Was Ali's second tier list better than some first tier lists?

[mr. magoo]

We all know who the big wins were for Muhammad Ali. His first tier list consists primarily of Foreman, Frazier, Liston and either Norton or Patterson ( depending on who you talk to ).

This thread is designed to discuss who his second tier list of opponents were, and weather or not this secondary list was as good or better than some champion's top list.

Ali's second tier list:
( in no particular order)

1. Jerry Quarry

2. Ron Lyle

3. Oscar Bonavena

4. Jimmy Ellis

5. Earnie Shavers

6. Jimmy Young

7. Buster Mathis

8. Earnie Terrell

9. Zora Folley

10. Mac Foster

11. Cleveland Williams

12. Joe Bugner

Now, what do you guys think? Were these opponents better than the top list of contenders that some lineal champions faced. How about guys like Dempsey, Johnson, Holmes, Louis, or Marciano?

[Senya13]

It's plain awful list, full of mediocrities or shot fighters.

[achillesthegreat]

If you compare guys like them to Tysons or Holmes reign then it could be argued.

[Bummy Davis]

We all know who the big wins were for Muhammad Ali. His first tier list consists primarily of Foreman, Frazier, Liston and either Norton or Patterson ( depending on who you talk to ).

This thread is designed to discuss who his second tier list of opponents were, and weather or not this secondary list was as good or better than some champion's top list.

Ali's second tier list:
( in no particular order)

1. Jerry Quarry

2. Ron Lyle

3. Oscar Bonavena

4. Jimmy Ellis

5. Earnie Shavers

6. Jimmy Young

7. Buster Mathis

8. Earnie Terrell

9. Zora Folley

10. Mac Foster

11. Cleveland Williams

12. Joe Bugner

Now, what do you guys think? Were these opponents better than the top list of contenders that some lineal champions faced. How about guys like Dempsey, Johnson, Holmes, Louis, or Marciano?

In retrospect, Quarry was good but intimadated vs Ali, Quarry was a solid guy who could beat the BIG slow punchers but had trouble with a mover and speed. Ali was older vs Young but did he really win that one? Young was good but for only a short while. Bonavena, Short and Squat gave Ali trouble but Oscar was a good fighter at best. the rest were either shot fighters or never beens

[Mendoza]

We all know who the big wins were for Muhammad Ali. His first tier list consists primarily of Foreman, Frazier, Liston and either Norton or Patterson ( depending on who you talk to ).

This thread is designed to discuss who his second tier list of opponents were, and weather or not this secondary list was as good or better than some champion's top list.

Ali's second tier list:
( in no particular order)

1. Jerry Quarry

2. Ron Lyle

3. Oscar Bonavena

4. Jimmy Ellis

5. Earnie Shavers

6. Jimmy Young

7. Buster Mathis

8. Earnie Terrell

9. Zora Folley

10. Mac Foster

11. Cleveland Williams

12. Joe Bugner

Now, what do you guys think? Were these opponents better than the top list of contenders that some lineal champions faced. How about guys like Dempsey, Johnson, Holmes, Louis, or Marciano?
This is an interesting thread. Ali had many fights vs quality ranked opponents. In terms of who beat who, Ali has TKO wins over Liston, Frazier, and Foreman. The three are in most cases viewed as top all time 15 heavyweights which is why I feel Ali should be #1 overall.

The other fighters you listed ( Norton was omited ) is a legacy by itself. If you factor in that most of the above Ali fights were vs prime or near prime fighters, I do beleive the group is better than the fighters Johnson beat for sure.

I beleive the group is slightly better than the fighters Louis, Dempsey, and Marciano beat. It’s a draw with Holmes competition. In some cases the big names that Louis, Marciano and Johnson beat were vs past their primes or very green fighters.

The fighters I colored in gold that Ali beat could have been champions in more than one era, and most certainly could have beaten some lineal champions. They also could have beaten anyone Johnson, Dempsey, Marciano, or Holmes defeated.

[mr. magoo]

It's plain awful list, full of mediocrities or shot fighters.

