@carmodifire Yeah Ali lost the first fight when he traded with Frazier but it was still an action packed war. Second fight he won easily despite being 42, he managed to dance most rounds but he lacked the power. 3rd fight he beat Frazier at his own game. Now using this logic if we put the Muhamad Ali of 66-7 in there with Frazier, I would honestly not be surprised if Frazier was stopped in the later rounds like 13-14. No fighter ever could beat the Ali of 66-7.
@goonerboy93 Ali never went to prison. His Heavyweight Title was taken away and his boxing license was revoked, but he never spent time in prison over his draft refusal. Fact check your history man!!!
Ali prime > Tyson prime. everyone who backs tyson do so because they base their argument on the first ali frazier fight where ali was in prison for 3/4 years before. wrong thing to base it on as ali was no where near as good as before he got jailed. Of course ali wasnt gonna win... he had no access to any sort of quality training beforehand so his skill declined over that time. When he got back into his stride he beat frazier the times after that
have watched 30 Ali fights in the last few weeks in honor of the man's birthday. and every comment section has people talking about Tyson. folks, just give it a rest.
@MPaltaojr Tyson beat Tyson that night in Tokyo. Buster Douglas was the right guy, in the right place, at the right time to benefit from Tyson's personal life distractions and poor conditioning. Even still, however, he nearly KOd Douglas. Douglas did not prove anything about his great skills that night, and Holyfield quickly took his Heavyweight title. Tyson beat Tyson.
joshmar11 lt's a totally fair comparison for the point l'm making. Don't take it out of context and scream blasphemy!!! I also compared Mike Tyson to Ken Norton but you overlooked that one. It's another fair comparison. Ali would not have enjoyed his fight with Tyson. He would have realized very quickley that Tyson had unique skills that made him too dangerous to put on the "Ali show". Contrary to it being regarded as a dream match up. I think it would have ended up as a very boring fight.
@mrcjrowe I could just as easily say that Ali always struggled to beat Joe Frazier. Ali would have fought Tyson the same way Tony Tucker did. Use his height, tie him up, initiate clinches and fight too cautiously as he did against Ken Norton who won, and also broke Ali's jaw in the process. Tyson would be the wrong kind of opponent for Ali to show off his greatness. Even Ali could never imagine someone built like Tyson could be fast with his hands.
@pilates68 An underrated Douglas beat Tyson via knockout!Then how about Ali?Tyson got very low stamina!Once the bout reached 6 rds Tyson eventually slow down & his punching power as well!Just watch his fight against Holyfield!
@pilates68 At the same time, Although Frazier did give Ali problems, they were close fights, close fights because Frazier worked like a mad dog down the stretch. Tyson barely worked inside, rather launched his attack from the outside. I can see Tyson hurting Ali, and at the same time I can see him being easily frustrated esp in the later rounds.
@KeitaThe1 Why does everyone think Ali went to jail??? He NEVER spent time in prison. Check your history. His boxing license was revoked and his Heavyweight title taken away, but he never went to jail over Vietnam or being a Muslim. Frazier would always give Ali trouble. His style nulifys the natural gifts of a scientific boxer, who's favorite opponent is always another boxer. Down and dirty sluggers make it a hard nights work. Ali's head movement and dancing were almost gone by Norton's time
@pilates68 What I meant was he was sentenced to 5 years in prison, his appeals was successful. But he didn't box until 3 years that hurt his entire career then after the Jerry Quary fight he fought Joe-Frazier and he lost because he wasn't the same fighter. So my question to you was do you believe if he career was consistent would he have won the Joe Frazier first fight. And beat Ken Norton in their first fight that Ken Norton broke his jaw. I wait for your answer.
@KeitaThe1 Styles make fights. Frazier was the wrong guy to show off Ali's scientific style of boxing. Liston, however, was perfectly limited and slow to make Ali look amaizing. Even in the 60's Frazier would have given him trouble. He was an aggressive slugger who had a great chin and always well conditioned for the distance. Every guy Ali faced in the 60's (except Patterson) trained in the style of the previous great which was flat footed, stalking, Joe Louis. Ali destroyed those guys.
@KeitaThe1 but Joe Frazier fought in the style of Henry Armstrong who was a 30's lightweight and was a nightmare for any scientific boxer. Norton was an odd style of fighter who benefitted from Ali's light punching style, less head movement, less footwork by the time they fought. I actually think he won 2 of their 3 fights and was robbed. His mistake was that he was always drawn out of his preferred style against Foreman, Shavers, and Cooney. He wasnt as big a puncher as his physique looked.
@pilates68 Thanks for your explanation but the Ali before his license was suspended would have been tough to beat. His timing was so good. The 3 year absence messed his timing up. But everybody has a right to their opinion.
@roquefort88888 You sound like you hate Tyson the man. I'm not talking about Tyson the man, I'm interested in Tyson the fighter. He was better in all departments than Smokin' Joe, who was great! But he was a reckless aggressive slugger who took a lot of punches and wasted a lot of punches with his toe to toe style. Tyson was much sharper. He did'nt bob and weave spastically to maintain aggression, he did it to successfully avoid punches and deliver hard, short, clean calculated shots with speed
@pilates68 Joe Frazier STRUGGLED to beat a Muhammad Ali who had been off for nearly 4 years. And Ali still got up in the 15th round after Frazier hit him with his best punch ever ! Ali would beat Tyson mentally first, then drain him of his engergy. If all the fighters Ali ever fought came back after nearly 4 years out of the ring and faced Ali in his prime... trust me... they would get battered and would not be winning no heavyweight title. Ali KO'd Foreman. Not even Holyfield could
@messier991102 Saying that two fighters have the same style doesn't mean they do exactly the same things in the ring. It's an analysis that is not literal. It means that within a contextual "approach" to boxing, they have the same approach. It's not a literal statement. Marciano, Frazier, and Tyson all shared the same approach and mentality to boxing. It doesn't mean they are the same fighter with the same skills copying each other in the ring.
@pilates68 no but they are different style wise, joe was purely an inside fighter, a relentless swarmer who threw nonstop punches to the body and head. tyson was a peekaboo style fighter, he didnt fight on the inside, he use his explosiveness and speed to catch his opponents with somethign as he came in. to beat ali you need to be an expert on the inside but tyson wasnt. he needed range.
@messier991102 Tyson didn't fight on the inside??? are we talking about the same guy? Tysons entire training was spent perfecting his inside attack. Short hooks to the body and head and big uppercuts up the middle. That is the best approach for a guy of his height and reach, just like Frazier. Tyson hated straight stand up boxing at range. He could do it, but it wasn't his preferred approach. And you could see it when he fought guys like Tony Tucker and Bonecrusher Smith.They were scared of him.
@messier991102 Frazier was a relentless swarmer but that was his approach to boxing, and Ali correctly, at the time, called it unscientific. He bobbed and weaved spastically to maintain constant aggression and keep his opponent on edge and when they stood toe to toe with him he would usually waste quite few shots before finishing the guy. It was a reckless way of doing what Tyson did a lot more sharply, crisply, and economically. I love Frazier (how can you not) but Tyson was better technically.
@pilates68 yes tyson was better technically but it doesnt change the fact the he wasnt an inside fighter and for his combos which are his best asset he needed range. and yes he didnt fight on the inside he even admitted to this.
@messier991102 Frazier proved he was a great inside fighter because he faced many opponents who were willing to fight him on the inside. Why do you think no one ever wanted to fight Tyson there? Because it was obvious that he was a great inside fighter.
@pilates68 then why did tyson initiate alot of clinches on the inside, why did he not fight back when being clinched, the reason is he waited for the ref to separate them and once at his preferred range he lunged in. there is a reason why holyfield dominated mike, evander controlled the inside game. look at the link on your page.
@messier991102 Hey listen, Im perfectly willing to admit that as Tysons career went along he began to abandon some of his best skills. Sure, by the mid 90s he was as you describe. Holyfield was the only guy brave enough to go toe to toe with him. l wouldnt say he dominated on the inside though, anymore than Tyson did when they fought. Tyson waned to get it over with, which was typical of his approach in his later career, and Holyfield trained for the distance. l'm taking Berbick, Biggs Spinks.
@messier991102 Later on? sure, I'll give you that. I'm talking about the kid who won the title in 86 against Berbick. Did you see how many clinches Bonecrusher Smith initiated? and Tony Tucker? and Tony Tubbs? and Larry Holmes? They wanted no part of Tyson on the inside. He was just so much better than just the inside that his "punchers chance" could still do the job lunging in from range. When you talk about Ali beating him Im sure you don't mean Earnie Shavers era Ali. Your talking Liston era.
@pilates68 tyson said himself he didnt like inside fighting, did you look at the link. look at tysons earlier fights when the man comes towards him and they are toe to toe he doesnt land anything flush, and looks awkward. once the clinch is initiated and broken up then he crushes the guy as the mike came foward. even george chuvalo said that tyson needs to work on his inside game. he said that tyson is too upright on the inside and he is too square. unless your telling me you know more
@messier991102 When Tyson finished Berbick they were practically forehead to chest. How much more inside can you get? it was a left hook to the body and a short right hook to the head. Carefully chosen, quickly timed and not wasted as part of a flurry, all from the inside. The final KO of Pinklon Thomas, Michael Spinks, Frank Bruno, all started from shots they took on the inside. Perhaps we should be having a discussion about how they were clearly not good inside fighters.
@pilates68 than chuvalo. in an interview with an early tyson the interviewer said that he is being compared with frazier and he quickly corrected her. tyson fought out of the peekaboo as well as patterson and jose torres, they all fought with the same style the only difference is that mike was more aggressive, while torres and patterson were more diverse, but none of them were swarmers. that wasnt d'amato's style.
@messier991102 I would say that the "peekaboo" style is a tactic suited for inside fighting. You are too hung up on toe to toe slugging and wasting shots with reckless swinging as the definition. Tyson was a much more controlled style of Marciano and Frazier more centered on conserving stamina. This is why I say he was technically better than Frazier and certainly better than George Chuvalo and Jerry Quarry who were suckered into fighting Frazier's fight. It was D'amatos version of smart inside.
@pilates68 tyson was very dangerous lunging in an coming foward but he wasnt dangerous once he was in, this is where joe was most dangerous thats why mike wouldnt beat ali.
@fadethetrade I agree, Tyson would be too much for Ali even in his prime. Tyson was the bullish style of Marciano and Frazier but refined and perfected. All the rough edges typical of that style of fighter were smoothed out, all the reckless aggression was controlled and harnessed into short crisp combination punching. Add to that tremendous strength and hand speed that NO boxing expert in previous decades would have thought possible for someone so muscle bound in appearence as Tyson.
They say ali was never the same after this fight.Alot like tyson after the spinks destruction.tyson was just never the same in quickness,awkwardness,combination punching and stamina.
I've always thought that this fight against Zora Folley was exactly how a Joe Louis versus Muhammed Ali fight would have looked and ended. That said, however, Folley showed that a flat footed fight style does not neccessarily mean slow hands as Ali/Clay said it did. Folley landed a few good quick shots that Ali (here in his prime) did not get away from fast enough. In latter years Frazier, Norton, and Shavers would connect at will as Ali's skills declined and conditioning lacked.
@pilates68 But watching this,I cant seem to believe that the 21 yr old tyson wouldnt have caught this ali running.I dont see any fighter in history beating the 21 yr old tyson by dancing away.How could ali win on points when tyson at that young age was as fast and stronger.?,not the post 88 tyson,im talking the pre88 tyson.
Ali had all day to line up that right hand to the temple after Foley threw the left jab. Just turned Foley's lights out all three times he went down. Ali was so fast that he moved to the right outside Foley's shoulder just as Foley was throwing his jab at Ali's shadow. Amazing. The definitive boxer. Ah, the sweet science made into art!!!
@dorsal08 Anybody who thinks Ali threw a "phantom punch" to knock out Liston needs only to view this fight; the punch was so fast I didn't see it at all, and had to watch replay; a short right hand just like the one that knocked out Liston.
@deepcosmiclove What are you talking about? It's a standard counter right hand over the jab while he's standing still with good length. That's not like Liston at all.
@capablemachine He's stepping into the punch, not standing still, and it's a short right, like the one that got Liston, but not an uppercut, so it's not exactly similar.
