye can really show how hittable, and downright beatable anyone in history truly is.

    Wow nice post Brass!

    Comment


      #72
      Originally posted by hhascup View Post

      Zora Folley in Sports Illustrated:

      "Louis wouldn't have a chance; he was too slow... There's no way to train yourself for what he does. The moves, the speed, the punches and the way he changes style every time you think you got him figured. The right hands Ali hit me with just had no business landing but they did. They came from nowhere. Many times he was in the wrong position but he hit me anyway. I've never seen anyone who could do that. The knockdown punch was so fast that I never saw it. He has lots of snap, and when the punches land they dizzy your head; they fuzz up your mind. He's smart. The trickiest fighter I've seen. He's had twenty-nine fights and acts like he's had a hundred. He could write the book on boxing, and anyone that fights him should be made to read it."[/FONT]
      Wouldnt you agree Louis had more technical knowledge? Making his opinion stronger?

      Comment


        #73
        Originally posted by Lubutheimmortal View Post
        Wouldnt you agree Louis had more technical knowledge? Making his opinion stronger?
        Louis never fought Ali, Foley did.

        Also, Jersey Joe Walcott, who fought Louis twice said that Ali was the best Heavyweight he ever saw.

        Comment


          #74
          Originally posted by Brassangel View Post
          Ali had a great physical swiftness, and could therefore lean away from punches, but as Joe Louis would point out in his autobiography:

          (Louis p 260), “Ali’s a great fighter, (but) he made too many mistakes, his hands are down a lot, and he takes too many punches to the body. I know what I’m talking about.

          "Technically, Ali wasn't a very good fighter; it was just that his physical gifts (speed, reflexes, and chin) were so astonishing that he was able to get away with things that would have gotten most fighters beaten up. Some may argue he did end beaten up when his career was over. George Foreman noted on his web-site () that after Ali’s speed diminished “it became apparent that he never really learned defense.”"

          I, for one, would listen to Joe Louis, one of the greatest boxing brains in terms of solving opponents, before Nat Fleischer. Not that he doesn't know what he's talking about, but still; Joe's experience in the ring speaks for itself, and he spent a lot of time with Ali and studying him on film.

          George Chuvalo, who was slow footed, lacked pure punching skill or speed, managed to find success to Ali's body, setting up flush shots to the chin in the 13th round of their fight while Ali was in his prime. Doug Jones, a small heavyweight with modest ability was able to be competative with Ali because he had quick hands and a good jab of his own. In both fights with Henry Cooper, Ali was hit cleanly by jabs. Even though he went on to win these contests, very average opponents were able to give him trouble while he was at his quickest. A well-passed-his-prime Sonny Liston was less than centimeters behind Ali when he threw a jab, but instead decided to go for the kill in a fight that he didn't train seriously for. I can guarantee Liston would have landed that jackhammer jab to counter Ali's jab were he[Liston] any younger. Even if Ali's speed would have saved him, there's a good chance that Liston's jab would have forced a different strategy from the young, dancing Clay.

          I never said that Ali didn't have a good jab, just that his jab left him open to counterpunching. Unfortunately for this theory, he never faced a top-notch contender who possessed this ability until later in his career. When he did, he got hit a lot.

          Ali also used right uppercuts to try to catch incoming opponents, which often left the right side of his face wide open. Regardless of his time spent away from the ring, this is one reason why Frazier and Norton were able to catch him cleanly so often. His chin saved him in these fights, not his defense. Were it an opponent with faster hands and an ability to finish, such as Joe Louis or Mike Tyson, for example, Ali may not have recovered.

          He was very difficult to hit from 1960-1967, because he never fought anyone with more than adequate ability to accomplish the simple measures for beating him; short of an over-the-hill Liston, or a quickly fading, suffering from back injury-laden Patterson.

          Nonetheless, I still rate Muhammad Ali as my #2 all-time heavyweight (sometimes #1, depending on the day). I'm just making clear that a critical eye can really show how hittable, and downright beatable anyone in history truly is.
          It's well known that in his prime Ali did everything "wrong" from a technichal aspect. He got away with it because of his incredible speed and reflexes. In a way it was actually a strength because you couldn't predict what he would do. A good comparison from today is Roy Jones. All these things were said about him as well. The difference between the two is that once his speed and reflexes diminished Ali adapted and found a new way to fight; Jones did not and kept trying to fight the same way he did in his prime. The results were Jones was starched in back to back fights.