Not really,

although Folley, Williams and Chuvalo may have been pst their best but the rest were fairly decent fighters with a reasonable amount of talent. Jerry Quarry for example was a top rated contender for the best part of 10 years, and times was even ranked as high as #1. He also defeated a lot of other top raters at the time. Shavers was viewed by some as having limited skill, but had one of the hardest punches history. Lyle was another very tough contender who was a great counter puncher and could take a pretty good hit as well. Bonavena, Ellis, Terell and Young were all decent boxers.

I'm not sure why you would label all of these men as shot or mediocre.

[Jbuz]

It's plain awful list, full of mediocrities or shot fighters.

:lol:

And Roy Jones' was brilliant, right?

[ChrisPontius]

The fighters I colored in gold that Ali beat could have been champions in more than one era, and most certainly could have beaten some lineal champions. They also could have beaten anyone Johnson, Dempsey, Marciano, or Holmes defeated.

I strongly disagree here.

You claim that Quarry, Lyle, Shavers and Young could beat anyone Johnson, Dempsey, Marciano and Holmes beat.
I beg to differ.

Young is the best fighter out of those in my opinion. I don't see Shavers getting past Walcott (if Walcott comes out like he did against Marciano, he may well knock him out in the 1st), Charles would beat Shavers, Witherspoon would beat Shavers, Cobb (a Holmes opponent) in fact DID beat Shavers and needless to say, Cobb is one of Holmes' worst opponents, so go figure.

Lyle was very limited and it appears to me he gets hyped up a lot because he's on Ali's resume. Sorry but i don't see all that big punching ability that people make him out to have. He knocked out Shavers (who was knocked out even by journeymen several times) and that's it. He went the distance in almost every other big fight. Losing the decision, i might add. He certainly wouldn't get past smart and cagey veterans like Walcott, Charles, Moore or a Witherspoon, etc. He gets called a huge puncher to save Foreman's chin from looking bad, but mind you he was also floored by Young and Ali who didn't carry a big punch either.

Young and Quarry are better and they might beat some, but certainly would lose quite some fights, like they did in reality.


To sum it up, Quarry, Young, Shavers and Lyle as a group have lost fights to: each other, Lynn Ball, Gerry Cooney, Ossie Ocasio, Ken Norton, Bob Stallings, Bernardo Mercado, Randall Cobb, Eddie Machen, Jimmy Ellis and George Chuvalo.

These are hardly entities that made the era as great as you think it is. In fact, while most of those fighters were good contenders, they were nothing special. Fighters like that were around in every era and they would've always caused the listed fighters trouble, hence i see no reason to assume they would've been champions in any other era. It's not like Ali and Frazier were in their primes from 72 on, but they still beat them every time.

[JohnThomas1]

:lol:

And Roy Jones' was brilliant, right?
You missed this one a while back

Do you think there were a lot of slicker boxers in history than prime Griffin? The one you have very hard time trying to hit him cleanly to the head, and may miss tens of punches before at least one of them lands?

"History" and "Prime Griffin" makes it sound like Griffin was some sort of historically noteworthy figure.

:hey

[mr. magoo]

You claim that Quarry, Lyle, Shavers and Young could beat anyone Johnson, Dempsey, Marciano and Holmes beat.
I beg to differ.



Perhaps he got a bit carried away here, but it's not entirely unreasonable to think that Quarry, Lyle, Shavers and Young could have been among the better opponents for the champions listed. In fact, Shavers actually was one of the best fighters Holmes beat.

Young is the best fighter out of those in my opinion.

Thats debatable. Young certainly defeated a fair number of guys, but lost more than a handful. I'm not sure that I'd rate him above Quarry, who's comp list was a bit longer, and who's loss list was drastically shorter.

I don't see Shavers getting past Walcott (if Walcott comes out like he did against Marciano, he may well knock him out in the 1st),

The same could go the other way if Earnie lands first. Walcott didn't exactly win every fight that he ever had, and arguably never fought a man who could throw a right like Shavers. Besides, even if Walcott was capable of winning, that wouldn't necessarily exclude Shavers as a top contender had he been around in the 40's/50's.