@deepcosmiclove Dude. This punch was fast, but everybody saw it. Liston, I think that punch was enough, to stagger him, and maybe even knock him down. But not to let Liston go down. However Liston knew just like in fight 1 he would be humiliated all over again if he continued. Now he has some controversy, and people might think Liston could beat him. He stopped fight 1 because Ali was going to take him in the 8th. Fight 2 there was no reason to go on, Liston woud lose badly.
@michaelyouth I don't know how you think you can read Sonny's mind. He got up but Walcott blew the fight with poor refereeing. It's evident in the 1st round that Liston couldn't compete; he's getting beat up badly just like in last round of the first fight.
@deepcosmiclove Ehm. I don't read his mind but Liston stopped in round 6 after completely being outclassed by Ali in all rounds with the exception of 5 ,where Sonny tried to blind him. No contest, so he quiet. He could have continued, but he realised he was going to get knocked out, as Ali staggered him as the rounds went on.
This was Ali's last fight before he was exiled from boxing in 1967. He was at his peak during this bout. Once Ali got his rhythm going he was impressive and unbeatable in the era of 1962-67.
@perokcojones for starter lewis was a coward, he picked his opponents and avoided them when they were at their peak. never gave klitschko the rematch he deserved. ANy of the guy I and other here cited would have. He avoid tyson like the plague, why do you think he didnt turn pro after his first olympics. Every self respected boxer would jump at the chance of turning pro and testing himself against the best. not lewis. Liston would have eaten him for breakfast.
@om82lndn liston?another muhammad ali justification,too short and light for a boxer like lewis,but he was good in the 60's ,tyson refused to fight against lewis in 1996 thats normal,even bowe threw his champion belt to avoid face him,klitschko gets beaten by an 6 years older and overweighted lewis,thats a fact look at the difference of weights
@perokcojones Why you gotta compare past fighters with this generation boxers. You do know that boxing has changed alot sine then and fighters are trained to work more on their defence. If Ali was in this era he would be just as technical as Lennox Lewis and way faster. Secondly every one knows that Ali's chin is great but can't say the same about Lennox :P
Madmac, stop talking rubbish, you seriously want us to believe klitschko would beat ali. Who the fuck did klitschko exactly beat. And lewis? Fuck off, lewis was so bad he picked his timing and only fought guys when they were older and slower. He could have fought son in the 80's, did everything to avoid that, even refused to turn pro after the olympics. Fucking coward. Ali never refuaed a fight and he beat monsters ounchers that would knock klitschko all the way back to ukraine. Fuck you
@om82lndn Dude who ever thinks Klitschko or whatever the hell their names are, are better than Ali, they are crazy. Muhammad, Frazier, Foreman, Patterson, Liston, Tyson, Ron Lyle, Shavers, Zora Folley, Chuvalo, prima Cleveland Williams, Ken Norton, Jerry Quarry, Henry Cooper; all of them would annihilate those idiots fairly easy..Screw Lewis, screw those 2 unexcited bums as paperchampions.
@perokcojones. you know shit about boxing,... too small??.Fuck of. You r ethe first idiot to label any of those guys are small. Liston had the same reach as Lewis, foreman had a shorter one. Your focus on height at the expense of more vital stats shows how ignorant you are.
I still think watching this bout again that Zora Foley could have beaten the count if he had wanted. Dont blame him for staying "down" he was never going to beat a peak Ali. Foley was a good fighter 5 years earlier as he showed in knocking out Henry Cooper. He would have been a dangerous opponent for an up and coming Ali, but this shot came to late for him to have a realistic chance. I remember reading that Ali took time to comfort Foley's son and tell him what a good fighter his dad was.
@TA152H01 Perhaps I'll just call you an asshole because clearly you can't appreciate the difference between poetry in motion, which is what boxing can be, and some sort of homosexual attraction. I'm straight as an arrow, pal, but I appreciate boxing on a deeper level that you obviously do, so it doesn't even matter to me what you say. You can go to hell and take your bigoted comments with you.
@TA152H01 Hardy har har. How long have you had that one saved up, stupid ass? You're obviously not an Ali fan or even a boxing fan, so just get lost, chump. You're embarrassing yourself and acting like a goddamn bigot.
This is a perfect example of why Ali wasn't an invincible fighter in his prime. Folley, despite sucking balls, was competitive because of a style Ali never could figure out.
@masterblaster102 Ali barely touched him the whole fight. He was a shot fighter, completely, by this point. He shouldn't have lasted a single round, yet the fight was close. He did hit Ali with some jabs and rights.
Put another way, how long do you think this glass-jawed, old, fighter would have lasted against Louis, Marciano, Foreman, Holmes, etc... I doubt he'd lasted a round against the punchers, and I doubt he'd have won a round against Holmes.
@TA152H01:U don't know what u're talking about. Zora hadn't lost a fight in 4 yrs by the time he got KO'd by Ali and his victims included Chuvalo (who was a puncher) and Bonavena. That fight wasn't close he was dropped once and KO'd. Ali rolled and ducked most his punches easily...he was good defensively (partly by not taking risk offensively) which was why he lasted so long. In the end Ali was too much for him and frankly anybody else including the guys u named had they fought him @ that time
@masterblaster102 Ali looked extremely ordinary that fight. Marciano would have killed him, Holmes would have butchered him, although Ali would always beat Foreman. Part of it was Ali's limitations, part of it was he was having an off-night. All fighters do.
He looked horrible. He missed constantly, and got hit by a SCRUB. He was 36, was fighting greats like Floyd Joiner (22-11-3) and Jefferson Davis (28-8-1) before Ali. Chuvalo? Are you kidding? 25-7 is a good record?
@TA152H01: so 25-7 is a bad record? obviously you know nothing about boxing. Ali would have smashed Marciano...you criticize Ali for beating a 36 yr old and then go on to say he'll lose to Marciano who made a career of fighting guys in their 40s and was getting knocked down by them lol, he was just too small and too slow to survive against Ali...Holmes would not have being to handle Ali's footspeed cos he won't be able to land that jab which he lives off . You need to learn more about the sport.
@masterblaster102 Where do you retards come from? You're completely clueless.
Tell me who Marciano fought who was over 40? You're clueless. Learn something before you argue with me, make it a challenge.
Ali fought a 36 year old way past his prime. Marciano fought people about that age (not 40, dummy) who were champs (Walcott, Moore) or who were at least competing at a high level (Louis, who was favored). Charles was 33.
25-7 sucks in boxing. You know nothing about the sport.
@TA152H01:I was an amateur boxer so I can tell you 25-7 is the decent record plus the guy was a heavyweight contender. Walcott, Moore (who came up from light heavy), charles (the only guy Marciano fought who wasn't near retirement but was KO'd previously by Walcott) were champs cos there was nobody in the division...Louis came out of retirement to fight. Liston would have crushed all of them on the same night. No serious boxing analyst would ever rank Marciano even near Ali. Learn the sport
@masterblaster102 An amateur what? You don't know boxing if you think a 25-7 record is a good record for a fighter. That's for the stepping stones, not the ones you watch. Using that for an example shows how pathetic Folley was.
Wrong about Louis. He had fought several times before fighting a pre-prime Marciano. Walcott, according to Louis (who knows more than you), was in his prime. Many consider the first fight Charles' best.
Even Ali said Marciano would have a chance against him
@TA152H01: U're an idiot talking about things u know little about. How many fights have u had? 25-7 is a decent record especially when u consider the opposition he went up against. Which A fighter did Marciano fight that was in his 20s? Louis was 37 yrs when they fought...you criticise Foleys opponents yet Louis "wins" in 1951 were against guys with 20 to 30 losses lol. Ali was just being respectful...he would have destroyed Marciano. Charles had been KO'd by an elderly Walcott lol
@masterblaster102 25-7 is a poor record for a top contender. The guys you refer to had almost 100 wins, and the most important thing is, I never used them as an example of the quality of fighters Louis faced. You, pathetically, did.
Marciano fought Roland LaStarza (53-3), Harry Mathews (81-3), Rex Layne (34-1), Roland LaStarza (1st fight, 37-0) when they were in their 20s. Did you learn anything, dumb ass?
Ali wasn't being respectful to any other fighter. He felt Marciano's power.
@TA152H01: Just who did these people fight? you sir are a buffoon with negligible knowledge of sport. This La Starza fellow may have even defeated Marciano lol. Ali was not respectful to fighters whom he faced in the ring...it was different retirees. Ali also said no heavyweight ever could beat him (I presume this includes Marciano). I respect Marciano as a fighter but against prime Ali he would have suffered a terrible beating as Ali was just too big, too fast with too much movement and punches
@masterblaster102 Always more lame ass excuses. You're truly pathetic. The skill level of fighters in that era was very high, and they fought each other.
Ali had problems with guys that leaned back; he preferred guys that came head first. Plus, Marciano would knocked him out if he caught him pulling his head back.
Ali in his prime wasn't very big and couldn't take a big punch. 70s Ali could take a shot, but wasn't mobile enough to take the punishment Marciano would bring.
Here's what I suggest to you. Don't keep saying stupid stuff, I'll always make you look like the fool you are. Over 40? None were. Marciano/Ali is a fight a lot of people talk about. Marciano would have KILLED the Ali that showed up against Folley, but both on a good day, only a complete idiot thinks he could say for sure.
Liston was a chump and a quitter.
Holmes would have beaten Ali most nights though. Styles make fights, Ali had no answer for Holmes.
@TA152H01: if you're searching for a fool all u have to do is look in the mirror. Marciano would not have stood a chance against Ali (or Liston for that matter) he was too small, too slow and not skilled enough. The man had 67 inch reach compared to Ali's 82 inch AND he was much smaller and slower lol. That fight would have been a massacre...although Marciano would not quit so I believe the ref would stopped the fight to ensure Marciano retained a face people could recognise
@masterblaster102 Only an idiot tries to predict a fight with certainty between two fighters, and then predicts the undefeated fighter must lose. You're an idiot. Completely.
Ali had a 78 inch reach, although they often said 80 inch. When it was measured (against Wilt's), it was 78 inches. Dumb ass.
Marciano had that disadvantage against virtually everyone he fought. Yet, he won. He never lost. 49-0. Not impressive, but 25-7 is? Dumb ass.
@TA152H01: undefeated lol...who did he fight? his career was littered with bums and opponents on the brink of collecting their pensions. Marciano's main advantage in most his big fights was a youth advantage, he was simply better conditioned than these old men...something he won't have against a prime Ali. He never faced anyone with anything remotely close to the speed and class of Ali. Some these old men even scored knockdowns against Marciano lol.. they wouldn't touch Ali. Easy work for Ali
@masterblaster102 You're right, Archie Moore as champ, Joe Walcott as champ, Ezzard Charles, Roland LaStarza, etc... all sucked, but Chuvalo was good? What a dumb ass.
Ali never fought anyone like Marciano. He even lost to Frazier, who by Ali's own statement, wasn't as good as Marciano.
Ali was nearly knocked out by Henry Cooper, and flattened by the "great" Doug Jones. Yup, Marciano would never touch him. Dumb ass.
@TA152H01: you're an idiot. Moore was a champ but @ light heavy and was old by the time he met marciano (he even dropped him). Walcott got KO'd by an elderly Louis....Charles was KO'd by Walcott. None of these guys would survive 4 rounds with either Liston or Foreman. I never said Chuvalo was great but considering that he was competing in what most knowlegeable observers as the golden era for the heavyweight division he had a decent record. Cooper didn't need to get inside Ali to land
@TA152H01: Er Louis was 35 when KO'd Walcott...Marciano never fought any good fighters in their prime. The average age of his opponents was 36 lol. Ali would easily embarass him....he simply wasn't skilled and did not move his head even nearly as well as Frazier. Marciano was the King of a mediocre age in the HW division which is why he retired so quick I suspect. Which hall of famer did he beat in their prime? lol. You're an idiot boy...you require further study in this sport
@masterblaster102 Joe Louis said Walcott was in his prime. Nothing in his fight indicated otherwise.
Most people consider Marciano's fights against Charles the best performance Charles ever had.
You know more than everyone else? Let's face it, you're a complete idiot who doesn't think, but just loves Ali.
Marciano retired because he couldn't get motivated for fights anymore. Same happened to Ali, except he didn't retire, and instead got brain-damaged. That was the correct course?
