BOXING LEGENDS

[R.J. MacReady]

Maybe Tyson wins* if both fighters are in their prime, but career-wise, Ali had the much better career.

*It's a big maybe because Ali was so great; however, Tyson's career was in the '80s and '90s, while Ali's career was in the '60s and '70s. In pretty much every sport, we have seen that the athletes get better from one generation to the next. The most basic example is track and field. There's no reason to think it's any different in boxing. Maybe Tyson would win because of this, but Ali had the much greater career.

By the same token, I think that either Klitschko beats any fighter from the '80s or '90s.

Think for a second, who did Ali fight ...and then look who Mike fought.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

Right, and I don't mind people's opinion, but I just can't understand in which universe De La Hoya has a better career than Chavez. De La Hoya gave up after he was getting whooped by a fighter smaller and lighter than he was and never got back into the ring again.

I agree, no comparison. But if you have to use an aging fighters very last fight to make a point I don;t know what to tell you. And I thought everyone knew he did that fight just for 1 last payday.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

In my lifetime?

Ali

Frazier

Hagler/Duran

 

[Ricky Roma]

Tyson in the top 3 is a joke. He did have everything going for him, but he pissed it away...and the joke of a division caught up to him and took him out. Off the top of my head:

Robinson
Ali
Leonard

 

[OutlawImmortal]

I agree, no comparison. But if you have to use an aging fighters very last fight to make a point I don;t know what to tell you. And I thought everyone knew he did that fight just for 1 last payday.

I grew up watching De La Hoya, he was my favorite fighter throughout my youth. No offense but I think I know what I'm allowed to criticize him on, and as a huge fan at the time that was one of the most disappointing and deflating fights I've ever seen. It's just one of many reasons I can think of why Chavez was a better boxer.

Tyson in the top 3 is a joke. He did have everything going for him, but he pissed it away...and the joke of a division caught up to him and took him out. Off the top of my head:

Robinson
Ali
Leonard

At his peak, I think you could argue that he could have excelled in any generation.

 

[Ricky Roma]

At his peak, I think you could argue that he could have excelled in any generation.

Sure...if he was fighting you and I.

I 'think' Tyson coulda been one of the all time greats. The fact is, he beat up on nothings, and was took out by guys on the next level....and those guys are not Ali or Fra...ooohhh fuck that...they are nothing.

 

[OutlawImmortal]

Sure...if he was fighting you and I.

I 'think' Tyson coulda been one of the all time greats. The fact is, he beat up on nothings, and was took out by guys on the next level....and those guys are not Ali or Fra...ooohhh fuck that...they are nothing.

Depends on how you look at it, I hear the argument about most athletes being better in the modern era all the time. At the end of day comparing athletes from different times become more subjective than anything. I can legitimately argue over De La Hoya and Chavez because they were not as far off as Tyson and some of the all-time greats in the heavyweight division. They even fought twice when Chavez was getting old, had 100+ fights and had years of not training combined with drug use catching up to him.

Besides, Foreman destroyed Frazier and he had no defensive skill whatsoever. He basically got by in that era off of pure punching power. Mike Tyson had the complete package in his prime.

 

[Ricky Roma]

Depends on how you look at it, I hear the argument about most athletes being better in the modern era all the time. At the end of day comparing athletes from different times become more subjective than anything. I can legitimately argue over De La Hoya and Chavez because they were not as far off as Tyson and some of the all-time greats in the heavyweight division. They even fought twice when Chavez was getting old, had 100+ fights and had years of not training combined with drug use catching up to him.

Besides, Foreman destroyed Frazier and he had no defensive skill whatsoever. He basically got by in that era off of pure punching power. Mike Tyson had the complete package in his prime.

The problem is, the comparison isn't between someone from 30 years ago to today. It isn't a matter of athletes being better in today's era vs. generations past. It's a matter of the actual fighting talent in the weight class.

Just look at the heavyweight division now....anyone think it's full of great athletes and such? That's irrelevant. I think we can all pretty much agree it's not full of great fighters, and I believe it was heading in this direction during the halcyon years of Tyson. As I said, I 'think' he may have ended up in the discussion (had he kept his crew intact/not allowed Don King to interfere/etc.) but his downward spiral and lack of talent around him to fight leaves a big question mark AFAIC.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

Mike Tyson had the complete package in his prime.

So your saying Tyson had great boxing fundamentals, his footwork was solid, he had controlled punches that never let him be out of position?

Tyson was not the complete package and nor did he need it in his prime. But working on his boxing skills would have made Tyson the greatest ever. They would have saved him in the later years. Tyson relied on his physical abilities mixed with marginal boxing fundamentals to win fights.

Look no further than the Pac Man. A high energy brawler is how he won all of his early fights. But Freddie knew in the later years Manny would have to become a great boxer to win fights. And that is what Manny became.