Charles would beat Shavers, Witherspoon would beat Shavers, Cobb (a Holmes opponent) in fact DID beat Shavers and needless to say, Cobb is one of Holmes' worst opponents, so go figure.


I agree with the Charles and Witherspoon claims, but I think you're overlooking the fact that Shavers was a bit past his prime when he faced Cobb, and in fact was leading the fight until he tired in the 8th round.

Lyle was very limited and it appears to me he gets hyped up a lot because he's on Ali's resume. Sorry but i don't see all that big punching ability that people make him out to have. He knocked out Shavers (who was knocked out even by journeymen several times) and that's it.

I think you're criticism focusses mainly on the assumption that Lyle was viewed as a hard puncher, which you obviously disagree with. Punching power was not necessarily Lyle's best asset. He was a great counter puncher with reasonable skills in other areas, and could take a pretty good punch as well. While his power may not have been tremendous per say, he still had enough sting to remind fighters that he was still there. I also disagree with your claim that his name is soley linked to Muhammad Ali's. Lyle was probably best remembered for his all time great meeting with George Foreman, which I need not remind you was an incredible fight. He also had good wins over Jimmy Ellis, Oscar Bonavena, Gregorio Peralta, Boone Kirkman, Earnie Shavers, Buster Mathis, Joe Bugner, and Scott Ledoux. Keep in mind that he knocked out Buster Mathis in 2 rounds, exploding the myth that Shavers was the only rated fighter that he Ko'd.


He went the distance in almost every other big fight. Losing the decision, i might add. He certainly wouldn't get past smart and cagey veterans like Walcott, Charles, Moore or a Witherspoon, etc. He gets called a huge puncher to save Foreman's chin from looking bad, but mind you he was also floored by Young and Ali who didn't carry a big punch either.


True but also speculative.



To sum it up, Quarry, Young, Shavers and Lyle as a group have lost fights to: each other, Lynn Ball, Gerry Cooney, Ossie Ocasio, Ken Norton, Bob Stallings, Bernardo Mercado, Randall Cobb, Eddie Machen, Jimmy Ellis and George Chuvalo.


This is quite the mixed bag of half truths, irrelevancies and oversimplifications that you've put together here, and hardly I might add, a summation.

The losses to Lynn Ball, Gerry Cooney, Ossie Ocasio, Mercado and Tex Cobb came when Shavers, Lyle, Young, and Quarry were nearing the end of their careers. Why not discredit Joe Frazier for his draw with Floyd Cummings while we're at it? As for your statment regarding Quarry, Lyle, Young and Shavers beating each other, well frankly, I don't consider this to be a sign of a weak era or a reflection of average talent. In fact, a strong era is defined by multiple top contenders meeting each other often, and usually ending up in mixed results. It happens when you have a large pool of talent. By the way, Johnson, Walcott, Charles, and Moore lost quite a few fights in their day as well, and plenty of those defeats came against what you might define as journeyman or average talent. It works both ways.


These are hardly entities that made the era as great as you think it is. In fact, while most of those fighters were good contenders, they were nothing special.

Subject to opinion. Funny how most experts, historians, fans, analysts and even fighters from all different eras, often point to the seventies as being an exceptional era. Of course, you probably just right this off as misleading propaganda, given that the concencus doesn't support your views.

[ChrisPontius]

Mathis was not ranked when he fought Lyle.



Subject to opinion. Funny how most experts, historians, fans, analysts and even fighters from all different eras, often point to the seventies as being an exceptional era. Of course, you probably just right this off as misleading propaganda, given that the concencus doesn't support your views.
That is because most of the people that form general opinion lived through it or have Ali as their hero boy. Yes, it does stand out but that is also because the second half of the 60's was crap (you had Ali, an old Patterson and a lot of mediocreties, a middleweight rising on the rankings) and the second half of the 70's also sucked. The title was held hostage by Ali and he kept on defending against non-entities like Dunn, Evangelista, etc. He kept ducking his mandatory (Foreman) and his fights were complete bores. Frazier was pretty much shot, Foreman was way past it, Ali was shot and Neon Leon Spinks became lineair champion.