          Poet
          Last edited by StarshipTrooper; 09-19-2007, 11:06 PM.

          Comment


            #75
            Originally posted by poet682006 View Post
            It's well known that in his prime Ali did everything "wrong" from a technichal aspect. He got away with it because of his incredible speed and refelexes. In a way it was actually a strength because you couldn't predict what he whould do. A good comparison from today is Roy Jones. All these things were said about him as well. The difference between the two is that once his speed and reflexes diminished Ali adapted and found a new way to fight; Jones did not and kept trying to fight the same way he did in his prime. The results were Jones was starched in back to back fights.

            Poet
            I agree 100%

            Comment


              #76
              Originally posted by hhascup View Post
              Louis never fought Ali, Foley did.

              Also, Jersey Joe Walcott, who fought Louis twice said that Ali was the best Heavyweight he ever saw.
              Yea I realize Foley fought Ali... . Still Louis is know for his knowledge of the Sweet Science. Louis was better then Foley was well.... .

              So anyone can say "Yea he was great cause he got the win against me"
              Just doesnt prove anything to me. As for Walcott thats a personal opinion not saying it doesnt count for anything (cause Jersey Joe was great!).

              Comment


                #77
                I put ROY JONES first because of the total package: HAND and amazing FOOT SPEED. In fact, while the hands get all the glory in boxing, it's really the FEET which deserve the praise in my book. They set up all punching angles. And if you dont have that FOOTWORK, you will be mediocre. All the guys that are really P4P had mad skills in the footwork department: ROBINSON, ALI, JONES, HAMED (tho some dont agree he was ill wit his feet)...

                JOE LOUIS, on the other hand had DECENT to GOOD footwork. And that was for a reason. BLACKBURN his trainer didnt' want to put all the effort into getting his feet together. The plan was to develop krazy hand speed/combo punching because no heavyweights of the time really had that except for JERSEY JOE WALCOTT--who was also trained by BLACKBURN in the beginning of his career before he left him for LOUIS!

                One big important element of the sport is too make your opponent look very ORDINARY because you're so far ahead of them in skills. JONES and ALI did that. ROBINSON. That's the point. Altho Ali shoulda retired by 1972. 10 plus years in boxing is an EON mayne! Roy shoulda been thru by 1998 or 99 at the latest. But the ADULATION and BAD MONEY MANAGEMENT gets these guys...

                Also as far as being TECHNICAL with ya skills in boxing--I think that's something to be avoided. You can be too technical, tryna do your punches correct. Boxing is really about OPENINGS when you see one, close it with a punch. Whether it's 1 or a 2, 3, 4 punch combo depends. Dont always throw a punch from EXPECTED angles. Walcott, Ali, Hamed, Jones and Pryor were all great for throwing punches from odd angles (that's a true MARTIAL ARTS skill which boxing is, let's not forget that).

                At the end of the day, I agree with most of everyone's choices. After all, you cant really narrow it to just 10. I really need a top 25 and the order could change. It would simply be these are the fighters that belong in that 25.

                And just to address the comment on ROBINSON v JONES: It would be interesting at MIDDLEWEIGHT. At 12-15 rounds, I'd go with Robinson. He was the better conditioned fighter. 10 rounds or less, Jones, possibly, even by stoppage. Robinson was more fluid and knew how to conserve movement. You know he watched INSECTS (especially the PRAYING MANTIS) for learning how to fight, move...Meanwhile, we all know Jones watched CHICKENS (chased them too).

                Always an interesting subject. And anybody can beat anybody else on a given day in the SQUARED CIRCLE
                .

                Comment


                  #78
                  Originally posted by Boxing Coach OG View Post
                  I put ROY JONES first because of the total package: HAND and amazing FOOT SPEED. In fact, while the hands get all the glory in boxing, it's really the FEET which deserve the praise in my book. They set up all punching angles. And if you dont have that FOOTWORK, you will be mediocre. All the guys that are really P4P had mad skills in the footwork department: ROBINSON, ALI, JONES, HAMED (tho some dont agree he was ill wit his feet)...

                  JOE LOUIS, on the other hand had DECENT to GOOD footwork. And that was for a reason. BLACKBURN his trainer didnt' want to put all the effort into getting his feet together. The plan was to develop krazy hand speed/combo punching because no heavyweights of the time really had that except for JERSEY JOE WALCOTT--who was also trained by BLACKBURN in the beginning of his career before he left him for LOUIS!