 

[Robotech]

The problem is, the comparison isn't between someone from 30 years ago to today. It isn't a matter of athletes being better in today's era vs. generations past. It's a matter of the actual fighting talent in the weight class.

Just look at the heavyweight division now....anyone think it's full of great athletes and such? That's irrelevant. I think we can all pretty much agree it's not full of great fighters, and I believe it was heading in this direction during the halcyon years of Tyson. As I said, I 'think' he may have ended up in the discussion (had he kept his crew intact/not allowed Don King to interfere/etc.) but his downward spiral and lack of talent around him to fight leaves a big question mark AFAIC.

As much as I hate to say it (because I'm American), I don't think anyone in history would be a favorite to beat either Klitschko brother. If it weren't for American athletes going into football or basketball, we would have a ton of excellent American heavyweights, but sadly, I don't think we'll ever see the American fight scene as full of talent as it was in the '50s, '60s and '70s.

 

[Robotech]

So your saying Tyson had great boxing fundamentals, his footwork was solid, he had controlled punches that never let him be out of position?

Tyson was not the complete package and nor did he need it in his prime. But working on his boxing skills would have made Tyson the greatest ever. They would have saved him in the later years. Tyson relied on his physical abilities mixed with marginal boxing fundamentals to win fights.

Look no further than the Pac Man. A high energy brawler is how he won all of his early fights. But Freddie knew in the later years Manny would have to become a great boxer to win fights. And that is what Manny became.

Tyson had great fundamentals early in his career, IMO. D'Amato taught him the peek-a-boo style that a short fighter needed to use. D'Amato emphasized head movement and footwork so that Tyson could avoid punches as much as possible.

After he reached the top, I think he got lazy. The head movement and footwork weren't the same anymore, and he simply just relied on his punching power.

However, even if he kept up with his technique, I think he would've had a hard time winning against top heavyweights as he aged. As a short heavyweight with a short reach, he really did have to rely on speed and quickness to be successful, which naturally slows down as one gets older. For example, Tyson v. Lennox in their twenties would've been an awesome fight, but as we saw, Tyson v. Lennox in their thirties was all Lennox all day.

 

[Ricky Roma]

As much as I hate to say it (because I'm American), I don't think anyone in history would be a favorite to beat either Klitschko brother.

In history? Not Ali? Louis? Frazier?

 

[DragonfromTO]

Sugar Ray Robinson
Joe Louis
Willie Pep

 

[Robotech]

In history? Not Ali? Louis? Frazier?

All great fighters, no doubt, but I don't think that any of them would be favored to win in a prime v. prime matchup. That's no knock on any of those greats, but the Kiltschkos are both absolutely gigantic men and are products of modern training and nutrition. In the past, I thought that the Klitschkos were just giant men who won on their physical gifts, but no, they are both highly skilled (great amateur pedigree and professional training) and both are very intelligent. As a pro, Wladimir was trained by one of the greatest trainers in Emanuel Steward. Both Klitschko brothers have a doctorate degree in sports science.

I'm not saying that they can't be beaten. Both have suffered losses, and this is sports after all, where anything can happen. I'm just saying that either Klitschko (at his prime) would probably be favored to win against anybody (except each other). As much as I would love to think that one of our great American fighters would be the favorite to win, I just can't.

 

[Ricky Roma]

All great fighters, no doubt, but I don't think that any of them would be favored to win in a prime v. prime matchup. That's no knock on any of those greats, but the Kiltschkos are both absolutely gigantic men and are products of modern training and nutrition. In the past, I thought that the Klitschkos were just giant men who won on their physical gifts, but no, they are both highly skilled (great amateur pedigree and professional training) and both are very intelligent. As a pro, Wladimir was trained by one of the greatest trainers in Emanuel Steward. Both Klitschko brothers have a doctorate degree in sports science.

I'm not saying that they can't be beaten. Both have suffered losses, and this is sports after all, where anything can happen. I'm just saying that either Klitschko (at his prime) would probably be favored to win against anybody (except each other). As much as I would love to think that one of our great American fighters would be the favorite to win, I just can't.

Given that your scenario is purely hypothetical, the only way a matchup could happen is if they were fighting in the same era. Therefore, put someone like a prime Ali in today's world, with all the medicinal and training advancements. I could never imagine one of the Klitschko brothers topping Ali.

In a nutshell, and generally, all athletes are superior today than they were 40 years ago. I have to take into consideration the specific eras, and in your case, an equal opportunity that each athlete can gain.

 

[Robotech]

Given that your scenario is purely hypothetical, the only way a matchup could happen is if they were fighting in the same era. Therefore, put someone like a prime Ali in today's world, with all the medicinal and training advancements. I could never imagine one of the Klitschko brothers topping Ali.

In a nutshell, and generally, all athletes are superior today than they were 40 years ago. I have to take into consideration the specific eras, and in your case, an equal opportunity that each athlete can gain.