Did you see the amount of shit Wlad got for fighting his mandatory Ray Austin? Now imagine him fighting guys like that all the time, but then voluntary while ducking the mandatory challenges, and not only that. Wlad knocked Austin out in 2 rounds never once using his right hands, Ali went the distance or nearly did with bums like Wepner. Sorry but that is not what i call a great era. Sure there were great fights, but there were also a lot of stinkers and little good was on the horizon past '75. I'm not saying it was horrible or anything, i'm exaggarating a bit, i'm just saying that in my opinion it was not that much better than other eras. All eras have their bores and their interesting fights.

[PowerPuncher]

I think the second tier are excellent but not good enough to dominate any era. They may beat champions from 15. Lets look:

Young - Arguably beat Ali and Norton and he beat Foreman. Thats 2 top10 HWs (well Foreman isnt in mine but hes in most) and a top20 HW of all time. Beat Lyle and probably should have got a decision against Shavers. Decent wins against Dunn &Garcia but seemed to go into journeyman mode after his disputed decision loss to Norton, which makes his resume look pretty bad but at his best he was elite. The fact he beat and held his own against the very elite HWs of the 70s, indicates he would have been a champ in another era, maybe he would have pulled off a decision against 1 of the lower tier champs like Charles/Walcott/Tunney/Willard/Carnera/Baer/Hart/Schmelling/Sharkey/Moorer etc

Quarrey - boxing skill, stamina, intense pressure, hand speed, pushed Frazier close, beat Shavers, Patterson & Lyle & Foster & Mathis. Patterson is a top20 HW of all time so that says allot for Quarrey. Given he has similar attributes to Marciano maybe he could have dominated Marcianos era in place of Marciano? Its a possibility although I think he'd pick up losses he'd probably have been a champ in that era.

Lyle - nearly beat Foreman who is in many peoples top5 (not mine) and nearly beat an old Ali top2 of all time on most peoples lists. Beat Shavers, Bonavena, Middleton, Bugner. VERY FAST HANDS FOR A BIG MAN. Strong, powerful, and very good technique considering he was such a late starter

Shavers - definately not elite, but his brutal power gives him a punchers chance against anyone. Bare in mind his power nearly took Ali & Holmes. He decapitated Norton (top20 HW), Young, Ellis and a plentitude of lesser fighters. If he caught Marciano the way Archie Moore did or got Dempsey the way Firpo did or Louis the way Baer did he could have even beaten an ATG HW, such was his power, but would ofcourse lose the rematch

[OLD FOGEY]

We all know who the big wins were for Muhammad Ali. His first tier list consists primarily of Foreman, Frazier, Liston and either Norton or Patterson ( depending on who you talk to ).

This thread is designed to discuss who his second tier list of opponents were, and weather or not this secondary list was as good or better than some champion's top list.

Ali's second tier list:
( in no particular order)

1. Jerry Quarry

2. Ron Lyle

3. Oscar Bonavena

4. Jimmy Ellis

5. Earnie Shavers

6. Jimmy Young

7. Buster Mathis

8. Earnie Terrell

9. Zora Folley

10. Mac Foster

11. Cleveland Williams

12. Joe Bugner

Now, what do you guys think? Were these opponents better than the top list of contenders that some lineal champions faced. How about guys like Dempsey, Johnson, Holmes, Louis, or Marciano?

Highest ratings achieved in Ring Yearly ratings:
Champions---0
1. Ellis, Terrell, Folley
2. Quarry, Young
3. Lyle, Bonavena
4. Williams
5. Shavers, Foster, Bugner
Never rated in Ring's yearly ratings--Buster Mathis
No Hall-of-Famers

Tommy Loughran-challenger from 1930's
Champions--Baer, Sharkey, Braddock
1. Stribling, Hamas
2. Schaaf, Godoy
3. Uzcudun, Renault
4. Levinsky, Griffiths
5. Walker, Risko
6. Ray Impellitiere
7. Jack London
8. Sonny Walker
9. Ettore
10. Campolo, Lenglet
Five Hall-of-Famers

Jimmy Bivins-challenger from 1940's
1. Mauriello, Bettina
2. Pastor, Savold
3. Murray, Sheppard, Maxim, Thompson, Henry
4. Flynn
5. Walker
6. DeJohn
7.
8. Valentino, Payne
9. Agramonte
10. Scott, Wallace
I left off Charles and Moore because Bivins defeated them at lightheavy.