                  One big important element of the sport is too make your opponent look very ORDINARY because you're so far ahead of them in skills. JONES and ALI did that. ROBINSON. That's the point. Altho Ali shoulda retired by 1972. 10 plus years in boxing is an EON mayne! Roy shoulda been thru by 1998 or 99 at the latest. But the ADULATION and BAD MONEY MANAGEMENT gets these guys...

                  Also as far as being TECHNICAL with ya skills in boxing--I think that's something to be avoided. You can be too technical, tryna do your punches correct. Boxing is really about OPENINGS when you see one, close it with a punch. Whether it's 1 or a 2, 3, 4 punch combo depends. Dont always throw a punch from EXPECTED angles. Walcott, Ali, Hamed, Jones and Pryor were all great for throwing punches from odd angles (that's a true MARTIAL ARTS skill which boxing is, let's not forget that).

                  At the end of the day, I agree with most of everyone's choices. After all, you cant really narrow it to just 10. I really need a top 25 and the order could change. It would simply be these are the fighters that belong in that 25.

                  And just to address the comment on ROBINSON v JONES: It would be interesting at MIDDLEWEIGHT. At 12-15 rounds, I'd go with Robinson. He was the better conditioned fighter. 10 rounds or less, Jones, possibly, even by stoppage. Robinson was more fluid and knew how to conserve movement. You know he watched INSECTS (especially the PRAYING MANTIS) for learning how to fight, move...Meanwhile, we all know Jones watched CHICKENS (chased them too).

                  Always an interesting subject. And anybody can beat anybody else on a given day in the SQUARED CIRCLE
                  .
                  Good post and yea footwork does matter alot. I dont understand your logic however about Ray v Roy because your saying if the fight is 12-15 rounds itll go to Ray, but it the fight is only 10 round Roy gets a stoppage... . Isnt it safe to say no one stops a MW Robinson at his best? I mean he was in the pickle so much and still went to a dec or a KO win. Plus is Jones can stop Ray in 10 rounds why does it matter that the fight goes 12 or 15?

                  Comment


                    #79
                    I would trust a Joe Louis who so much as heard of Ali before a Zora Folley who fought Ali even ten times. Louis made a very critical analysis after watching Ali's fights (even being present for a few of them), and watching him on film. Joe was a man who knew everything from a critiquing standpoint.

                    Also, Ali was extremely quick, but he was not superhuman. Much of time, in fact, he was fractions of second ahead at best. When he faced other guys with quick hands (see: my previous post), he actually ran into trouble. Louis threw explosive, lightning fast, and laser accurate combinations into the smallest of openings. A counter-jab requires only timing to beat even the fastest fighter. He could pull that off. Does that mean he'd beat him? I don't know, but it could certainly force a change up that Ali didn't expect, nor would he be comfortable with. He didn't learn that he could simply soak up damage, lean on the ropes, and headlock his opponents into oblivion until he started getting old.

                    Comment


                      #80
                      Originally posted by Brassangel View Post
                      I would trust a Joe Louis who so much as heard of Ali before a Zora Folley who fought Ali even ten times. Louis made a very critical analysis after watching Ali's fights (even being present for a few of them), and watching him on film. Joe was a man who knew everything from a critiquing standpoint.

                      Also, Ali was extremely quick, but he was not superhuman. Much of time, in fact, he was fractions of second ahead at best. When he faced other guys with quick hands (see: my previous post), he actually ran into trouble. Louis threw explosive, lightning fast, and laser accurate combinations into the smallest of openings. A counter-jab requires only timing to beat even the fastest fighter. He could pull that off. Does that mean he'd beat him? I don't know, but it could certainly force a change up that Ali didn't expect, nor would he be comfortable with. He didn't learn that he could simply soak up damage, lean on the ropes, and headlock his opponents into oblivion until he started getting old.

                      There very few Greats that would admit that they would be beaten by anyone.

                      The main reason I rate Ali over Louis is the CHIN. Ali had one of the best and Louis's was just average. Also, Louis had all kinds of trouble with boxers such as Billy Conn and Jersey Joe Walcott. Walcott knocked him down several times and light hitting Conn had him hurt and almost knocked him down as well.

                      Most of the films you see on Louis is the highlights of his best bouts, try looking at the entire fight. I am not saying that Louis wasn't Great, because he was, BUT I am saying that nobody was unbeatable, and that includes Louis and Ali.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP