Is ali over rated?

Question

after looking at the tyson question i was thinking is ali over rated i know he was one of the all time greats but people talk about him like he was invincible personally i dont think he was quite as great as people think he was defently one of the best but im not sure if he was the best . what do u lot think ?

Answer 1

He was a great champion.

Answer 2

I definitely think Ali is overrated.  Frazier exposed Ali, more in the 1st fight than any of the others.  Norton also exposed Ali.  Ali is a great, one of the best of all time.  But he isn't THE greatest HW or boxer of all time

Answer 3

This is why Ali may stand for more than a long time, boxers/boxing are in a decline and I don't say any improvement at anytime soon. Baseball, football and basketball are all getting better you can't say the same about boxing.

Also when the next Ali comes around, will he have the competition to make him great.

Do you know what convergence means? Will the stars line up again that same way for another fighter? My view is no.

Also, Ali is more than a boxer. He is an historical figure like Jackie Robinson.

Several of Ali's children have said this: They realized how great their father was when their own heroes/idols are constantly telling them that Ali was their inspiration/muse to attempt to achieve greatness for themselves.

P. S. Maybe Jordan or Tiger could be another Ali, if they were concerned about more than money.



HE FOUGHT AND BEAT THE GREAT OF HIS ERA, HIS SPEED, HIS DEFENSE, HIS STRATEGY, HIS CHIN, HIS WILL AND HIS HEART - THE FACTS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES

Answer 4

No heavyweight in history beat more top level fighters than Ali - the fact that he fought most of them after he was past his best is even more evidence to that fact.  

Even though, by most accounts, we never saw the best Ali could have been, again, like Tyson, all you need are a pair of eyes to see his greatness.  Speed, underestimated power, one of the great chins of all-time, stamina, ability to adjust, ring savy, there wasn't anything he couldn't do.

The greatest heavyweight of all-time - if you take the 1965 version of Ali, how could you pick against him?

Answer 5

No, Ali is not overated. He is simply the best boxer there ever has been. There is absolutely no doubt about it! SIMPLY THE BEST!

Answer 6

Go rent or buy any documentary on him and you tell me...

Answer 7

Absolutely not!

Some people only remember the fights after his three year layoff. The quality of film from the mid sixties isn't very good. But Ali's best years occurred before the 3 year layoff. Youtube has some stuff but the quality isn't very good.

The Ali that beat Norton, Frazier and Foreman etc. Wasn't the "best" of Ali. It is a testament to his greatness, that he was able to defeat those other greats, when he already had slowed down a little.  

One of the things that bothers me most is when there is a question posted about Ali vs someone(anyone) and someone answers the Ali would "rope a dope" him. Ali came up with that vs Foreman because he was years away from being able to stand on his toes & stick and move.

Nobody moved like Ali before or since. it is very hard for a big man to move like that, as Ali got older and filled out and carried more weight with older legs, he couldn't do it for 15 rds. But he still won!

Name one other HW, that has wins against 3 other Top Ten type fighters in their prime!

Ali has Liston, Foreman and Frazier.

He also avenged his losses until he got to old.

Answer 8

I think he's rated correctly.

Don't forget the 3 years of Ali's prime that he wasn't allowed to fight.

Answer 9

Muhammed Ali and the words over rated should never collide in the same sentance.  Ali may have lost 3 prime years of his career, but you have to remember as Cassius Clay he would float like a butterfly, but after his return he could no longer let his legs do the bulk of the work, so theoretically Clay and Ali were two really different fighters although they were the same human being.  He had a chin, good defense, decent power, and a lot of heart.  Never will there ever be another Boxer like this, nor person for that matter.

Answer 10

You are over-rated.

Answer 11

Overrated as a boxer? Maybe. Overrated as a person? No. Along with Jackie Robinson, Ali was the athlete who had the biggest impact on the world.

Answer 12

all i know is he bit an ear twice soo hes a stupid person

MIKE TYSON IS A HO-MO

Answer 13

No Ali is not overrated he should be given the respect as a fighter who never ducked nobody or never was KO'd (His loss to Holmes was a corner retirement not a KO.) He faced good opposition and won, although some wins can be debated, but those came at the later half of his career. He brought speed and footwork to the big man division. No one would do that again until Tyson in 1985. Ali in my book is one of my top ten greatest fighters.

Answer 14

No, never count Ali out. He fought Listion, Frazier, Foreman,Norton, Lyle, Quarry and many others. He can always pull off an extraordinary upset off like against Liston and Foreman who were the Tyson of their days ( although I think Frazier style was more similar to Tyson).

Answer 15

In all the ways to legitimately grade champions Ali is at or very near the top in every category.  Ali and Joe Louis stand well above the rest.  THEN you have the Top 10.  Larry Holmes and Lennox Lewis are very Underrated.  They certainly should rank high in the Top 10.  

In no certain order, here are the rest.  Johnson, Dempsey, Marciano, Liston, Frazier, Forman, Tyson, Holyfield.  Of these champions, Dempsey and Frazier are near the bottom.  Aside from the win over Ali,  Frazier has accomplished much but not what some of the others have.    

Dempsey avoided many of the best fighters of his time during the ''coulor line era''.  Some say the Wills fight wasn't his fault but Dempsey openly admitted to avoiding Sam Langford and his reason why.   I have to put Holyfield above Frazier (in the ring) and Dempsey (quality of opposition), though Dempsey would have given him a tougher fight than Frazier would.  Both might beat Evander but he accomplished far more than both.

Liston, Forman and Tyson were all limited.  Marciano was just too small.  Johnson is a bit overrated, partly for being the first Black Champion and part because he out boxed most during his time.   This was Before the days of ''combination'' punching.  People compare him to Ali but Jack didnt have near Ali's speed, combination punching, or footwork.    Johnson is more like a poorman's Larry Holmes.  Liston was powerful but he was really a limited bully.      

Ali would have beaten Frazier had they fought in 69 as was originally planned before the exile.  The second Liston fight was all wrong.  Sonny tanked but that wasnt Ali's fault.  He would have won anyway.  He was much stronger the second time around.  

This isn't to say where they rank but Louis, Holmes and Lewis would have the best chance to beat Ali.  Rocky and young Tyson would have been a hand full.  However, Rocky is just too limited and Mike has too many flaws to tangle with Ali.  Johnson would have just been out-boxed.  Dempsey could hit but Ali would have absorbed enough to stay ahead on points or stop him late.  

In a series of fights with the top 12, Ali might not go undefeated.  However, he would certainly suffer fewer losses than all the rest on the list.

Answer 16

No he is not over rated.  Muhammad Ali really was the greatest heavyweight champion in boxing history.  He was human, he wasn't invincible, but considering his level of competition, his impact outside the ring on the social issues of his era, and his incredible skill and ability in the ring, over all he edges Joe Louis as truly the best and brightest of all heavyweight champions.  He was an incredible human being and a great man, the fact that he was also the best single heavyweight champion of all time is secondary.

Answer 17

Over rated? Yes and no. I say no, because in all honesty, he beat the best of his era. So definately, he is up there with the greatest.

I say yes because alot of people refer to his Civil Rights stuff ... OK, that's very admirable he did that, cool. That means NOTHING in the ring. When someone asks a question of Ali's ability, please do not bring up Vietnam, you know?

Also, he had alot of fights that could have gone either way on the cards. He lost 5 times, but could have (by my count of close scores) lost 9. If he was 52-9 instead of 56-5 he would not be "The Greatest". Marciano was unbeaten, Louis had 25 defenses in 11 years, Ali would be know as "the guy who won the title 3 times". Not "The Greatest"

Alot of that was in the judges hands.