Archie Moore--challenger from 1950's
1. Bivins, Valdes
2. Baker
3. Sheppard, Maxim, Henry
4. Lovell, Dunlap, Lavorante
5. Walker
6. Satterfield
7.
8. Rischer
9. Norkus
10. Muscato, Slade
Moore is hurt because Harold Johnson, with wins over Godoy, Bivins, Valdes, Henry, Charles, and Machen, among others, was never rated at heavyweight.
Two Hall-of-Famers

Harold Johnson--not a challenger in the fifties
Champion--Charles
1. Bivins, Valdes, Moore, Machen
2. Godoy, Jones
3. Henry
4.
5.
6. Satterfield
7.
8. Bethea
9.
10. Slade
Interestingly, Johnson beats Machen & Jones from the sixties.
Three Hall-of-Famers

Comment--I don't see see that much outstanding about this list of second level Ali opponents-I would rate Loughran, Moore, Johnson, and Bivins all higher. Someone like Quarry can be built up, but would he really be a favorite over these four, or someone like Stribling or Henry or Thompson. I think not. I think it useful to mention that Loughran actually has wins over two bigger men, Impellitiere and Campolo, than Ali does.

[mr. magoo]

Highest ratings achieved in Ring Yearly ratings:
Champions---0
1. Ellis, Terrell, Folley
2. Quarry, Young
3. Lyle, Bonavena
4. Williams
5. Shavers, Foster, Bugner
Never rated in Ring's yearly ratings--Buster Mathis

Tommy Loughran-challenger from 1930's
Champions--Baer, Sharkey, Braddock
1. Stribling, Hamas
2. Schaaf, Godoy
3. Uzcudun, Renault
4. Levinsky, Griffiths
5. Walker, Risko
6. Ray Impellitiere
7. Jack London
8. Sonny Walker
9. Ettore
10. Campolo, Lenglet

Jimmy Bivins-challenger from 1940's
1. Mauriello, Bettina
2. Pastor, Savold
3. Murray, Sheppard, Maxim, Thompson, Henry
4. Flynn
5. Walker
6. DeJohn
7.
8. Valentino, Payne
9. Agramonte
10. Scott, Wallace
I left off Charles and Moore because Bivins defeated them at lightheavy.

Archie Moore--challenger from 1950's
1. Bivins, Valdes
2. Baker
3. Sheppard, Maxim, Henry
4. Lovell, Dunlap, Lavorante
5. Walker
6. Satterfield
7.
8. Rischer
9. Norkus
10. Muscato, Slade
Moore is hurt because Harold Johnson, with wins over Godoy, Bivins, Valdes, Henry, Charles, and Machen, among others, was never rated at heavyweight.

Harold Johnson--not a challenger in the fifties
Champion--Charles
1. Bivins, Valdes, Moore, Machen
2. Godoy, Jones
3. Henry
4.
5.
6. Satterfield
7.
8. Bethea
9.
10. Slade
Interestingly, Johnson beats Machen & Jones from the sixties.

Comment--I don't see see that much outstanding about this list of second level Ali opponents-I would rate Loughran, Moore, Johnson, and Bivins all higher. Someone like Quarry can be built up, but would he really be a favorite over these four, or someone like Stribling or Henry or Thompson. I think not. I think it useful to mention that Loughran actually has wins over two bigger men, Impellitiere and Campolo, than Ali does.

Do you at least think that some of them might be competitive in the various eras that you listed?

[groove]

Quarry, Ellis, Young and Lyle - those fighters are as good as the 50s contenders - light heavies Moore and Charles - look at what happened to a great light heavy in Bob Foster when he fought top class heavies like Frazier or Ali - no fucking contest. Old Walcott and Louis. Man Rocky would've had tougher fights against that bunch as they were proper heavies apart from Ellis and at their peak - Rocky fought no fighter at their peak and definitely no proper heavy. They all would beat Don Cockell. Shit Chuvalu, Bonavena, Terrell, Shavers, even Bugner would've beaten him up.