@TA152H01: Contd as he was the same size as Ali not the same for Marciano who would to get inside Ali. He had much slower hands and feet than Ali. Plus Ali could unload a boatload punches within a twinkle of an eye. Marciano was a guy who was very hittable and would swamped with punches from Ali
@masterblaster102 Frazier was much easier to hit than Marciano, and he beat Ali like a dog. He didn't hit as hard, and really only had one hand. Witness the fight. If that had been Marciano, Ali would have been knocked out.
Ali was fast, but not very accurate. Watch him miss Folley, who just pulled his head back.
@TA152H01: Marciano was much easier to hit than Frazier cos for one Frazier had much better head movement. Even looking at their fights on youtube shows Marciano getting tagged repeatedly by C-class fighters. Plus Marciano had much slower feet than Joe. Ali would have a field day with Marciano as Marciano would never see those punches coming. Foley was much more skilled defensively than Rocky and even he said he didn't think anyone could beat Ali
@masterblaster102 Complete nonsense by someone that doesn't know boxing. Marciano late in his career was very hard to hit, early, easy.
Charles was a much more accurate puncher than the fast, but inaccurate, Ali. The other problem is, Marciano leaned back, which Ali hated, because he didn't like to commit on punches. Ali knew leaning in left him susceptible to counter punches so avoided it. And if Marciano got him, Ali would go down. And like it.
@TA152H01: you're an idiot. Ellis also leaned back but it didn't help him. How can Marciano dodge punches from Ali (the fastest HW of all time) when he couldn't dodge punches from an old man like Walcott. Marciano beat boxers? lol...yeah boxers with grandchildren lol
@masterblaster102 Ali wasn't accurate, and he was not the fastest heavyweight of all time. Roy Jones was faster, and Floyd Patterson was faster.
Ali was, however, very fast, but he wasn't very accurate. He hated leaning forward, and would have been knocked out if he tried that against Marciano, because Marciano could hit from any position. Ali could take a punch when he got older, the problem is, Marciano would follow up. And just keep beating him down. Ali would be TKO'd in a corner.
@TA152H01: Leaning forward is actually a no-no in boxing. Clearly you're ignorant of the sport lol...and why would he need to lean against Marciano when he has such a massive reach advantage against him. Marciano would be chasing shadows all night and end up having to pick up parts of his face from the mat
@masterblaster102 Ignorant of boxing? Coming from you? In order to reach Marciano, Ali would have to lean forward, and commit to punches, not just flick out his weak jab. He couldn't reach Marciano without moving his balance forward, because of the crouch Marciano was in, and the fact he would lean back. He could throw jabs all day, and unless he committed, he'd have a hard time hitting.
The problem is, Marciano could punch from there, and Ali wouldn't handle that type of power. Dummy.
@TA152H01: crouch lol...Marciano would be a sitting duck just like he was for Walcott who ran out of gas due to old age. Ali had one the best jabs in history and would bust up Rocky's face within 4 rounds and poor Rocky wouldn't be able to land a shot on Ali cos he's small and too slow...Ali could fire 10 punches in the time Rocky would need to throw 1 lol. When Marciano's eyes have been shut from punches Ali would move in for the kill
@TA152H01: Walcott was progressively slowing down due to fatigue from age (even though he was giving Marciano a boxing lesson). 2nd fight? he was done as fighter...hell even old Joe louis KO'd him so that wasn't a big deal. He wouldn't land a punch on the prime Ali
@masterblaster102 More horseshit. Ali would have never lasted as long as Walcott, that fight was grueling.
Again, to show what an idiot you are, round 12 was one of the best for Walcott. You're dumb, huh?
Joe Louis was a much better puncher than Ali could ever hope to be. Speed, perfect form, and power. That's why he's rated so high. Ali? No power. No left hook. No body shots. No uppercut. He was a cut below.
@TA152H01: Walcott was 39 yrs old when he fought Marciano...and this was the 1950s, in todays terms that would nearly 50. Ali had no left hook? now I know u know nothing about boxing lol. Even Joe Louis himself said Ali was the best fighter he'd ever seen. Check any list of boxing greats and tell when u see Marciano's name anywhere near Ali's. Marciano made a career from fighting old men
@masterblaster102 Where did Louis say that? You make that up? He also said Marciano would always beat him, even in his prime.
Nearly 50? Thanks for making us laugh again, you pathetic dumb ass. Actually, Louis said Walcott was in his prime in his late 30s. Moore fought until he was 47. You're so fucking stupid. Kill yourself! LOL!
@TA152H01: Louis did say that...go watch Ali/Liston. In fact Louis said Liston was unbeatable. "Walcott was in his prime in his late thirties" lol...Listen to yourself, do you honestly think anyone with a functioning brain will find that statement credible? You're a numbskull boy. Even Marciano himself refused to take credit for beating an old Joe Louis bcos he knew people would laugh at him. Yeah Holyfield is still fighting but does beating him give anyone cred. Of course not. Learn the sport
@masterblaster102 But Walcott was still a very good, very competent fighter when he fought Marciano. He was old, but not done. Still, when Marciano ruled the division it was weak. There were no Foremans, No Alis, No Holmes, no Nortons. Same is true of when Ali ruled the division in the mid 60s. One last point, Marciano didn't refuse to take credit beating Louis because he was concerned people would laugh at him, it was because he had class.
@TA152H01: U talk about Cooper and Jones like Ali lost those fights. He stopped Cooper twice and outclassed Jones (who would beat Charles in my view) but then give credit to Marciano who getting knocked down by old men lol. Ali fought guys better than Marciano you simpleton....check any list of boxing greats and you'll see guys Ali fought and beat ranking ahead of Marciano let alone Ali himself
@masterblaster102 Ali was nearly knocked out by Cooper, and was lucky the round ended. Many people think Jones beat Ali (I don't), but he was a horrible fighter that gave Ali a hard time.
Only a COMPLETE moron considers Jones in the same class as Charles. Charles was a much more complete fighter than Ali, and could do anything. His first fight against Marciano was fought at a pace Ali would never sustain. Ali had no power, no left hook, no uppercut, and couldn't throw to the body.
@TA152H01: Then u could say the same for lot of Rocky's opponents cos he was getting Knocked down by old men repeatedly. Charles was stopped twice within a yr of the Rocky fight by bums like John Holman (45 fight, 17 losses, 7 by KO) and Young Jack Johnson (45 fights, 20 losses)...some great! lol. Rocky defended his title only 5 times where all but one of his opponents came in with no fewer than 10 losses on their record! Norton, Foreman, Frazier, Liston put together didn't have that many losses
@masterblaster102 Rocky got knocked down twice, and got right up. He wasn't hurt. Ali nearly got knocked out by Cooper, Frazier, and should have been knocked out by Shavers but Shavers didn't follow up.
Marciano fought the best out there. You talk about 10+ losses, and somehow ignore 83 wins, or 148 wins. Another way to look at it is every guy he fought had over 50 wins, and everyone but one over 60.
You forget, two of those guys beat Ali. No one beat Marciano. Losses are bad.
@TA152H01: Marciano was undefeated cos he didn't fight anyone. It's about who you fight dummy...if they spent their careers fighting cab drivers then obvious you rack that many wins but if you're losing to guys with 20 losses then one has to question your claim to greatness
@masterblaster102 Marciano beat Walcott in his prime (according to Joe Louis), Ezzard Charles in his best fight (according to most writers of the time), Archie Moore well before he lost his championship, and everyone who was anyone.
Ali lost to Ken Norton, a guy Marciano would have killed. He only beat an old Sonny Liston, a very slow Foreman who got beaten by Jimmy Young, and Frazier after Frazier was out of his prime. Oh, and lost to Frazier and Norton. LOL! Dumb ass.
@TA152H01: Keep fooling yourself idiot. Marciano was nothing but a destroyer of granddaddies...of course Charles did well against Marciano (he wasn't any good). When I check the lists...Norton, Frazier and Foreman all rank ahead of Marciano.
@masterblaster102 Marciano would have killed Norton. Norton only owned Ali, because of Ali's flaws. He exposed Ali for all to see.
Frazier was a good fighter, but even Ali said Marciano was better. Also, let's not forget, Frazier BEAT Ali. Defeated him. Diminished him. Nearly knocked him out. Then knocked him down. Stood over him like a bitch.
Ali could only beat him after Frazier's prime. But, even Ali said Marciano was better.
@TA152H01; Norton would have smashed Marciano...Marciano was just too small with not enough skill for Norton. Marciano ran from real competition and retired early like a bitch lol
@masterblaster102 There was no one left to fight after beating the who's who of the time. Norton only owned Ali because Ali was so badly flawed, and he had the style to expose it. He got knocked out by Cooney! Shavers! Foreman! Jimmy Young got robbed against him. Holmes smashed him.
He couldn't fight punchers. He was very susceptible to the left hook, just Ali was too chicken to step in, and he had no left hook. So, he got raped by Norton.
@TA152H01: Yeah after beating pensioners and guys with over 10 losses! some achievement! that's why no serious boxing expert rates him highly. He could have fought longer but he knew where his limits were
@masterblaster102 Man, you must be smoking something. Norton never won a title fight. And you rank him ahead of the only man to win the title, defend it multiple times, beat the best fighters of his era, and retire undfeated? Ranked ahead according to whom? I like Norton, and he was a great figther, but there is no way he ranks ahead of Marciano. Again, WHO DID ROCLY NOT FIGHT THAT HE SHOULD HAVE?
@MADMAC572: this was on the ring magazine. And I would agree that based on the fact that he was HW champ and he was in a poor era (not his fault) this is unfair...I rate fighters on what I see and who they fought. Rocky failed on both counts in my view...though he was incredibly tough (that was plain to see) but his footwork was sloppy, he was slow, had no real skill other than throwing power punches and would have been easily disassembled by any truly skilled fighter with a credible defense
@TA152H01: Contd- when they faced Ali. Marciano in the end had only 5 title defences and retired @ 32...Why? I suspect cos he knew he was nothing more than a tough guy with few real skills and since he was now champion he couldn't keep fighting bums. It was only matter time before some young gun (and not the pensioners he kept fighting) with real skills came along and exposed him
@masterblaster102 Marciano quit because he wasn't motivated anymore. You're really quite dumb, it seems.
Moore was champ. Walcott was champ. Charles was in his prime. LaStarza not even 30. They were the best, and he fought them. If there was a 25 year old better than Walcott, why was Walcott champ? Dumb ass.
Ali stole money from people by showing up fat and out of shape because he had no motivation except money late in his career. Marciano retired instead of embarrass himself.
@TA152H01: Marciano retired cos he knew he couldn't keep fighting bums as world champ. Who the hell is LaStarza? lol Marciano even lost the 1st fight to him by a lot of accounts...Walcott and Charles (whose best was @ light heavy) had been destroyed previously by bums. Marciano retired @ 32 cos he knew he couldn't keep fighting bums
@masterblaster102 You don't know who LaStarza was? What a dumb ass! LOL. You're so stupid, that you don't even realize it. It's always fun to break you retards down to size. You're already a mental midget.
Charles fought at 185 or so against Marciano, and they were about the same weight, not much over LHW. Man, you're dumb.
Look at the division when Marciano retired. There were no other guys to fight, so your conclusion is as dumb as everything else you say. Dumb ass! LOL!
@masterblaster102 You're kidding right? You're not that stupid, are you? No one even heard of Liston until around 1959, Marciano retired in 1955. What a dumb ass. Johansson's first fight out of Europe was in 1959. No one heard of him in 1955. And he was a great fighter? He'd have been killed by Marciano.
You're a real dumb ass, huh? Can you say anything even dumber? It's hard to imagine, but then, you always do.
@TA152H01: Actually Liston had been a contender from 1955 but wasn't given a shot...perhaps bcos Marciano preferred guys in their mid-30s and over with at least 10 losses lol
@masterblaster102 You're so dumb. Liston only had 8 fights before 1955, and was not even known by anyone. He didn't even fight a name fighter until Cleveland Williams in 1959. In 1955, he was just a new boxer trying to make a name for himself.
You see how dumb you are? When you give names that were obviously not on the map in 1955, you admit to losing your own argument. Patterson and Moore were the ones that fought for the championship over a year later (after elimination bouts)
@masterblaster102 Yup, the great 21-7-2 Marty Marshall? That guy? The guy who weighed 179 pounds? The guy that lost his two previous fights, to "greats" Harold Johnson and Bob Satterfield? That guy?
I keep thinking you can't say anything dumber, but then you do. You're dumber than dumb. You're a complete imbecile. Keep posting, please, my buddy here enjoys you're stupidity too much to stop laughing. Keep us entertained, typical brain-dead youtuber.
@TA152H01: well he had fewer losses than most of Marciano's opponents. You are the guy making an utter fool of yourself going around saying Rocky would kill Ali. When anyone who knows anything about boxing knows Marciano was a hype-job and would be easily destroyed by Ali
@masterblaster102 He had 23 wins, 9 losses, and fought totally lousy fighters. You said this guy made Liston a contender, despite that record, and losing two prior fights against nobodies. You were wrong, huh?
So, the fewer losses means the better fighter? Ali, 5 losses. TKO'd. Beaten like a dog by Frazier and Norton while still young. Broken jaw. Marciano. No losses. The fewer losses are better, by your own admission. Who lost fewer times? LOL. Get some help dude, you're dumb.
@TA152H01 Ali was the only one ever to KO Foreman. Prime Holi scraped a win against old Foreman. Moore says Ali beats Louis and Marciano, so did Sugar Ray Robinson. Ali's chin was great, and if a past prime Ezzard Charles went the distance, no way is Ali being KO's by Marciano. Ali was past his prime with Norton and a almost 4 year ban before Frazier, and he'd been through wars, which takes a lot out of a fighter. Ali was better than Walcott, who was outboxing Marciano.
@carmodifire Foreman was a slow fighter that got tired easily. Ali got him tired, and he was easy to knock down when tired. Nothing to see there. Jimmy Young beat him in his prime too.
Charles was in his prime. Most said that was his best fight, and he lost it easily.
Ali was 29 when he fought Frazier, Marciano 32 when he fought Moore. 29 is past his prime? Norton owned him because of his flaws, not his age.
Guys have layoffs. Louis did. He didn't make excuses.
@TA152H01: Charles was in his prime and was getting stopped by nobodies? lol Charles btw actually started his career as an amateur featherweight (he was a small man). Charles was a nobody you buffoon just like the rest of the guys Marciano fought.Louis by his own admission only came bcos of the money situation he knew he wasn't the same. Ali came back in the toughest era for the HW division and dominated. Ali was easy to knock down? and Marciano was not? lol... he only had 5 title defenses lol
@masterblaster102 Most people smarter than you believe Charles/Marciano was Charles' best fight. He just fought a guy that was too tough. Stopped by whom you dumb fuck? He hadn't been stopped by anyone in three years (Walcott), and before that eight years earlier. You dumb ass.
Again, you're such a dumb bastard. Louis had one fight between 1942 and 1946. He came back in great form. It wasn't his choice. He chose to retire in 1948, at 34, and by then the problem was age, not a layoff.
@TA152H01: That was Charles' best fight cos Marciano wasn't any good...simpleton. Charles got stopped twice (just months after the Marciano fight) by bums who had previously lost nearly half the fights they'd ever had. Charles was good @ light HW (where he was fighting smaller guys) not HW. Tell me one Hall of famer who Marciano fought that wasn't in his 30s. Ok so according he retired bcos of age in 1948 but was somehow in "great" condition when he fought Rocky in 1951? lol. Owning u is so easy
@masterblaster102 After taking a beating from Marciano for 23 rounds, I'm sure Charles lost something of himself.
Charles/Marciano I was a better fight than Ali/Frazier I. Charles looked in top form, had very good stamina against an impossible fighter, and showed great heart. That's why everyone commented it was his best fight. He could do things Ali only dreamed of, like actually throw to the body or throw a good hook.
Hey dumb ass, I didn't say Louis was in his prime.
@TA152H01: Taking a beating? lol...Last I recall it was Marciano's face that was falling on the mat lol...actually only the year b4 the Marciano fights, Charles had been conquered by "greats" like Harold Johnson and Nino Valdes lol. Rocky was crude brawler with no footwork, negligible defense, no jab and only beat guys based on being younger and fresher. Charles had fought 83 fights going into the contest...the man was washed up. Marciano was overrated and would be blasted into next week by Ali
@masterblaster102 Yes, you're an imbecile. Charles lost the fight, remember? He was hurt throughout the first fight, and barely survived the 15th. He got knocked down in the 3rd round, and knocked down twice and out in the 8th. He did more damage? What a twit
The biggest difference between Ali and Marciano can be seen in these fights. Watch Ali get off the mat against Frazier, watch Marciano pound the crap out of Charles in 15. Tough fights, one guy was the man, one the bitch.
@TA152H01: yeah struggling with a washed up light HW all the way to the 15th...even "young jack johnson" didn't need all that time ha ha...where did u get your brain again? Who's recognised as the greatest HW of all time? Archie Moore (who fought both guys) said Ali would smash your hero. Remember that saying about Marciano...if you missed Marciano with a jab he would stick out his face and apologise lol
@masterblaster102 Are you so stupid you still don't know what I'm talking about? You're mental processes aren't any faster than a bright German Shepherd's.
Louis came back in the second time because he needed money. He was still a very good fighter, but was not in his prime. Neither was Marciano, who was still improving rapidly.
It should be obvious do you I was talking about 1942-1946 layoff. But, then, you're a moron.
@TA152H01: Everyone can see you're an idiot including the gentleman above....but sadly u refuse to come to terms with the glaring truth. You're in denial boy....Marciano was a hype-job and wouldn't survive against the competition Ali faced let alone Ali himself. Hopefully this humbling experience will lead you to a more sensible (and knowledgeable) appraisal of the sport and characters that define it
@masterblaster102 Dude, you've been exposed as an idiot post after post. You say falsehoods, or completely idiotic remarks, and get caught, and are too stupid to even acknowledge it.
I'll give you a hint, no one knows who'd win between the two. Ali never fought anyone that good, and Marciano had a tough style for him. The same was true for Marciano. If they fought 100 times, each would win some. Marciano was more of a man, so I'd favor him in a 15 rounder.
@TA152H01: You're still here?! lol...I see you're getting owned by others as well. Marciano lived off his youth by fighting old men (and bums) and would be destroyed by Ali as the other guys have told you. I see you're one of these morons who won't accept the truth even when the whole world is telling it to you. So I'll let the others carry on the task of publicly humiliating you.
@masterblaster102 You're wrong about everything you say. Your supporting evidence is incorrect, so why would your summation be correct?
Reality check, peckerwood. No one knows who'd win. But we do know Ali lost five times. Marciano zero. We do know virtually everyone Marciano fought with talked about him like he had no chance. Walcott said he was an amateur. That's before getting knocked out twice, then he said how hard he hit, and how difficult he was.
@TA152H01 Foreman got tired, because he didn't train for endurance...because his power ko'd frazier in 2. You had to take his shots. Young won only because Foreman changed his style to a more conservative one.
Charles was best at light heavy, he wasn't even a natural heavy.
Ali and Louis both had layoffs, and lost because of it. Ali beat Frazier later, even though Frazier was younger. Ali had been through wars before Norton 3, he won #2, and undertrained for #1. Ali beat better boxers.
@carmodifire Not necessarily. Some guys just naturally have more endurance.
Charles fought Marciano at 185, it's not far from LHW. Plus, he was HW champ, and fought extremely well. He looked great against Marciano, most said it was his best fight. He just fought a guy that was greater.
Louis had no trouble coming back from his layoff. Ali did because he finally faced better fighters, and lost. Frazier was past his prime after Ali I. That type of fighter doesn't normally last long.
@TA152H01 Marciano didn't fight good HW's that were big. Walcott, old Louis, Charles, were hardly 200, and less, cruiserweights. Marciano relied on stamina, not skills. He was a crude brawler, but others couldn't match his great stamina. Louis didn't fight great quality opposition, so he was OK after the layoff. Frazier was in his prime, and perfect for Ali's style, After Ali's 3 1/2 year layoff, but BARELY won. Ali beat Foreman, Shavers, Lyle, all when he was old. Ali was just too fast in '67.
@carmodifire The Ali that fought Folley would have been easily beaten by Marciano. He struggled against a lousy fighter. Part of it is style, part of it was Ali having an off-night.
Marciano had horrific power to go with stamina. It's a tough combination to beat.
You fail to recognize a lot of his abilities as well. He could throw punches from anywhere, way off balance, and with power. He had tremendous heart and toughness, and everyone who fought him said he was hard to hit.
@TA152H01 I don't think so. Foley was even bigger than Marciano, who was a very small heavyweight. And Marciano did not have very good footwork. Against a guy who moves as much as Ali did, he might have been outpointed. Not easy fight either way, and quite possibly a very boring one with Ali moving and Jabbing and Marciano unable to land.
@MADMAC572: That's what I keep telling the idiot. However I disagree that the fight would have gone the distance cos even though Rocky had a great chin he was very susceptible to cuts and the '67 Ali threw far more punches with more speed than anyone Rocky ever faced...I think the fight would have been stopped on cuts . Rocky was just too small and too slow to be in a competitive fight with that Ali. I agree the wide gulf in footspeed would being the most decisive disadvantage from Rocky's side
@masterblaster102 Ali was cut by Charles who sat on his punches, and by Walcott. Otherwise he wasn't ever in danger on cuts. Both Walcott and Charles sat and punched. Ali seldom did that in his 'first half" and if he did, Rocky would have hit him hard. He'd have flicked his jab, his occassional right cross - but I do not think he would have planted to throw hard enough to open a cut on the Rock. And it's possible, though unlikely, Rocky would have landed a shot and KOed Ali.
@MADMAC572: I think it's laughable to think Rocky could have KO'd Ali with 1 shot. Nobody ever did...the vast majority of the guys Rocky KO'd had been KO'd before. Foreman and Liston hit harder than Rocky but couldn't KO Ali. Ali did sit on his punches (his footwork was just too good so it seems like he didn't) just look @ the faces of everyone he fought after the fight was over. Rocky is vastly overrated cos of the suspect quality of the guys he faced. Ali would have busted him up badly
fighters who take dives should be given acting lessons first. what a farce......
commieplot 1 day ago
The best boxer of all time is Ali ! Period !
ameedmusleh 2 days ago
Ever look at the similarities between Tyson and Floyd Patterson?
rusk1963 4 days ago
What's the point of all the comments about who would be better; Ali or Tyson. An endless discussion about something we will never find out.
haantje68 5 days ago
ali dominated frazier while dancing, but didnt have the stamina by then to keep it up
carmodifire 3 weeks ago
@carmodifire Yeah Ali lost the first fight when he traded with Frazier but it was still an action packed war. Second fight he won easily despite being 42, he managed to dance most rounds but he lacked the power. 3rd fight he beat Frazier at his own game. Now using this logic if we put the Muhamad Ali of 66-7 in there with Frazier, I would honestly not be surprised if Frazier was stopped in the later rounds like 13-14. No fighter ever could beat the Ali of 66-7.
musood6630 2 weeks ago
@musood6630 he was 32, I think you accidentally used the '4' and yeah, at 32 and have footwork like that was amazing.
carmodifire 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
TheJewinator 3 weeks ago
@goonerboy93 Ali never went to prison. His Heavyweight Title was taken away and his boxing license was revoked, but he never spent time in prison over his draft refusal. Fact check your history man!!!
pilates68 1 month ago
Ali prime > Tyson prime. everyone who backs tyson do so because they base their argument on the first ali frazier fight where ali was in prison for 3/4 years before. wrong thing to base it on as ali was no where near as good as before he got jailed. Of course ali wasnt gonna win... he had no access to any sort of quality training beforehand so his skill declined over that time. When he got back into his stride he beat frazier the times after that
goonerboy93 1 month ago
have watched 30 Ali fights in the last few weeks in honor of the man's birthday. and every comment section has people talking about Tyson. folks, just give it a rest.
