What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Thought Provoking Sports Question of the Day

Anonymous519

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2021
Messages
347
Reaction score
221
Points
168
Location
Florida
"Considering the following fighters at their prime, who would win the follxing boxing matches?"

  1. Muhammad Ali vs. Mike Tyson
  2. Muhammad Ali vs. Rocky Marciano
  3. George Foreman vs. Jack Dempsey
  4. Sugar Ray Leonard vs. Sugar Ray Robinson
  5. Marvin Hagler vs. Jake Lamotta
  6. Roberto Duran vs. Henry Armstrong
  7. Floyd Mayweather vs. Thomas Hearns
  8. Tyson Fury vs. Lennox Lewis
  9. Carlos Monzon vs. Marvin Hagler
  10. Roberto Duran vs. Floyd Mayweather
1. Power and speed vs. adaptability and slick moves...hmmm. I think if Tyson had stayed on the straight and narrow he would have been among the top three heavyweights of all-time. He was just crushing opponents early on. But Ali at his best always found a way to beat whoever he was facing especially up against adversity. Whether it would have been "rope-a-dope" or another strategy I think he could have pulled off a victory in this one.

2. For those unaware they did do a computer version of this fight and Marciano won. But in his heyday, he was a small heavyweight and would have been much too slow against Ali. Ali would have scored a TKO for sure in this one.

3. Wow what a war this would have been. The heart factor goes to Dempsey and he would have won this fight in a battle of attrition.

4. The battle of "Sugars." I loved watching Ray Leonard fight. His speed, his agility, his mobility around the ring when he wanted to show that off was so much fun to watch. But Robinson may be the greatest pound-for-pound fighter in history. This would have been a close decision fight with the winner in my estimation, the original Sugar Ray.

5. Another all-out war. Hagler had tons of heart but so did Lamotta. You could beat on Lamotta all day and he'd still be in your face. I don't think either fighter could score a knockout here so I like Hagler by a very close decision.

6. Henry "Hurricane Hank" Armstrong is not as well known by most boxing fans not because he fought a long time ago but because unless you are a boxing historian, his name is not as well remembered as men like Ali, Ray Robinson, Tyson, etc. But he was one hell of a fighter. The man fought 183 times and won 152 of those fights. That's an incredible .830 winning percentage. Roberto Duran on the other hand was "Manos de Piedra" or in English, "Hands of Stone." Not a great puncher but a punisher. This would have been just an amazing bout but in Armstrong's era, fighters were simply tougher. For that I would say he would defeat Duran.

7. The "Hitman" would have taken out a fighter I believe is WAY overrated. Mayweather for his career did not face the level of competition other champion fighters have. Hearns could knock out anybody. His KOs were devestating. Just ask Roberto Duran. He wins this one in a cake walk.

8. Two slick fighters here. Fury is very impressive with his defensive moves and he is big. This would certainly go the distance and I think Fury would just barely get the nod.

9. Carlos Monzon is another fighter who sometimes is forgotten about how great he was. He lost his life at an early age but had a full boxing career. In 100 fights he lost just three times but had nine draws. 59 fights, more than half of his victories were by KO. Hagler? A beast. I think Marvin had the durablity and punching power to unseat Monzon from the victory circle. Either a TKO or a lopsided decision would go in favor of "Marvelous."

10. We have Duran again and Mayweather who one more time would be way overmatched. Duran would knock out Mayweather inside of five rounds.
 

Polishprince

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
36,885
Reaction score
23,922
Points
1,915
Tyson beat Larry Holmes easily, and Holmes had little problems with Muhammad Ali. I can't see Iron Mike breaking a sweat fighting Ali.
 

donttread

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
396
Reaction score
252
Points
193
As much fun as these conversations are IMO we cannot accurately compare atheletes across eras. Too much changes, the ball, the equipment, the rules , the steroids.
I do believe however that there is something to be said for evaluating how the athelete dominated his era. Like Ruth or Gretzy.
I will say I agree that Hagler was a beast. Where other fighters threw punches of combos he unleashed flurries.
 