[OLD FOGEY]

Do you at least think that some of them might be competitive in the various eras that you listed?

Certainly there would be contenders, with possibly a couple of exceptions like Mathis. He gassed after five or six rounds. I don't think he would have gotten close to a championship fight in those days.

My point is I don't pick anybody on that list as a favorite over the four I listed, and these are contenders, not champions, and their resumes are better than Ali's second string resume.

[mr. magoo]

Certainly there would be contenders, with possibly a couple of exceptions like Mathis. He gassed after five or six rounds. I don't think he would have gotten close to a championship fight in those days.

My point is I don't anybody on that list as a favorite over the four I listed, and these are contenders, not champions, and their resumes are better than Ali's second string resume.

I can't disagree with you there. I looked up Young Stribling on Boxrec. He had an unbelievable number of fights before even hitting the age of 29. If I read it right, I believe he died just one month after his last fight at age 30 or something. Incredible resume. I'm thinking of doing a little research on him and possibly starting a thread in the next week or so.

[OLD FOGEY]

Quarry, Ellis, Young and Lyle - those fighters are as good as the 50s contenders - light heavies Moore and Charles - look at what happened to a great light heavy in Bob Foster when he fought top class heavies like Frazier or Ali - no fucking contest. Old Walcott and Louis. Man Rocky would've had tougher fights against that bunch as they were proper heavies apart from Ellis and at their peak - Rocky fought no fighter at their peak and definitely no proper heavy. They all would beat Don Cockell. Shit Chuvalu, Bonavena, Terrell, Shavers, even Bugner would've beaten him up.

Bob Foster? He never beat a top ten heavyweight. Not exactly the same as these men.

Peak? So what. You can come halfway down Mt Everest and still be much higher than your local hill, even if the hill looks pretty tall if you're standing next to it. These guys weren't that good nor that big. Ellis, possibly actually the best of them, as he beat Patterson, Quarry, Bonavena, Chuvalo, and Martin, had been an ordinary middleweight who never cracked the middleweight rankings and had a losing record against rated middleweights.

[ChrisPontius]

Quarry, Ellis, Young and Lyle - those fighters are as good as the 50s contenders - light heavies Moore and Charles - look at what happened to a great light heavy in Bob Foster when he fought top class heavies like Frazier or Ali - no fucking contest.

And what happened when Foster fought "Average Joe"-heavies ? No fucking contest.

[OLD FOGEY]

And what happened when Foster fought "Average Joe"-heavies ? No fucking contest.

Earlier lightheavies--Loughran, Moore, and Johnson did well, Later lightheavies, Spinks, Roy Jones, Toney, did well. Foster, in my estimation, is not a paradigm of what happens to lightheavies who move up.

Foster lost to Doug Jones, and Jones gave Ali a very close fight. Harold Johnson beat Jones easily. I think you can only push the Foster business so far. He lost to most of the best fighters he fought other than the 39 year old Tiger. Ali, Frazier, Jones, Terrell, Folley, and Mina all beat him.

[janitor]

We all know who the big wins were for Muhammad Ali. His first tier list consists primarily of Foreman, Frazier, Liston and either Norton or Patterson ( depending on who you talk to ).

This thread is designed to discuss who his second tier list of opponents were, and weather or not this secondary list was as good or better than some champion's top list.

Ali's second tier list:
( in no particular order)

1. Jerry Quarry

2. Ron Lyle

3. Oscar Bonavena

4. Jimmy Ellis

5. Earnie Shavers

6. Jimmy Young

7. Buster Mathis

8. Earnie Terrell

9. Zora Folley

10. Mac Foster

11. Cleveland Williams

12. Joe Bugner

Now, what do you guys think? Were these opponents better than the top list of contenders that some lineal champions faced. How about guys like Dempsey, Johnson, Holmes, Louis, or Marciano?