90038jhon 1 month ago 15
@90038jhon I know man. I love Tyson and grew up with him, but I know enough about boxing to know that Tyson does not even approach Ali's greatness.
strategery101 3 weeks ago
@MPaltaojr Tyson beat Tyson that night in Tokyo. Buster Douglas was the right guy, in the right place, at the right time to benefit from Tyson's personal life distractions and poor conditioning. Even still, however, he nearly KOd Douglas. Douglas did not prove anything about his great skills that night, and Holyfield quickly took his Heavyweight title. Tyson beat Tyson.
pilates68 1 month ago
joshmar11 lt's a totally fair comparison for the point l'm making. Don't take it out of context and scream blasphemy!!! I also compared Mike Tyson to Ken Norton but you overlooked that one. It's another fair comparison. Ali would not have enjoyed his fight with Tyson. He would have realized very quickley that Tyson had unique skills that made him too dangerous to put on the "Ali show". Contrary to it being regarded as a dream match up. I think it would have ended up as a very boring fight.
pilates68 1 month ago
@mrcjrowe I could just as easily say that Ali always struggled to beat Joe Frazier. Ali would have fought Tyson the same way Tony Tucker did. Use his height, tie him up, initiate clinches and fight too cautiously as he did against Ken Norton who won, and also broke Ali's jaw in the process. Tyson would be the wrong kind of opponent for Ali to show off his greatness. Even Ali could never imagine someone built like Tyson could be fast with his hands.
pilates68 1 month ago
@pilates68 Did you just compare Tony Tucker to ALI?
joshmar11 1 month ago 16
@pilates68 An underrated Douglas beat Tyson via knockout!Then how about Ali?Tyson got very low stamina!Once the bout reached 6 rds Tyson eventually slow down & his punching power as well!Just watch his fight against Holyfield!
MPaltaojr 1 month ago
@pilates68 At the same time, Although Frazier did give Ali problems, they were close fights, close fights because Frazier worked like a mad dog down the stretch. Tyson barely worked inside, rather launched his attack from the outside. I can see Tyson hurting Ali, and at the same time I can see him being easily frustrated esp in the later rounds.
suprapower101 1 month ago
@pilates68 If Ali would have not been in jail do you think he would have had any problems with Frazier, Norton etc.
KeitaThe1 1 week ago
@KeitaThe1 Why does everyone think Ali went to jail??? He NEVER spent time in prison. Check your history. His boxing license was revoked and his Heavyweight title taken away, but he never went to jail over Vietnam or being a Muslim. Frazier would always give Ali trouble. His style nulifys the natural gifts of a scientific boxer, who's favorite opponent is always another boxer. Down and dirty sluggers make it a hard nights work. Ali's head movement and dancing were almost gone by Norton's time
pilates68 1 week ago
@pilates68 What I meant was he was sentenced to 5 years in prison, his appeals was successful. But he didn't box until 3 years that hurt his entire career then after the Jerry Quary fight he fought Joe-Frazier and he lost because he wasn't the same fighter. So my question to you was do you believe if he career was consistent would he have won the Joe Frazier first fight. And beat Ken Norton in their first fight that Ken Norton broke his jaw. I wait for your answer.
KeitaThe1 1 week ago
@KeitaThe1 Styles make fights. Frazier was the wrong guy to show off Ali's scientific style of boxing. Liston, however, was perfectly limited and slow to make Ali look amaizing. Even in the 60's Frazier would have given him trouble. He was an aggressive slugger who had a great chin and always well conditioned for the distance. Every guy Ali faced in the 60's (except Patterson) trained in the style of the previous great which was flat footed, stalking, Joe Louis. Ali destroyed those guys.
pilates68 1 week ago
@KeitaThe1 but Joe Frazier fought in the style of Henry Armstrong who was a 30's lightweight and was a nightmare for any scientific boxer. Norton was an odd style of fighter who benefitted from Ali's light punching style, less head movement, less footwork by the time they fought. I actually think he won 2 of their 3 fights and was robbed. His mistake was that he was always drawn out of his preferred style against Foreman, Shavers, and Cooney. He wasnt as big a puncher as his physique looked.
pilates68 1 week ago
@pilates68 Thanks for your explanation but the Ali before his license was suspended would have been tough to beat. His timing was so good. The 3 year absence messed his timing up. But everybody has a right to their opinion.
KeitaThe1 1 week ago
@roquefort88888 You sound like you hate Tyson the man. I'm not talking about Tyson the man, I'm interested in Tyson the fighter. He was better in all departments than Smokin' Joe, who was great! But he was a reckless aggressive slugger who took a lot of punches and wasted a lot of punches with his toe to toe style. Tyson was much sharper. He did'nt bob and weave spastically to maintain aggression, he did it to successfully avoid punches and deliver hard, short, clean calculated shots with speed
pilates68 1 month ago
@pilates68 Joe Frazier STRUGGLED to beat a Muhammad Ali who had been off for nearly 4 years. And Ali still got up in the 15th round after Frazier hit him with his best punch ever ! Ali would beat Tyson mentally first, then drain him of his engergy. If all the fighters Ali ever fought came back after nearly 4 years out of the ring and faced Ali in his prime... trust me... they would get battered and would not be winning no heavyweight title. Ali KO'd Foreman. Not even Holyfield could
mrcjrowe 1 month ago
@pilates68 your comparing frazier to tyson meanwhile their styles are totally different
messier991102 1 month ago
@messier991102 Saying that two fighters have the same style doesn't mean they do exactly the same things in the ring. It's an analysis that is not literal. It means that within a contextual "approach" to boxing, they have the same approach. It's not a literal statement. Marciano, Frazier, and Tyson all shared the same approach and mentality to boxing. It doesn't mean they are the same fighter with the same skills copying each other in the ring.
pilates68 1 month ago
@pilates68 no but they are different style wise, joe was purely an inside fighter, a relentless swarmer who threw nonstop punches to the body and head. tyson was a peekaboo style fighter, he didnt fight on the inside, he use his explosiveness and speed to catch his opponents with somethign as he came in. to beat ali you need to be an expert on the inside but tyson wasnt. he needed range.
messier991102 1 month ago
@messier991102 Tyson didn't fight on the inside??? are we talking about the same guy? Tysons entire training was spent perfecting his inside attack. Short hooks to the body and head and big uppercuts up the middle. That is the best approach for a guy of his height and reach, just like Frazier. Tyson hated straight stand up boxing at range. He could do it, but it wasn't his preferred approach. And you could see it when he fought guys like Tony Tucker and Bonecrusher Smith.They were scared of him.
pilates68 1 month ago
@messier991102 Frazier was a relentless swarmer but that was his approach to boxing, and Ali correctly, at the time, called it unscientific. He bobbed and weaved spastically to maintain constant aggression and keep his opponent on edge and when they stood toe to toe with him he would usually waste quite few shots before finishing the guy. It was a reckless way of doing what Tyson did a lot more sharply, crisply, and economically. I love Frazier (how can you not) but Tyson was better technically.
pilates68 1 month ago
@pilates68 yes tyson was better technically but it doesnt change the fact the he wasnt an inside fighter and for his combos which are his best asset he needed range. and yes he didnt fight on the inside he even admitted to this.
messier991102 1 month ago
@messier991102 Frazier proved he was a great inside fighter because he faced many opponents who were willing to fight him on the inside. Why do you think no one ever wanted to fight Tyson there? Because it was obvious that he was a great inside fighter.
pilates68 1 month ago
@pilates68 then why did tyson initiate alot of clinches on the inside, why did he not fight back when being clinched, the reason is he waited for the ref to separate them and once at his preferred range he lunged in. there is a reason why holyfield dominated mike, evander controlled the inside game. look at the link on your page.
messier991102 1 month ago
@messier991102 Hey listen, Im perfectly willing to admit that as Tysons career went along he began to abandon some of his best skills. Sure, by the mid 90s he was as you describe. Holyfield was the only guy brave enough to go toe to toe with him. l wouldnt say he dominated on the inside though, anymore than Tyson did when they fought. Tyson waned to get it over with, which was typical of his approach in his later career, and Holyfield trained for the distance. l'm taking Berbick, Biggs Spinks.
pilates68 1 month ago
@messier991102 Later on? sure, I'll give you that. I'm talking about the kid who won the title in 86 against Berbick. Did you see how many clinches Bonecrusher Smith initiated? and Tony Tucker? and Tony Tubbs? and Larry Holmes? They wanted no part of Tyson on the inside. He was just so much better than just the inside that his "punchers chance" could still do the job lunging in from range. When you talk about Ali beating him Im sure you don't mean Earnie Shavers era Ali. Your talking Liston era.
pilates68 1 month ago
@pilates68 tyson said himself he didnt like inside fighting, did you look at the link. look at tysons earlier fights when the man comes towards him and they are toe to toe he doesnt land anything flush, and looks awkward. once the clinch is initiated and broken up then he crushes the guy as the mike came foward. even george chuvalo said that tyson needs to work on his inside game. he said that tyson is too upright on the inside and he is too square. unless your telling me you know more
messier991102 1 month ago
@messier991102 When Tyson finished Berbick they were practically forehead to chest. How much more inside can you get? it was a left hook to the body and a short right hook to the head. Carefully chosen, quickly timed and not wasted as part of a flurry, all from the inside. The final KO of Pinklon Thomas, Michael Spinks, Frank Bruno, all started from shots they took on the inside. Perhaps we should be having a discussion about how they were clearly not good inside fighters.
pilates68 1 month ago
@pilates68 than chuvalo. in an interview with an early tyson the interviewer said that he is being compared with frazier and he quickly corrected her. tyson fought out of the peekaboo as well as patterson and jose torres, they all fought with the same style the only difference is that mike was more aggressive, while torres and patterson were more diverse, but none of them were swarmers. that wasnt d'amato's style.
messier991102 1 month ago
@messier991102 I would say that the "peekaboo" style is a tactic suited for inside fighting. You are too hung up on toe to toe slugging and wasting shots with reckless swinging as the definition. Tyson was a much more controlled style of Marciano and Frazier more centered on conserving stamina. This is why I say he was technically better than Frazier and certainly better than George Chuvalo and Jerry Quarry who were suckered into fighting Frazier's fight. It was D'amatos version of smart inside.
pilates68 1 month ago
@pilates68 on google tye in tyson was not an inside fighter, the people on that site explain why he wasnt.
messier991102 1 month ago
@pilates68 tyson was very dangerous lunging in an coming foward but he wasnt dangerous once he was in, this is where joe was most dangerous thats why mike wouldnt beat ali.
messier991102 1 month ago
@fadethetrade I agree, Tyson would be too much for Ali even in his prime. Tyson was the bullish style of Marciano and Frazier but refined and perfected. All the rough edges typical of that style of fighter were smoothed out, all the reckless aggression was controlled and harnessed into short crisp combination punching. Add to that tremendous strength and hand speed that NO boxing expert in previous decades would have thought possible for someone so muscle bound in appearence as Tyson.
pilates68 2 months ago
@pilates68 U mean a prime Tyson & a prime Ali?