JoeMoma

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
20,806
Reaction score
8,478
Points
950
1. Power and speed vs. adaptability and slick moves...hmmm. I think if Tyson had stayed on the straight and narrow he would have been among the top three heavyweights of all-time. He was just crushing opponents early on. But Ali at his best always found a way to beat whoever he was facing especially up against adversity. Whether it would have been "rope-a-dope" or another strategy I think he could have pulled off a victory in this one.
I wonder if Ali's rope-a-dope would of worked against Tyson in his prime. I find it amazing how Ali could just lean against the ropes and take a beating like he did. Would Tyson's power punches have been able to get through Ali's rope-a-dope defense?
 

Polishprince

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
36,885
Reaction score
23,922
Points
1,915
Hearns is a lot bigger than Mayweather, you'd think that would give him the advantage.

However, Mayweather knocked out the Big Show, the world's largest athlete, the bigger they are the harder they fall.
 

JoeMoma

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
20,806
Reaction score
8,478
Points
950
Tyson beat Larry Holmes easily, and Holmes had little problems with Muhammad Ali. I can't see Iron Mike breaking a sweat fighting Ali.
Ali was just a shell of his old self in his prime when he fought Holmes.
 

postman

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2017
Messages
13,152
Reaction score
4,868
Points
345
Tyson beat Larry Holmes easily, and Holmes had little problems with Muhammad Ali. I can't see Iron Mike breaking a sweat fighting Ali.
You missed the part "in their prime"
 

postman

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2017
Messages
13,152
Reaction score
4,868
Points
345
  1. Muhammad Ali vs. Mike Tyson
  2. Muhammad Ali vs. Rocky Marciano

This would easily be Ali over Tyson and Ali over Marciano
Ali was always a thinker, and in his prime also a puncher.
 

JoeMoma

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
20,806
Reaction score
8,478
Points
950
With fights in general, it's fun to speculate who will win. But if it were easy to predict, then there would be little point in having the fight. It's too bad that we can never really know by actually having the fights on the OP's list.

As far as computer simulations, they can be tweaked so that either fighter can win.
 

Polishprince

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
36,885
Reaction score
23,922
Points
1,915
With fights in general, it's fun to speculate who will win. But if it were easy to predict, then there would be little point in having the fight. It's too bad that we can never really know by actually having the fights on the OP's list.

As far as computer simulations, they can be tweaked so that either fighter can win.


Back in the day, I think there were more quality fighters as it was one of the only athletic rackets going. People didn't make nearly as much in football or basketball. There was no MMA.

As a general rule, the old time fighters were probably better- they had to be because of increased competition.
 

DGS49

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
12,486
Reaction score
7,967
Points
1,065
Location
Pittsburgh
What many ignore about Ali is that he could take a punch. Foreman hit him with a dozen shots that would have knocked anyone else out, and Ali wasn't even phased.

The most interesting theoretical fight would be Ali vs. Tyson. The unstoppable force against the immovable object.

We'll never know.
 
OP
Anonymous519

Anonymous519

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2021
Messages
347
Reaction score
221
Points
168
Location
Florida
Yes, we will never know but always fun to speculate! You have to put aside influences like how athletes trained differently and rule changes for all sports but with boxing, you really don't have that. Perhaps today's fighters might have an edge in conditioning but for toughness the older eras were far ahead of today's boxers. Just think about the days when they fought without gloves and had bouts of 72 rounds and more. In the modern era, not only did they shorten championship bouts to 12 rounds many fighters find it difficult to even get to a 12 round.
 

JoeMoma

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
20,806
Reaction score
8,478
Points
950
What many ignore about Ali is that he could take a punch. Foreman hit him with a dozen shots that would have knocked anyone else out, and Ali wasn't even phased.

The most interesting theoretical fight would be Ali vs. Tyson. The unstoppable force against the immovable object.

We'll never know.
Ali may of faired better off in his later years if he had been knocked out rather than taking all those punches.
 

DrLove

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2016
Messages
37,715
Reaction score
19,870
Points
1,915
Location
Central Oregon Coast
I wonder if Ali's rope-a-dope would of worked against Tyson in his prime. I find it amazing how Ali could just lean against the ropes and take a beating like he did. Would Tyson's power punches have been able to get through Ali's rope-a-dope defense?

