100% this…
The fact that there is a Golfer but no Tennis players on that list speaks says a lot about it’s credibility or lack thereof.
I think there is also a programmed bias against Djokovic for a multitude of reasons. Had Federer stayed as the all time slam leader in the sport there is no doubt in my mind that he would have been included here.
Foreman is a way different puzzle than Joe Louis. Foreman was incredibly powerful and long, but not particularly technically proficient. He also likely beats Ali in a rematch. Foreman fought really stupidly.
Joe Louis is probably the most technical and complete heavyweight ever, and he had power.
I think Ray Robinson is pretty darned near the consensus best boxer. If not, he’s the closest thing to it.
Styles do make fights. That said, Joe Louis was so complete that he might beat everyone. Look at Jon Jones. He hasn’t been the victim of a certain style. We haven’t found a cryptonite for him. He has beaten everyone.
Switching gears a bit, I think Foreman beats Ali in a rematch, where he employs a little bit of pacing, intelligence, and strategy.
You’re definitely not alone in that. But if we refresh the context, OP’s list has Ali as the second greatest athlete of all-time when Ray Robinson is more often regarded as being a greater boxer, and Joe Louis can easily give Ali a run for his money in the GOAT heavyweight debate.
There hasn’t been a “kryptonite” for Jones because he spent years avoiding challenges at HW.
He didn’t look great at all vs Stipe, but he was fighting a 44 year old coming off a loss and a 2 year layoff.
I don’t like the Jones comparison.
Peak ability usually means you didn’t have wars and lose fights during your prime though, which is why I don’t think Ali fits that criteria. I think of like Anderson or BJ, who had some period of time where they were untouchable and miles ahead of their peers. I don’t think Ali ever had that. Hell, if we’re taking peak ability I think you have to consider putting Tyson over Ali. I probably would.
Oh I know, I just meant he created the blueprint of saying shit you don’t mean so you and your opponent both make as much money as possible that guys like Chael and Conner picked up later on to sell PPVs.
Rambling is what these threads are for lol
GOAT is a very nebulous term, so I certainly see how you get to a different conclusion than I would.
I don’t know about that.
I get that boxing has regressed technically, but it has progressed athletically.
Like I said, I have a very hard time believing that one HW could run the table vs all other great HWs, all things being equal.
There’s way too many great fighters with different strengths and styles.
At some point you’re gonna run into a problem you don’t solve.
Louis was not undefeated.
Maybe maybe not.
But he didn’t.
It’s the sweet science for a reason.
Again…
I think the HW title is the most prestigious title in combat sports, and that includes boxing.
I don’t think a 150lb fighter can be the greatest of all time.
He can be p4p considered the most skilled,
and he can certainly be among the greatest.
I’m my book the top HWs are always going to be top dog – especially when we’re talking about the arguable HW GOAT who made his career in arguably the best HW era.
I’m a big Tyson fan.
Nothing would have made me happier than if he had continued his peak run to become the arguable GOAT.
But that didn’t happen.
I do think that Tyson’s peak run gets underrated by hipsters who want to diminish that era and generally throw shade on greatness.
Tyson beat some very legit HWs, and did it in a way that has not been replicated.
But his peak was not in the most competitive era – and the era that followed saw Tyson as a shadow of his former self.
Even then he was able to win the title again, which is impressive in itself.
And yeah Ali had some wars, but look at those guys.
He also pretty much clowned Liston, who IMO tends to get overlooked.
Liston was a killer and a physical problem for anyone.
It would be very difficult to be “untouchable” in Ali’s era.
Who do you see accomplishing that?
Other than Marciano, nobody has really been “untouchable”.
I don’t think Foreman beats Ali if he gets a rematch back then. I think he needed the religious experience and time off to become the best version of himself, in addition to learning the cross guard from Archie.
I do wonder about the champion Foreman vs prime Ali though. I think that’s a hell of a fight.
I actually went and watched Foreman vs Ritch for the first time recently. I had avoided it because I knew George lost and then retired, I figured it was a sad performance that led him to retire. It was very much not that. His longevity and not only being the champ, but being able to compete with and beat the best guys 3 generations later is wild. He looked better in that fight than maybe any other fight in his career.
Danaher always talks about how impressive it was that Roger was not only the best during his run, but also came out of retirement to beat the best guy of the next generation. George did that but on a crazy different level.
I don’t know. But personally I can’t put a guy number one just because he happened to be in a tough era and he probably would have been far and away the goat.
I don’t hate him or think he sucks, although it may seem like that. It’s just when I look at his body of work I see a great fighter in an era of other great fighters, not someone in greatest territory.
Another big part for me is as a (former) fighter and current coach I’m obsessed with technical greatness and proficiency. Ali has some interesting meta strategies like the rope-a-dope but the idea of letting a big guy get tired so you could win later rounds wasn’t something he came up with. I never watch his fights and think “whoa that is a brilliant setup, let’s analyze what he was doing there” the way I do with guys like Moore, Frazier, Foreman.
Maybe I’m just biased to cross guard guys or something lol.
It also doesn’t help Ali that Norton is really underrated by most people.
Many people disagree with you, and even if we adopt your position on that for the sake of argument, there’s still Joe Lous. I think a lot of the modern guys, particularly the bigger ones would beat Ali. As mentioned earlier, aside from the official record, Norton bested Ali at least two out of their three matches.
I think the fact that the heavyweights got bigger hurts Ali more than Louis. Ali relied on his quick hands, and his quick feet and his great footwork. He’d still have that, but he wasn’t a technically complete fighter and he relied on being a relatively long heavyweight and a good sized heavyweight. He wouldn’t be as long or as big now, relatively speaking. Joe Louis would retain his technical mastery and his power.
He took on all comers at LHW. You just don’t like Jones.
I don’t either, but I can see past it.
205 was much deeper division during most of Jon’s run.
To my eyes if he’d have gone to HW earlier he would have looked to be running from better fighters to fight less technical slower guys.
and I respect that he fought all comers and didn’t do the thing they had Stipe do of fighting the same people over and over again.
He’s a decent example of a guy who doesn’t have losses because “styles make fights.” There are others.
Jones isn’t part of any “A beats B, B beats C, and C beats A” scenario. He beat them all, regardless of their style or their attributes.
as much as I hate him as a human, the fact that he was better than all of his opponents at every part of MMA is fucking astonishing.
The AI didn’t take into account his unbeaten record in domestic violence skirmishes
I hate him too. I think I rooted against him every time he fought. In hindsight I’m glad he beat DC, but that’s it 