MPaltaojr 1 month ago
They say ali was never the same after this fight.Alot like tyson after the spinks destruction.tyson was just never the same in quickness,awkwardness,combination punching and stamina.
fadethetrade 2 months ago
@fadethetrade Yeah but ali was smarter, He used his brain instead of his speed.
whisperkid1 4 weeks ago
I've always thought that this fight against Zora Folley was exactly how a Joe Louis versus Muhammed Ali fight would have looked and ended. That said, however, Folley showed that a flat footed fight style does not neccessarily mean slow hands as Ali/Clay said it did. Folley landed a few good quick shots that Ali (here in his prime) did not get away from fast enough. In latter years Frazier, Norton, and Shavers would connect at will as Ali's skills declined and conditioning lacked.
pilates68 2 months ago
@pilates68 But watching this,I cant seem to believe that the 21 yr old tyson wouldnt have caught this ali running.I dont see any fighter in history beating the 21 yr old tyson by dancing away.How could ali win on points when tyson at that young age was as fast and stronger.?,not the post 88 tyson,im talking the pre88 tyson.
fadethetrade 2 months ago
Ali had all day to line up that right hand to the temple after Foley threw the left jab. Just turned Foley's lights out all three times he went down. Ali was so fast that he moved to the right outside Foley's shoulder just as Foley was throwing his jab at Ali's shadow. Amazing. The definitive boxer. Ah, the sweet science made into art!!!
dorsal08 2 months ago
@dorsal08 Anybody who thinks Ali threw a "phantom punch" to knock out Liston needs only to view this fight; the punch was so fast I didn't see it at all, and had to watch replay; a short right hand just like the one that knocked out Liston.
deepcosmiclove 2 months ago
@deepcosmiclove What are you talking about? It's a standard counter right hand over the jab while he's standing still with good length. That's not like Liston at all.
capablemachine 2 months ago
@capablemachine He's stepping into the punch, not standing still, and it's a short right, like the one that got Liston, but not an uppercut, so it's not exactly similar.
deepcosmiclove 2 months ago
@deepcosmiclove Dude. This punch was fast, but everybody saw it. Liston, I think that punch was enough, to stagger him, and maybe even knock him down. But not to let Liston go down. However Liston knew just like in fight 1 he would be humiliated all over again if he continued. Now he has some controversy, and people might think Liston could beat him. He stopped fight 1 because Ali was going to take him in the 8th. Fight 2 there was no reason to go on, Liston woud lose badly.
michaelyouth 2 months ago
@michaelyouth I don't know how you think you can read Sonny's mind. He got up but Walcott blew the fight with poor refereeing. It's evident in the 1st round that Liston couldn't compete; he's getting beat up badly just like in last round of the first fight.
deepcosmiclove 2 months ago
@deepcosmiclove Ehm. I don't read his mind but Liston stopped in round 6 after completely being outclassed by Ali in all rounds with the exception of 5 ,where Sonny tried to blind him. No contest, so he quiet. He could have continued, but he realised he was going to get knocked out, as Ali staggered him as the rounds went on.
michaelyouth 2 months ago
Un nocaut dudoso
edanper 2 months ago
fighting in forth round folley fell
gfugh 2 months ago
This was Ali's last fight before he was exiled from boxing in 1967. He was at his peak during this bout. Once Ali got his rhythm going he was impressive and unbeatable in the era of 1962-67.
inbredagogo 2 months ago
Foreman, ali, frazier, liston, norton, shaveers hell even lyle would have fucked lewis good
om82lndn 3 months ago
@om82lndn all of them too small for a heavyweight like him(but foreman),and you say all that to protect your hero,ok but thats not true at all
perokcojones 3 months ago
@perokcojones for starter lewis was a coward, he picked his opponents and avoided them when they were at their peak. never gave klitschko the rematch he deserved. ANy of the guy I and other here cited would have. He avoid tyson like the plague, why do you think he didnt turn pro after his first olympics. Every self respected boxer would jump at the chance of turning pro and testing himself against the best. not lewis. Liston would have eaten him for breakfast.
om82lndn 3 months ago
@om82lndn liston?another muhammad ali justification,too short and light for a boxer like lewis,but he was good in the 60's ,tyson refused to fight against lewis in 1996 thats normal,even bowe threw his champion belt to avoid face him,klitschko gets beaten by an 6 years older and overweighted lewis,thats a fact look at the difference of weights
perokcojones 3 months ago
@perokcojones Why you gotta compare past fighters with this generation boxers. You do know that boxing has changed alot sine then and fighters are trained to work more on their defence. If Ali was in this era he would be just as technical as Lennox Lewis and way faster. Secondly every one knows that Ali's chin is great but can't say the same about Lennox :P
324582782 2 months ago
@perokcojones Finally its skill that matters in boxing, weight and height are just plus point.
324582782 2 months ago
Madmac, stop talking rubbish, you seriously want us to believe klitschko would beat ali. Who the fuck did klitschko exactly beat. And lewis? Fuck off, lewis was so bad he picked his timing and only fought guys when they were older and slower. He could have fought son in the 80's, did everything to avoid that, even refused to turn pro after the olympics. Fucking coward. Ali never refuaed a fight and he beat monsters ounchers that would knock klitschko all the way back to ukraine. Fuck you
om82lndn 3 months ago
@om82lndn Dude who ever thinks Klitschko or whatever the hell their names are, are better than Ali, they are crazy. Muhammad, Frazier, Foreman, Patterson, Liston, Tyson, Ron Lyle, Shavers, Zora Folley, Chuvalo, prima Cleveland Williams, Ken Norton, Jerry Quarry, Henry Cooper; all of them would annihilate those idiots fairly easy..Screw Lewis, screw those 2 unexcited bums as paperchampions.
michaelyouth 3 months ago
@perokcojones. you know shit about boxing,... too small??.Fuck of. You r ethe first idiot to label any of those guys are small. Liston had the same reach as Lewis, foreman had a shorter one. Your focus on height at the expense of more vital stats shows how ignorant you are.
om82lndn 3 months ago
I still think watching this bout again that Zora Foley could have beaten the count if he had wanted. Dont blame him for staying "down" he was never going to beat a peak Ali. Foley was a good fighter 5 years earlier as he showed in knocking out Henry Cooper. He would have been a dangerous opponent for an up and coming Ali, but this shot came to late for him to have a realistic chance. I remember reading that Ali took time to comfort Foley's son and tell him what a good fighter his dad was.
Caskchap 3 months ago
@TA152H01 Perhaps I'll just call you an asshole because clearly you can't appreciate the difference between poetry in motion, which is what boxing can be, and some sort of homosexual attraction. I'm straight as an arrow, pal, but I appreciate boxing on a deeper level that you obviously do, so it doesn't even matter to me what you say. You can go to hell and take your bigoted comments with you.
LedWhisky69 4 months ago
@TA152H01 Hardy har har. How long have you had that one saved up, stupid ass? You're obviously not an Ali fan or even a boxing fan, so just get lost, chump. You're embarrassing yourself and acting like a goddamn bigot.
LedWhisky69 4 months ago
@TA152H01 Are you? Get the fuck outta here, chump. Ali with his hands raised in triumph over a fallen opponent is a work of art.
LedWhisky69 4 months ago
This is a perfect example of why Ali wasn't an invincible fighter in his prime. Folley, despite sucking balls, was competitive because of a style Ali never could figure out.
TA152H01 4 months ago
@TA152H01: was competitive? lol...the guy got knocked out. Barely touched Ali the entire fight
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Ali barely touched him the whole fight. He was a shot fighter, completely, by this point. He shouldn't have lasted a single round, yet the fight was close. He did hit Ali with some jabs and rights.
Put another way, how long do you think this glass-jawed, old, fighter would have lasted against Louis, Marciano, Foreman, Holmes, etc... I doubt he'd lasted a round against the punchers, and I doubt he'd have won a round against Holmes.
Not horrible, but not invinceable
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01:U don't know what u're talking about. Zora hadn't lost a fight in 4 yrs by the time he got KO'd by Ali and his victims included Chuvalo (who was a puncher) and Bonavena. That fight wasn't close he was dropped once and KO'd. Ali rolled and ducked most his punches easily...he was good defensively (partly by not taking risk offensively) which was why he lasted so long. In the end Ali was too much for him and frankly anybody else including the guys u named had they fought him @ that time
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Ali looked extremely ordinary that fight. Marciano would have killed him, Holmes would have butchered him, although Ali would always beat Foreman. Part of it was Ali's limitations, part of it was he was having an off-night. All fighters do.
He looked horrible. He missed constantly, and got hit by a SCRUB. He was 36, was fighting greats like Floyd Joiner (22-11-3) and Jefferson Davis (28-8-1) before Ali. Chuvalo? Are you kidding? 25-7 is a good record?
Learn.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: so 25-7 is a bad record? obviously you know nothing about boxing. Ali would have smashed Marciano...you criticize Ali for beating a 36 yr old and then go on to say he'll lose to Marciano who made a career of fighting guys in their 40s and was getting knocked down by them lol, he was just too small and too slow to survive against Ali...Holmes would not have being to handle Ali's footspeed cos he won't be able to land that jab which he lives off . You need to learn more about the sport.
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Where do you retards come from? You're completely clueless.
Tell me who Marciano fought who was over 40? You're clueless. Learn something before you argue with me, make it a challenge.
Ali fought a 36 year old way past his prime. Marciano fought people about that age (not 40, dummy) who were champs (Walcott, Moore) or who were at least competing at a high level (Louis, who was favored). Charles was 33.
25-7 sucks in boxing. You know nothing about the sport.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01:I was an amateur boxer so I can tell you 25-7 is the decent record plus the guy was a heavyweight contender. Walcott, Moore (who came up from light heavy), charles (the only guy Marciano fought who wasn't near retirement but was KO'd previously by Walcott) were champs cos there was nobody in the division...Louis came out of retirement to fight. Liston would have crushed all of them on the same night. No serious boxing analyst would ever rank Marciano even near Ali. Learn the sport
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 An amateur what? You don't know boxing if you think a 25-7 record is a good record for a fighter. That's for the stepping stones, not the ones you watch. Using that for an example shows how pathetic Folley was.
Wrong about Louis. He had fought several times before fighting a pre-prime Marciano. Walcott, according to Louis (who knows more than you), was in his prime. Many consider the first fight Charles' best.
Even Ali said Marciano would have a chance against him
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: U're an idiot talking about things u know little about. How many fights have u had? 25-7 is a decent record especially when u consider the opposition he went up against. Which A fighter did Marciano fight that was in his 20s? Louis was 37 yrs when they fought...you criticise Foleys opponents yet Louis "wins" in 1951 were against guys with 20 to 30 losses lol. Ali was just being respectful...he would have destroyed Marciano. Charles had been KO'd by an elderly Walcott lol
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 25-7 is a poor record for a top contender. The guys you refer to had almost 100 wins, and the most important thing is, I never used them as an example of the quality of fighters Louis faced. You, pathetically, did.
Marciano fought Roland LaStarza (53-3), Harry Mathews (81-3), Rex Layne (34-1), Roland LaStarza (1st fight, 37-0) when they were in their 20s. Did you learn anything, dumb ass?
Ali wasn't being respectful to any other fighter. He felt Marciano's power.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Just who did these people fight? you sir are a buffoon with negligible knowledge of sport. This La Starza fellow may have even defeated Marciano lol. Ali was not respectful to fighters whom he faced in the ring...it was different retirees. Ali also said no heavyweight ever could beat him (I presume this includes Marciano). I respect Marciano as a fighter but against prime Ali he would have suffered a terrible beating as Ali was just too big, too fast with too much movement and punches
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Always more lame ass excuses. You're truly pathetic. The skill level of fighters in that era was very high, and they fought each other.
Ali had problems with guys that leaned back; he preferred guys that came head first. Plus, Marciano would knocked him out if he caught him pulling his head back.
Ali in his prime wasn't very big and couldn't take a big punch. 70s Ali could take a shot, but wasn't mobile enough to take the punishment Marciano would bring.
TA152H01 3 months ago
Here's what I suggest to you. Don't keep saying stupid stuff, I'll always make you look like the fool you are. Over 40? None were. Marciano/Ali is a fight a lot of people talk about. Marciano would have KILLED the Ali that showed up against Folley, but both on a good day, only a complete idiot thinks he could say for sure.
Liston was a chump and a quitter.
Holmes would have beaten Ali most nights though. Styles make fights, Ali had no answer for Holmes.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: if you're searching for a fool all u have to do is look in the mirror. Marciano would not have stood a chance against Ali (or Liston for that matter) he was too small, too slow and not skilled enough. The man had 67 inch reach compared to Ali's 82 inch AND he was much smaller and slower lol. That fight would have been a massacre...although Marciano would not quit so I believe the ref would stopped the fight to ensure Marciano retained a face people could recognise
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Only an idiot tries to predict a fight with certainty between two fighters, and then predicts the undefeated fighter must lose. You're an idiot. Completely.
Ali had a 78 inch reach, although they often said 80 inch. When it was measured (against Wilt's), it was 78 inches. Dumb ass.
Marciano had that disadvantage against virtually everyone he fought. Yet, he won. He never lost. 49-0. Not impressive, but 25-7 is? Dumb ass.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: undefeated lol...who did he fight? his career was littered with bums and opponents on the brink of collecting their pensions. Marciano's main advantage in most his big fights was a youth advantage, he was simply better conditioned than these old men...something he won't have against a prime Ali. He never faced anyone with anything remotely close to the speed and class of Ali. Some these old men even scored knockdowns against Marciano lol.. they wouldn't touch Ali. Easy work for Ali
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 You're right, Archie Moore as champ, Joe Walcott as champ, Ezzard Charles, Roland LaStarza, etc... all sucked, but Chuvalo was good? What a dumb ass.