These oponents would make up a prety solid resume but it is important not to build them up to more than they were as OLD FOGEY has pointed out.

While Ali's A teir is unmatched his B teir might not necisarily be the best of any heavyweight champion. If you took Joe Louis's A teir to exclude Baer Schmeling and Walcott you would still have a lot of talent.

Where dose Floyd PAtterson fit in by the way?

[mr. magoo]

These oponents would make up a prety solid resume but it is important not to build them up to more than they were as OLD FOGEY has pointed out.

While Ali's A teir is unmatched his B teir might not necisarily be the best of any heavyweight champion. If you took Joe Louis's A teir to exclude Baer Schmeling and Walcott you would still have a lot of talent.

Where dose Floyd PAtterson fit in by the way?

I originally place Norton and Patterson in the top tier with the parenthesis ( depending on who you talk to )

Some people have them both in the top tier while others may put them in tier B. I'll say one thing, if you place Patterson and Norton in the second tier, and eliminate say Folley, Williams and Mathis, you'd probably have a stronger list.

[PowerPuncher]

Where would you rank these on your top HW lists?

I think Young & Quarrey maybe around 30/40 mark. Lyle around mid 40s. Shavers & Ellis top60.

[janitor]

Quarry, Ellis, Young and Lyle - those fighters are as good as the 50s contenders - light heavies Moore and Charles - look at what happened to a great light heavy in Bob Foster when he fought top class heavies like Frazier or Ali - no fucking contest.

I honestly don't think that Bob Foster would have done any better in the heavyweight division of the early 50s than in his own era. He just did not have the style to be an efective heavyweight.

If you want a practical demonstration that the top contenders of the Marciano era would have been efective in Ali's era look at Harold Johnson. He fought a few of the same oponents as Muhamad Ali and Sonny Liston while past his best and did better against most of them.

[Mendoza]

I strongly disagree here.

You claim that Quarry, Lyle, Shavers and Young could beat anyone Johnson, Dempsey, Marciano and Holmes beat.
I beg to differ.

Young is the best fighter out of those in my opinion. I don't see Shavers getting past Walcott (if Walcott comes out like he did against Marciano, he may well knock him out in the 1st), Charles would beat Shavers, Witherspoon would beat Shavers, Cobb (a Holmes opponent) in fact DID beat Shavers and needless to say, Cobb is one of Holmes' worst opponents, so go figure.

Lyle was very limited and it appears to me he gets hyped up a lot because he's on Ali's resume. Sorry but i don't see all that big punching ability that people make him out to have. He knocked out Shavers (who was knocked out even by journeymen several times) and that's it. He went the distance in almost every other big fight. Losing the decision, i might add. He certainly wouldn't get past smart and cagey veterans like Walcott, Charles, Moore or a Witherspoon, etc. He gets called a huge puncher to save Foreman's chin from looking bad, but mind you he was also floored by Young and Ali who didn't carry a big punch either.

Young and Quarry are better and they might beat some, but certainly would lose quite some fights, like they did in reality.

To sum it up, Quarry, Young, Shavers and Lyle as a group have lost fights to: each other, Lynn Ball, Gerry Cooney, Ossie Ocasio, Ken Norton, Bob Stallings, Bernardo Mercado, Randall Cobb, Eddie Machen, Jimmy Ellis and George Chuvalo.

These are hardly entities that made the era as great as you think it is. In fact, while most of those fighters were good contenders, they were nothing special. Fighters like that were around in every era and they would've always caused the listed fighters trouble, hence i see no reason to assume they would've been champions in any other era. It's not like Ali and Frazier were in their primes from 72 on, but they still beat them every time.

The key word here is could beat. I did not say would beat for sure. Yes, Shavers could KO Walcott or Charles. Yes Jimmy Young could out box anyone Johnson beat. Yes Quarry could beat anyone Dempsey beat. Yes Lyle could KO Schmeling or UD Baer.

If you want to tally up the W's and L's of Ali's tier two opponents, then compare them the W's and L's of the fighters Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, and Marciano beat, I think Ali's opponents will look a bit better.

