Jemi7:


No try Phenom. Poe dey my Top 3 favorite rappers right now, you Don hear him latest Jam? Double money, sick jam

Aside phenom, these are my favorite rappers right now

Nasty C - this boy dey spit like say him never touch down Africa before

Poe

Dremo

Cassper Nyovest

Sauce kid aka sinzu (my realest nigga, bad bad rapper, he just got out of jail two days ago in the US)

Boogie (baddest underground rapper)

I dey gbadun yung6ix before but him tiny voice wey him dey form piss me off

Phenom too good Abeg. This him latest jam 4am at 4 point na mad jam.

jonsnow92:


As for the modern greatest list. In this particular order ill rate my top 3

Alli
Foreman
Tyson/Holmes

Holmes is my best heavyweight of all time. The complete package.

afrodoc2:
[/b]

You have a point there especially considering he was Ali's sparring partner for several years and learnt a lot from Ali. When Ali was old and slow he peppered his oga, although in his defence he did say he was begging Ali to quit during the fight. He was the master jabber and had a solid chin and the heart of a lion. His fight with Norton was like a life and death match.

As per the Ali/Foreman fight if you watch the old tapes and documentaries many journalists truly feared for Ali's life. They truly believed Foreman would kill him.
See what Foreman did to Frazier na, who wouldn't be afraid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zx9iSfRIFI

Na Howard Cossel commentary crazy pass..DOWN GOES FRAZIER, DOWN GOES FRAZIER..THE HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION IS TAKING THE MAN TO JURY EIGHT COUNT AND FOREMAN IS AS POISED AS CAN BE IN A NEUTRAL CORNER. Foreman was crazy though and it was because Alli beat him with a TKO, thats y Alli is the greatest in my mind.

As for Holmes, i don't really know if i should blame him,
He needed to leave Alli's shadow, cos no matter how good he was then, he just wasn't considered as good as ALLI. Even the fight posters had Alli vs Holmes, when traditionally its should be Holmes vs Alli cos Holmes was the Champion and Alli was the challenger. But Holmes should have taken it easy with Alli, The brutality was too much, I wasn't born when the fight happened but watching it years later self, i had tears in my eyes..Holmes na werey

Ibime:


Holmes is my best heavyweight of all time. The complete package.

OF all time?..Greater than Alli? Joe Louis? Sugar Ray Robinson? Jack Dempsey?..Even Mike Tyson?

jonsnow92:
OF all time?..Greater than Alli? Joe Louis? Sugar Ray Robinson? Jack Dempsey?..Even Mike Tyson?

In Bert Randolph Sugar's ranking he rated 1)Joe Luis 2)Ali eight)Foreman 9)Frazier 10)Holmes
The other guys in the top 10 were old timers like Rocky Marciano, Ezzard Charles, Gene Tunney e.t.c meaning for modern boxing he ranked Ali, Foreman, Frazier, then Holmes.

P.S Sugar Ray Robinson was not a heavy weight.

jonsnow92:
OF all time?..Greater than Alli? Joe Louis? Sugar Ray Robinson? Jack Dempsey?..Even Mike Tyson?

Sugar Ray was not a heavyweight.

Mike Tyson doesn't come into discussion.

Yes, I feel if you put all the greats in a league, Holmes would win the league as he was more complete with fewer weaknesses.

Holmes did not lose a fight till he was 36. He was 48-0 at that point.

Ibime:


Sugar Ray was not a heavyweight.

Mike Tyson doesn't come into discussion.

Yes, I feel if you put all the greats in a league, Holmes would win the league as he was more complete with fewer weaknesses.

Yeaah True, Ray wasn't a Heavy weight.

Holmes was very good in his own right but we can't particularly say he had fewer weaknesses.He fought during an era when the Golden generation were declining, infant i think the big names Holmes fought and won were 35 years old declining Norton, 40yrs Old finished Alli and maybe Earnie Shavers(that had nothing except his hard punching style)..I can say if he fought those golden generation guys in their prime, he wouldn't have been that good.

afrodoc2:


In Bert Randolph Sugar's ranking he rated 1)Joe Luis 2)Ali eight)Foreman 9)Frazier 10)Holmes
The other guys in the top 10 were old timers like Rocky Marciano, Ezzard Charles, Gene Tunney e.t.c meaning for modern boxing he ranked Ali, Foreman, Frazier, then Holmes.