Ali never fought anyone like Marciano. He even lost to Frazier, who by Ali's own statement, wasn't as good as Marciano.
Ali was nearly knocked out by Henry Cooper, and flattened by the "great" Doug Jones. Yup, Marciano would never touch him. Dumb ass.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: you're an idiot. Moore was a champ but @ light heavy and was old by the time he met marciano (he even dropped him). Walcott got KO'd by an elderly Louis....Charles was KO'd by Walcott. None of these guys would survive 4 rounds with either Liston or Foreman. I never said Chuvalo was great but considering that he was competing in what most knowlegeable observers as the golden era for the heavyweight division he had a decent record. Cooper didn't need to get inside Ali to land
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Louis wasn't old when he knocked out Walcott, and Louis could knock out anyone. Another dumb line.
Walcott threw very good combinations, and hit hard. All these guys were great fighters.
Liston and Foreman were way too slow, and would have had a terrible against good fighters. That's why they couldn't hold the championships long.
Frazier knocked Ali on his ass too, and nearly knocked him out in round 11. Did he have to get in?
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Er Louis was 35 when KO'd Walcott...Marciano never fought any good fighters in their prime. The average age of his opponents was 36 lol. Ali would easily embarass him....he simply wasn't skilled and did not move his head even nearly as well as Frazier. Marciano was the King of a mediocre age in the HW division which is why he retired so quick I suspect. Which hall of famer did he beat in their prime? lol. You're an idiot boy...you require further study in this sport
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Joe Louis said Walcott was in his prime. Nothing in his fight indicated otherwise.
Most people consider Marciano's fights against Charles the best performance Charles ever had.
You know more than everyone else? Let's face it, you're a complete idiot who doesn't think, but just loves Ali.
Marciano retired because he couldn't get motivated for fights anymore. Same happened to Ali, except he didn't retire, and instead got brain-damaged. That was the correct course?
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Contd as he was the same size as Ali not the same for Marciano who would to get inside Ali. He had much slower hands and feet than Ali. Plus Ali could unload a boatload punches within a twinkle of an eye. Marciano was a guy who was very hittable and would swamped with punches from Ali
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Frazier was much easier to hit than Marciano, and he beat Ali like a dog. He didn't hit as hard, and really only had one hand. Witness the fight. If that had been Marciano, Ali would have been knocked out.
Ali was fast, but not very accurate. Watch him miss Folley, who just pulled his head back.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Marciano was much easier to hit than Frazier cos for one Frazier had much better head movement. Even looking at their fights on youtube shows Marciano getting tagged repeatedly by C-class fighters. Plus Marciano had much slower feet than Joe. Ali would have a field day with Marciano as Marciano would never see those punches coming. Foley was much more skilled defensively than Rocky and even he said he didn't think anyone could beat Ali
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Complete nonsense by someone that doesn't know boxing. Marciano late in his career was very hard to hit, early, easy.
Charles was a much more accurate puncher than the fast, but inaccurate, Ali. The other problem is, Marciano leaned back, which Ali hated, because he didn't like to commit on punches. Ali knew leaning in left him susceptible to counter punches so avoided it. And if Marciano got him, Ali would go down. And like it.
Marciano always beat boxers.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: you're an idiot. Ellis also leaned back but it didn't help him. How can Marciano dodge punches from Ali (the fastest HW of all time) when he couldn't dodge punches from an old man like Walcott. Marciano beat boxers? lol...yeah boxers with grandchildren lol
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Ali wasn't accurate, and he was not the fastest heavyweight of all time. Roy Jones was faster, and Floyd Patterson was faster.
Ali was, however, very fast, but he wasn't very accurate. He hated leaning forward, and would have been knocked out if he tried that against Marciano, because Marciano could hit from any position. Ali could take a punch when he got older, the problem is, Marciano would follow up. And just keep beating him down. Ali would be TKO'd in a corner.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Leaning forward is actually a no-no in boxing. Clearly you're ignorant of the sport lol...and why would he need to lean against Marciano when he has such a massive reach advantage against him. Marciano would be chasing shadows all night and end up having to pick up parts of his face from the mat
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Ignorant of boxing? Coming from you? In order to reach Marciano, Ali would have to lean forward, and commit to punches, not just flick out his weak jab. He couldn't reach Marciano without moving his balance forward, because of the crouch Marciano was in, and the fact he would lean back. He could throw jabs all day, and unless he committed, he'd have a hard time hitting.
The problem is, Marciano could punch from there, and Ali wouldn't handle that type of power. Dummy.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: crouch lol...Marciano would be a sitting duck just like he was for Walcott who ran out of gas due to old age. Ali had one the best jabs in history and would bust up Rocky's face within 4 rounds and poor Rocky wouldn't be able to land a shot on Ali cos he's small and too slow...Ali could fire 10 punches in the time Rocky would need to throw 1 lol. When Marciano's eyes have been shut from punches Ali would move in for the kill
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Walcott wasn't afraid to trade, Ali would be. He took a lot of shots.
Again, you show your stupidity. Walcott got knocked out by a single punch. It wasn't because he was tired, he just got nailed.
Second fight, he got knocked out in the first round. Was he tired then, dumb ass? You're really so dumb.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Walcott was progressively slowing down due to fatigue from age (even though he was giving Marciano a boxing lesson). 2nd fight? he was done as fighter...hell even old Joe louis KO'd him so that wasn't a big deal. He wouldn't land a punch on the prime Ali
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 More horseshit. Ali would have never lasted as long as Walcott, that fight was grueling.
Again, to show what an idiot you are, round 12 was one of the best for Walcott. You're dumb, huh?
Joe Louis was a much better puncher than Ali could ever hope to be. Speed, perfect form, and power. That's why he's rated so high. Ali? No power. No left hook. No body shots. No uppercut. He was a cut below.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Walcott was 39 yrs old when he fought Marciano...and this was the 1950s, in todays terms that would nearly 50. Ali had no left hook? now I know u know nothing about boxing lol. Even Joe Louis himself said Ali was the best fighter he'd ever seen. Check any list of boxing greats and tell when u see Marciano's name anywhere near Ali's. Marciano made a career from fighting old men
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Where did Louis say that? You make that up? He also said Marciano would always beat him, even in his prime.
Nearly 50? Thanks for making us laugh again, you pathetic dumb ass. Actually, Louis said Walcott was in his prime in his late 30s. Moore fought until he was 47. You're so fucking stupid. Kill yourself! LOL!
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Louis did say that...go watch Ali/Liston. In fact Louis said Liston was unbeatable. "Walcott was in his prime in his late thirties" lol...Listen to yourself, do you honestly think anyone with a functioning brain will find that statement credible? You're a numbskull boy. Even Marciano himself refused to take credit for beating an old Joe Louis bcos he knew people would laugh at him. Yeah Holyfield is still fighting but does beating him give anyone cred. Of course not. Learn the sport
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 But Walcott was still a very good, very competent fighter when he fought Marciano. He was old, but not done. Still, when Marciano ruled the division it was weak. There were no Foremans, No Alis, No Holmes, no Nortons. Same is true of when Ali ruled the division in the mid 60s. One last point, Marciano didn't refuse to take credit beating Louis because he was concerned people would laugh at him, it was because he had class.
MADMAC572 3 months ago
@TA152H01: U talk about Cooper and Jones like Ali lost those fights. He stopped Cooper twice and outclassed Jones (who would beat Charles in my view) but then give credit to Marciano who getting knocked down by old men lol. Ali fought guys better than Marciano you simpleton....check any list of boxing greats and you'll see guys Ali fought and beat ranking ahead of Marciano let alone Ali himself
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Ali was nearly knocked out by Cooper, and was lucky the round ended. Many people think Jones beat Ali (I don't), but he was a horrible fighter that gave Ali a hard time.
Only a COMPLETE moron considers Jones in the same class as Charles. Charles was a much more complete fighter than Ali, and could do anything. His first fight against Marciano was fought at a pace Ali would never sustain. Ali had no power, no left hook, no uppercut, and couldn't throw to the body.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Then u could say the same for lot of Rocky's opponents cos he was getting Knocked down by old men repeatedly. Charles was stopped twice within a yr of the Rocky fight by bums like John Holman (45 fight, 17 losses, 7 by KO) and Young Jack Johnson (45 fights, 20 losses)...some great! lol. Rocky defended his title only 5 times where all but one of his opponents came in with no fewer than 10 losses on their record! Norton, Foreman, Frazier, Liston put together didn't have that many losses
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Rocky got knocked down twice, and got right up. He wasn't hurt. Ali nearly got knocked out by Cooper, Frazier, and should have been knocked out by Shavers but Shavers didn't follow up.
Marciano fought the best out there. You talk about 10+ losses, and somehow ignore 83 wins, or 148 wins. Another way to look at it is every guy he fought had over 50 wins, and everyone but one over 60.
You forget, two of those guys beat Ali. No one beat Marciano. Losses are bad.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Marciano was undefeated cos he didn't fight anyone. It's about who you fight dummy...if they spent their careers fighting cab drivers then obvious you rack that many wins but if you're losing to guys with 20 losses then one has to question your claim to greatness
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Marciano beat Walcott in his prime (according to Joe Louis), Ezzard Charles in his best fight (according to most writers of the time), Archie Moore well before he lost his championship, and everyone who was anyone.
Ali lost to Ken Norton, a guy Marciano would have killed. He only beat an old Sonny Liston, a very slow Foreman who got beaten by Jimmy Young, and Frazier after Frazier was out of his prime. Oh, and lost to Frazier and Norton. LOL! Dumb ass.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Keep fooling yourself idiot. Marciano was nothing but a destroyer of granddaddies...of course Charles did well against Marciano (he wasn't any good). When I check the lists...Norton, Frazier and Foreman all rank ahead of Marciano.
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Marciano would have killed Norton. Norton only owned Ali, because of Ali's flaws. He exposed Ali for all to see.
Frazier was a good fighter, but even Ali said Marciano was better. Also, let's not forget, Frazier BEAT Ali. Defeated him. Diminished him. Nearly knocked him out. Then knocked him down. Stood over him like a bitch.
Ali could only beat him after Frazier's prime. But, even Ali said Marciano was better.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01; Norton would have smashed Marciano...Marciano was just too small with not enough skill for Norton. Marciano ran from real competition and retired early like a bitch lol
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 There was no one left to fight after beating the who's who of the time. Norton only owned Ali because Ali was so badly flawed, and he had the style to expose it. He got knocked out by Cooney! Shavers! Foreman! Jimmy Young got robbed against him. Holmes smashed him.
He couldn't fight punchers. He was very susceptible to the left hook, just Ali was too chicken to step in, and he had no left hook. So, he got raped by Norton.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Yeah after beating pensioners and guys with over 10 losses! some achievement! that's why no serious boxing expert rates him highly. He could have fought longer but he knew where his limits were
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Man, you must be smoking something. Norton never won a title fight. And you rank him ahead of the only man to win the title, defend it multiple times, beat the best fighters of his era, and retire undfeated? Ranked ahead according to whom? I like Norton, and he was a great figther, but there is no way he ranks ahead of Marciano. Again, WHO DID ROCLY NOT FIGHT THAT HE SHOULD HAVE?
MADMAC572 3 months ago
@MADMAC572: this was on the ring magazine. And I would agree that based on the fact that he was HW champ and he was in a poor era (not his fault) this is unfair...I rate fighters on what I see and who they fought. Rocky failed on both counts in my view...though he was incredibly tough (that was plain to see) but his footwork was sloppy, he was slow, had no real skill other than throwing power punches and would have been easily disassembled by any truly skilled fighter with a credible defense
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@MADMAC572 This guy is a complete idiot. He makes up "facts", gets caught constantly, and the idiot doesn't care that he's constantly wrong.
He's a complete dunce.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Contd- when they faced Ali. Marciano in the end had only 5 title defences and retired @ 32...Why? I suspect cos he knew he was nothing more than a tough guy with few real skills and since he was now champion he couldn't keep fighting bums. It was only matter time before some young gun (and not the pensioners he kept fighting) with real skills came along and exposed him
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Marciano quit because he wasn't motivated anymore. You're really quite dumb, it seems.