That one would be truly interesting. The rope-a-dope worked because Ali used the ropes to lighten the blows OR evade them entirely. Not sure if they still allow guys to actually hold on to the ropes. Gives a guy too much leverage. But yeah, he'd let the opponent punch himself into exhaustion and then go in for the kill. Man, the betting odds on that one probably would be a pick-em.

 

NoBueno

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2021
Messages
226
Reaction score
195
Points
88
Location
Louisiana North
"Considering the following fighters at their prime, who would win the follxing boxing matches?"

  1. Muhammad Ali vs. Mike Tyson
  2. Muhammad Ali vs. Rocky Marciano
  3. George Foreman vs. Jack Dempsey
  4. Sugar Ray Leonard vs. Sugar Ray Robinson
  5. Marvin Hagler vs. Jake Lamotta
  6. Roberto Duran vs. Henry Armstrong
  7. Floyd Mayweather vs. Thomas Hearns
  8. Tyson Fury vs. Lennox Lewis
  9. Carlos Monzon vs. Marvin Hagler
  10. Roberto Duran vs. Floyd Mayweather
1. Power and speed vs. adaptability and slick moves...hmmm. I think if Tyson had stayed on the straight and narrow he would have been among the top three heavyweights of all-time. He was just crushing opponents early on. But Ali at his best always found a way to beat whoever he was facing especially up against adversity. Whether it would have been "rope-a-dope" or another strategy I think he could have pulled off a victory in this one.

2. For those unaware they did do a computer version of this fight and Marciano won. But in his heyday, he was a small heavyweight and would have been much too slow against Ali. Ali would have scored a TKO for sure in this one.

3. Wow what a war this would have been. The heart factor goes to Dempsey and he would have won this fight in a battle of attrition.

4. The battle of "Sugars." I loved watching Ray Leonard fight. His speed, his agility, his mobility around the ring when he wanted to show that off was so much fun to watch. But Robinson may be the greatest pound-for-pound fighter in history. This would have been a close decision fight with the winner in my estimation, the original Sugar Ray.

5. Another all-out war. Hagler had tons of heart but so did Lamotta. You could beat on Lamotta all day and he'd still be in your face. I don't think either fighter could score a knockout here so I like Hagler by a very close decision.

6. Henry "Hurricane Hank" Armstrong is not as well known by most boxing fans not because he fought a long time ago but because unless you are a boxing historian, his name is not as well remembered as men like Ali, Ray Robinson, Tyson, etc. But he was one hell of a fighter. The man fought 183 times and won 152 of those fights. That's an incredible .830 winning percentage. Roberto Duran on the other hand was "Manos de Piedra" or in English, "Hands of Stone." Not a great puncher but a punisher. This would have been just an amazing bout but in Armstrong's era, fighters were simply tougher. For that I would say he would defeat Duran.

7. The "Hitman" would have taken out a fighter I believe is WAY overrated. Mayweather for his career did not face the level of competition other champion fighters have. Hearns could knock out anybody. His KOs were devestating. Just ask Roberto Duran. He wins this one in a cake walk.

8. Two slick fighters here. Fury is very impressive with his defensive moves and he is big. This would certainly go the distance and I think Fury would just barely get the nod.

9. Carlos Monzon is another fighter who sometimes is forgotten about how great he was. He lost his life at an early age but had a full boxing career. In 100 fights he lost just three times but had nine draws. 59 fights, more than half of his victories were by KO. Hagler? A beast. I think Marvin had the durablity and punching power to unseat Monzon from the victory circle. Either a TKO or a lopsided decision would go in favor of "Marvelous."

10. We have Duran again and Mayweather who one more time would be way overmatched. Duran would knock out Mayweather inside of five rounds.
1- Ali is too smart for Iron Mike
2- Ali is too fast for Rocky
3- Big George way too big for Mike
4- Robinson, all day
5- Marvin
6- I'd take Duran over any man who ever walked at 135 pounds
7- Floyd may Flummox Hearns for a while, but if Hearns hits him...
8- Fury by decision
9- Marvin, again
10- See #6
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$0.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top