Yes Quarry, Young, Shavers and Lyle as a group have lost fights to: each other, Lynn Ball, Gerry Cooney, Ossie Ocasio, Ken Norton, Bob Stallings, Bernardo Mercado, Randall Cobb, Eddie Machen, Jimmy Ellis and George Chuvalo. However Walcott and Chalres by themselves lost a lot and in some cases to lesser men than the above names. The same can be said for Louis or Dempsey opponents.

There have been quite a few weak lineal champions. Hart, Braddock, Spinks, Rhaman, ect..... For sure Quarry, Lyle, Shavers, and Young were just as good, if not better.

[Cojimar 1945]

Ali fought a number of top contenders in his second reign though the decisions in the Norton and Young fights are controversial. Foreman was not the top contender for a long time so Ali hardly can be accussed of ducking him. Foreman is also not as difficult for Ali stylistically as Norton.

[Bummy Davis]

I strongly disagree here.

You claim that Quarry, Lyle, Shavers and Young could beat anyone Johnson, Dempsey, Marciano and Holmes beat.
I beg to differ.

Young is the best fighter out of those in my opinion. I don't see Shavers getting past Walcott (if Walcott comes out like he did against Marciano, he may well knock him out in the 1st), Charles would beat Shavers, Witherspoon would beat Shavers, Cobb (a Holmes opponent) in fact DID beat Shavers and needless to say, Cobb is one of Holmes' worst opponents, so go figure.

Lyle was very limited and it appears to me he gets hyped up a lot because he's on Ali's resume. Sorry but i don't see all that big punching ability that people make him out to have. He knocked out Shavers (who was knocked out even by journeymen several times) and that's it. He went the distance in almost every other big fight. Losing the decision, i might add. He certainly wouldn't get past smart and cagey veterans like Walcott, Charles, Moore or a Witherspoon, etc. He gets called a huge puncher to save Foreman's chin from looking bad, but mind you he was also floored by Young and Ali who didn't carry a big punch either.

Young and Quarry are better and they might beat some, but certainly would lose quite some fights, like they did in reality.


To sum it up, Quarry, Young, Shavers and Lyle as a group have lost fights to: each other, Lynn Ball, Gerry Cooney, Ossie Ocasio, Ken Norton, Bob Stallings, Bernardo Mercado, Randall Cobb, Eddie Machen, Jimmy Ellis and George Chuvalo.

These are hardly entities that made the era as great as you think it is. In fact, while most of those fighters were good contenders, they were nothing special. Fighters like that were around in every era and they would've always caused the listed fighters trouble, hence i see no reason to assume they would've been champions in any other era. It's not like Ali and Frazier were in their primes from 72 on, but they still beat them every time.


:good

[groove]

And what happened when Foster fought "Average Joe"-heavies ? No fucking contest.

Beg to differ. Terrell and Zora Folley were not average joe heavies.

[janitor]

Beg to differ. Terrell and Zora Folley were not average joe heavies.

They would not have been dealt with conclusivley by Charles or Moore.

[mr. magoo]

=dave krieg]Ali's first tier was basically Foreman,Frazier and Norton

I think you can ad Liston and Patterson to that first tier list.

virtually everybody else he fought were overrated just to make Ali seem like he fought alot of great fighters but even that said average fighters like Doug Jones hurt him and beat him and were robbed.

I've never heard the claim that Doug Jones was robbed against Muhammad Ali and nor do I agree that most of his opponents were over hyped.

[My dinner with Conteh]

The Jones decision was considered debatable though squire. The crowd chanted "fix" and "fake" when Clay was got the nod (although they were mostly Jones supporters to begin with). Most sportswriters though felt Cass won a close duke, as I did.

[Bummy Davis]

Ali fought a lot of guys they just pulled out of no where and built up, NO one outside of the hardcore boxing fan knew them but everyone knew Ali...Blin?Evangelista, Richard Dunn....Jones was a real good small Heavy and he gave Ali quite a fight...Even an OLD Moore landed some good punches on Ali before he caught a few flurries...Ali was great but not Superman and he had a lot of connects