Moore was champ. Walcott was champ. Charles was in his prime. LaStarza not even 30. They were the best, and he fought them. If there was a 25 year old better than Walcott, why was Walcott champ? Dumb ass.
Ali stole money from people by showing up fat and out of shape because he had no motivation except money late in his career. Marciano retired instead of embarrass himself.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Marciano retired cos he knew he couldn't keep fighting bums as world champ. Who the hell is LaStarza? lol Marciano even lost the 1st fight to him by a lot of accounts...Walcott and Charles (whose best was @ light heavy) had been destroyed previously by bums. Marciano retired @ 32 cos he knew he couldn't keep fighting bums
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 You don't know who LaStarza was? What a dumb ass! LOL. You're so stupid, that you don't even realize it. It's always fun to break you retards down to size. You're already a mental midget.
Charles fought at 185 or so against Marciano, and they were about the same weight, not much over LHW. Man, you're dumb.
Look at the division when Marciano retired. There were no other guys to fight, so your conclusion is as dumb as everything else you say. Dumb ass! LOL!
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: really so where ingemarr johansson and Sonny Liston come from? LaStarza was a bum boy...no boxing expert would look at him seriously lo
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 You're kidding right? You're not that stupid, are you? No one even heard of Liston until around 1959, Marciano retired in 1955. What a dumb ass. Johansson's first fight out of Europe was in 1959. No one heard of him in 1955. And he was a great fighter? He'd have been killed by Marciano.
You're a real dumb ass, huh? Can you say anything even dumber? It's hard to imagine, but then, you always do.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Actually Liston had been a contender from 1955 but wasn't given a shot...perhaps bcos Marciano preferred guys in their mid-30s and over with at least 10 losses lol
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 You're so dumb. Liston only had 8 fights before 1955, and was not even known by anyone. He didn't even fight a name fighter until Cleveland Williams in 1959. In 1955, he was just a new boxer trying to make a name for himself.
You see how dumb you are? When you give names that were obviously not on the map in 1955, you admit to losing your own argument. Patterson and Moore were the ones that fought for the championship over a year later (after elimination bouts)
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Liston had beaten Marty Marshall who was a top-ranked HW which put him in contention
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Yup, the great 21-7-2 Marty Marshall? That guy? The guy who weighed 179 pounds? The guy that lost his two previous fights, to "greats" Harold Johnson and Bob Satterfield? That guy?
I keep thinking you can't say anything dumber, but then you do. You're dumber than dumb. You're a complete imbecile. Keep posting, please, my buddy here enjoys you're stupidity too much to stop laughing. Keep us entertained, typical brain-dead youtuber.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: well he had fewer losses than most of Marciano's opponents. You are the guy making an utter fool of yourself going around saying Rocky would kill Ali. When anyone who knows anything about boxing knows Marciano was a hype-job and would be easily destroyed by Ali
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 He had 23 wins, 9 losses, and fought totally lousy fighters. You said this guy made Liston a contender, despite that record, and losing two prior fights against nobodies. You were wrong, huh?
So, the fewer losses means the better fighter? Ali, 5 losses. TKO'd. Beaten like a dog by Frazier and Norton while still young. Broken jaw. Marciano. No losses. The fewer losses are better, by your own admission. Who lost fewer times? LOL. Get some help dude, you're dumb.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01 Ali was the only one ever to KO Foreman. Prime Holi scraped a win against old Foreman. Moore says Ali beats Louis and Marciano, so did Sugar Ray Robinson. Ali's chin was great, and if a past prime Ezzard Charles went the distance, no way is Ali being KO's by Marciano. Ali was past his prime with Norton and a almost 4 year ban before Frazier, and he'd been through wars, which takes a lot out of a fighter. Ali was better than Walcott, who was outboxing Marciano.
carmodifire 3 months ago
@carmodifire Foreman was a slow fighter that got tired easily. Ali got him tired, and he was easy to knock down when tired. Nothing to see there. Jimmy Young beat him in his prime too.
Charles was in his prime. Most said that was his best fight, and he lost it easily.
Ali was 29 when he fought Frazier, Marciano 32 when he fought Moore. 29 is past his prime? Norton owned him because of his flaws, not his age.
Guys have layoffs. Louis did. He didn't make excuses.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Charles was in his prime and was getting stopped by nobodies? lol Charles btw actually started his career as an amateur featherweight (he was a small man). Charles was a nobody you buffoon just like the rest of the guys Marciano fought.Louis by his own admission only came bcos of the money situation he knew he wasn't the same. Ali came back in the toughest era for the HW division and dominated. Ali was easy to knock down? and Marciano was not? lol... he only had 5 title defenses lol
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Most people smarter than you believe Charles/Marciano was Charles' best fight. He just fought a guy that was too tough. Stopped by whom you dumb fuck? He hadn't been stopped by anyone in three years (Walcott), and before that eight years earlier. You dumb ass.
Again, you're such a dumb bastard. Louis had one fight between 1942 and 1946. He came back in great form. It wasn't his choice. He chose to retire in 1948, at 34, and by then the problem was age, not a layoff.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: That was Charles' best fight cos Marciano wasn't any good...simpleton. Charles got stopped twice (just months after the Marciano fight) by bums who had previously lost nearly half the fights they'd ever had. Charles was good @ light HW (where he was fighting smaller guys) not HW. Tell me one Hall of famer who Marciano fought that wasn't in his 30s. Ok so according he retired bcos of age in 1948 but was somehow in "great" condition when he fought Rocky in 1951? lol. Owning u is so easy
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 After taking a beating from Marciano for 23 rounds, I'm sure Charles lost something of himself.
Charles/Marciano I was a better fight than Ali/Frazier I. Charles looked in top form, had very good stamina against an impossible fighter, and showed great heart. That's why everyone commented it was his best fight. He could do things Ali only dreamed of, like actually throw to the body or throw a good hook.
Hey dumb ass, I didn't say Louis was in his prime.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Taking a beating? lol...Last I recall it was Marciano's face that was falling on the mat lol...actually only the year b4 the Marciano fights, Charles had been conquered by "greats" like Harold Johnson and Nino Valdes lol. Rocky was crude brawler with no footwork, negligible defense, no jab and only beat guys based on being younger and fresher. Charles had fought 83 fights going into the contest...the man was washed up. Marciano was overrated and would be blasted into next week by Ali
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Yes, you're an imbecile. Charles lost the fight, remember? He was hurt throughout the first fight, and barely survived the 15th. He got knocked down in the 3rd round, and knocked down twice and out in the 8th. He did more damage? What a twit
The biggest difference between Ali and Marciano can be seen in these fights. Watch Ali get off the mat against Frazier, watch Marciano pound the crap out of Charles in 15. Tough fights, one guy was the man, one the bitch.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: yeah struggling with a washed up light HW all the way to the 15th...even "young jack johnson" didn't need all that time ha ha...where did u get your brain again? Who's recognised as the greatest HW of all time? Archie Moore (who fought both guys) said Ali would smash your hero. Remember that saying about Marciano...if you missed Marciano with a jab he would stick out his face and apologise lol
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Btw it's documented that Louis came back cos of tax and financial issues. Try to use internet constructively sometime
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Are you so stupid you still don't know what I'm talking about? You're mental processes aren't any faster than a bright German Shepherd's.
Louis came back in the second time because he needed money. He was still a very good fighter, but was not in his prime. Neither was Marciano, who was still improving rapidly.
It should be obvious do you I was talking about 1942-1946 layoff. But, then, you're a moron.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: Everyone can see you're an idiot including the gentleman above....but sadly u refuse to come to terms with the glaring truth. You're in denial boy....Marciano was a hype-job and wouldn't survive against the competition Ali faced let alone Ali himself. Hopefully this humbling experience will lead you to a more sensible (and knowledgeable) appraisal of the sport and characters that define it
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Dude, you've been exposed as an idiot post after post. You say falsehoods, or completely idiotic remarks, and get caught, and are too stupid to even acknowledge it.
I'll give you a hint, no one knows who'd win between the two. Ali never fought anyone that good, and Marciano had a tough style for him. The same was true for Marciano. If they fought 100 times, each would win some. Marciano was more of a man, so I'd favor him in a 15 rounder.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01: You're still here?! lol...I see you're getting owned by others as well. Marciano lived off his youth by fighting old men (and bums) and would be destroyed by Ali as the other guys have told you. I see you're one of these morons who won't accept the truth even when the whole world is telling it to you. So I'll let the others carry on the task of publicly humiliating you.
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 You're wrong about everything you say. Your supporting evidence is incorrect, so why would your summation be correct?
Reality check, peckerwood. No one knows who'd win. But we do know Ali lost five times. Marciano zero. We do know virtually everyone Marciano fought with talked about him like he had no chance. Walcott said he was an amateur. That's before getting knocked out twice, then he said how hard he hit, and how difficult he was.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01 Foreman got tired, because he didn't train for endurance...because his power ko'd frazier in 2. You had to take his shots. Young won only because Foreman changed his style to a more conservative one.
Charles was best at light heavy, he wasn't even a natural heavy.
Ali and Louis both had layoffs, and lost because of it. Ali beat Frazier later, even though Frazier was younger. Ali had been through wars before Norton 3, he won #2, and undertrained for #1. Ali beat better boxers.
carmodifire 3 months ago
@carmodifire Not necessarily. Some guys just naturally have more endurance.
Charles fought Marciano at 185, it's not far from LHW. Plus, he was HW champ, and fought extremely well. He looked great against Marciano, most said it was his best fight. He just fought a guy that was greater.
Louis had no trouble coming back from his layoff. Ali did because he finally faced better fighters, and lost. Frazier was past his prime after Ali I. That type of fighter doesn't normally last long.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01 Marciano didn't fight good HW's that were big. Walcott, old Louis, Charles, were hardly 200, and less, cruiserweights. Marciano relied on stamina, not skills. He was a crude brawler, but others couldn't match his great stamina. Louis didn't fight great quality opposition, so he was OK after the layoff. Frazier was in his prime, and perfect for Ali's style, After Ali's 3 1/2 year layoff, but BARELY won. Ali beat Foreman, Shavers, Lyle, all when he was old. Ali was just too fast in '67.
carmodifire 3 months ago
@carmodifire The Ali that fought Folley would have been easily beaten by Marciano. He struggled against a lousy fighter. Part of it is style, part of it was Ali having an off-night.
Marciano had horrific power to go with stamina. It's a tough combination to beat.
You fail to recognize a lot of his abilities as well. He could throw punches from anywhere, way off balance, and with power. He had tremendous heart and toughness, and everyone who fought him said he was hard to hit.
TA152H01 3 months ago
@TA152H01 I don't think so. Foley was even bigger than Marciano, who was a very small heavyweight. And Marciano did not have very good footwork. Against a guy who moves as much as Ali did, he might have been outpointed. Not easy fight either way, and quite possibly a very boring one with Ali moving and Jabbing and Marciano unable to land.
MADMAC572 3 months ago
@MADMAC572: That's what I keep telling the idiot. However I disagree that the fight would have gone the distance cos even though Rocky had a great chin he was very susceptible to cuts and the '67 Ali threw far more punches with more speed than anyone Rocky ever faced...I think the fight would have been stopped on cuts . Rocky was just too small and too slow to be in a competitive fight with that Ali. I agree the wide gulf in footspeed would being the most decisive disadvantage from Rocky's side
masterblaster102 3 months ago
@masterblaster102 Ali was cut by Charles who sat on his punches, and by Walcott. Otherwise he wasn't ever in danger on cuts. Both Walcott and Charles sat and punched. Ali seldom did that in his 'first half" and if he did, Rocky would have hit him hard. He'd have flicked his jab, his occassional right cross - but I do not think he would have planted to throw hard enough to open a cut on the Rock. And it's possible, though unlikely, Rocky would have landed a shot and KOed Ali.
MADMAC572 3 months ago
@MADMAC572: I think it's laughable to think Rocky could have KO'd Ali with 1 shot. Nobody ever did...the vast majority of the guys Rocky KO'd had been KO'd before. Foreman and Liston hit harder than Rocky but couldn't KO Ali. Ali did sit on his punches (his footwork was just too good so it seems like he didn't) just look @ the faces of everyone he fought after the fight was over. Rocky is vastly overrated cos of the suspect quality of the guys he faced. Ali would have busted him up badly
masterblaster102 3 months ago