So you don't think it's even possible for one of the Klitschkos to ever beat Ali? You would give them 0% chance? Not once out of 100 fights? I don't think that's how sports work, especially heavyweight boxing.

Is it possible that Ali, if he were born the same year as the youngest Klitschko, would be 6'7" 250 lbs? I suppose it's possible, but I think it's unlikely. I used to think that the Klitschkos were just giant brutes and that's how they won, but we can't overlook how highly skilled they are. Their skill level is comparable with the skill level of the champions of the past. I'm not saying that they would never lose to any of the past champions, but I think that their size and power would give them an advantage. These guys do severe damage just with their jab.

For the longest time, we in the West didn't really know how great the fighers are from the ex-Soviet countries because they were not allowed to turn pro, but we're finding out with fighters like Klitschko and Gennady Golovkin just how good these guys really are.

I don't root for the Klitschkos (it's hard to root for Goliath), but I give credit where it's due. Wladimir hasn't lost in over 10 years, I believe. If he keeps fighting, he should lose eventually, as he is almost 40 years old. I'm hoping some American fighters can step up. Deontay Wilder's got crazy power and would have a puncher's chance, but I'm not too confident in Wilder's ability to withstand Wladmir's punches.

 

[Ricky Roma]

So you don't think it's even possible for one of the Klitschkos to ever beat Ali? You would give them 0% chance? Not once out of 100 fights? I don't think that's how sports work, especially heavyweight boxing.

Is it possible that Ali, if he were born the same year as the youngest Klitschko, would be 6'7" 250 lbs? I suppose it's possible, but I think it's unlikely.

OK...if we're going by a scenario of 100 or so fights, I think almost any fighter could beat another within the same class. It could just come down to a single punch, but we have to think about it in a more logical manner - if it's actually possible in this dream scenario matchup. They wouldn't fight 100 times. They wouldn't fight 10 times.....you'd be extremely lucky to get 2 or 3 matches.

I do think if guys like Louis or Ali were born generations later, they would be bigger. Why? The human species has gained height and weight (some obvious bad weight as well). Given the medicinal, nutritional and workout advancements in modern society, I don't there is any doubt they'd all be bigger/stronger/faster/etc. How big - I don't know...but they would be bigger.

Maybe I'm not giving the Klitschkos their due. Perhaps its nostalgia taking over....I just can't remember the last time I looked forward to a heavyweight fight.

 

[Robotech]

OK...if we're going by a scenario of 100 or so fights, I think almost any fighter could beat another within the same class. It could just come down to a single punch, but we have to think about it in a more logical manner - if it's actually possible in this dream scenario matchup. They wouldn't fight 100 times. They wouldn't fight 10 times.....you'd be extremely lucky to get 2 or 3 matches.

I do think if guys like Louis or Ali were born generations later, they would be bigger. Why? The human species has gained height and weight (some obvious bad weight as well). Given the medicinal, nutritional and workout advancements in modern society, I don't there is any doubt they'd all be bigger/stronger/faster/etc. How big - I don't know...but they would be bigger.

Maybe I'm not giving the Klitschkos their due. Perhaps its nostalgia taking over....I just can't remember the last time I looked forward to a heavyweight fight.

I didn't necessarily mean that they would fight 100 times. I was just making the point that either guy would have a chance to win, and that you can't really say that either guy would absolutely win. You had said that '[you] could never imagine one of the Klitschko brothers topping Ali."

I think it's probable that Ali would be stronger and faster in today's game, but I don't think that he would be much more than he was back in his day because what we're really seeing as sports evolve is the the hyper specialization of athletes. If you look at sports back in the day, you will notice that athletes within the same sport and across different sports were closer in size to each other than they are today. In essence, athletes have gotten bigger in the sports where huge size is prized (e.g., football and basketball) and athletes have gotten smaller where being small is an advantage (e.g., gymnastics). There was a really good TED talk on this given by David Epstein. It's worth a listen. I think it's only about 15 minutes long.

Heavyweight boxing, because there is no restriction on maximum weight, is a part of this hyper specialization pattern. The heavyweight division is really dominated by super heavyweights these days and I don't see that changing. While it will always be possible for a smaller heavyweight to be successful, I think those will be few and far between.

The Klitschkos deserve their due. I think that they are under appreciated because of where they are from.

 

[Robotech]

I get nostalgic, too. I'd love to think that someone like Ali, Foreman, or Tyson would go in there and smash a Klitschko, but when I think about it logically, I think Ali, Foreman, or Tyson would be facing an uphill battle. Once again, I'm not saying that they could never win, but I do think that they would be at a disadvantage.

 

[Ricky Roma]

As I've stated, the division to me, is irrelevant. I can't think of a marquee matchup that Klitschko has, and that ties directly to the greatness. Ali had Foreman, Liston and Frazier - all truly great fighters in their own right. At least Tyson had a 90 second destruction of Michael Spinks that forever established him, but the signs were there that the heavyweight era was ending.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.