P.S Sugar Ray Robinson was not a heavy weight.

Couldnt agree more with Berth with him long cigar, but Holmes ahead of Tyson? ...Hmm in their prime, i'll tilt towards Tyson.

jonsnow92:

Holmes was very good in his own right but we can't particularly say he had fewer weaknesses.He fought during an era when the Golden generation were declining, infant i think the big names Holmes fought and won were 35 years old declining Norton, 40yrs Old finished Alli and maybe Earnie Shavers(that had nothing except his hard punching style)..I can say if he fought those golden generation guys in their prime, he wouldn't have been that good.

I say the Golden generation (Norton, Frazier and Foreman) became golden because they beat Ali (or in Foremans case, he embarrassed the guys that beat Ali). Maybe they wouldn't become golden if they fought in Holmes era. Berbick, Shavers and Leon Spinks were no slouches but Holmes did not give them light to shine. Foreman is about the only guy from Ali era that I can confidently put money on beating Holmes, and even that is dicey cos Shavers hit harder than Foreman yet lost to Holmes.

jonsnow92:
Couldnt agree more with Berth with him long cigar, but Holmes ahead of Tyson? ...Hmm in their prime, i'll tilt towards Tyson.

Tyson will rank with Sonny Liston somewhere outside top 10.

jonsnow92:
Couldnt agree more with Berth with him long cigar, but Holmes ahead of Tyson? ...Hmm in their prime, i'll tilt towards Tyson.

Bert put Tyson at no 14. Points he made against Tyson were that he had just 5 years and he didn't do too well when he faced other greats.
Against Holmes he said Holmes did not face any greats in their prime and fought many also-rans. That was the same point made against Lennox who he said would be about 18 or 19.
One thing he weighed heavily was how you did against other greats in your era and your fighting ability as opposed to just W-L record.

Ibime:


I say the Golden generation (Norton, Frazier and Foreman) became golden because they beat Ali (or in Foremans case, he embarrassed the guys that beat Ali). Maybe they wouldn't become golden if they fought in Holmes era. Berbick, Shavers and Leon Spinks were no slouches but Holmes did not give them light to shine. Foreman is about the only guy from Ali era that I can confidently put money on beating Holmes, and even that is dicey cos Shavers hit harder than Foreman yet lost to Holmes.

Frazier and Foreman would have dominated any era had they not fought during Alli's, Frazier's only losses were against Alli and Foreman(2ce each), so its safe to say had he not fight those 2, he would have retired undefeated. So the same premise could be used for Holmes too cos he never fought any great.

No i don't think Shavers hit harder than George..And even if he did, Shavers was a relative nobody'' compared to other big names.He wasn't considered a big name during the Alli era and Holmes fought him when shavers was 34 self..

Also if Holmes was that good i think he should have climbed up the ranks fast enough, He didn't get his first chance at glory till he was 29, when all the other greats were finished..Also he lost all his comebacks too.

afrodoc2:


Bert put Tyson at no 14. Points he made against Tyson were that he had just 5 years and he didn't do too well when he faced other greats.
Against Holmes he said Holmes did not face any greats in their prime and fought many also-rans. That was the same point made against Lennox who he said would be about 18 or 19.
One thing he weighed heavily was how you did against other greats in your era and your fighting ability as opposed to just W-L record.

Hear Hear..Totally Agree.

Im talking about fighter for fighter..Holmes vs Tyson in their Prime.

jonsnow92:
Frazier and Foreman would have dominated any era had they not fought during Alli's, Frazier's only losses were against Alli and Foreman(2ce each), so its safe to say had he not fight those 2, he would have retired undefeated. So the same premise could be used for Holmes too cos he never fought any great.

No i don't think Shavers hit harder than George..And even if he did, Shavers was a relative nobody'' compared to other big names.He wasn't considered a big name during the Alli era and Holmes fought him when shavers was 34 self..

Also if Holmes was that good i think he should have climbed up the ranks fast enough, He didn't get his first chance at glory till he was 29, when all the other greats were finished..Also he lost all his comebacks too.

You are right on Holmes. Those guys clocked 34-38 and he suddenly catapulted to the top at 29. And all those Tim Witherspoon and Gerry Cooney that Holmes was beating would never have been legends in Ali's era. Holmes was great but no way would he have dominated the 70s.

On Ernie Shavers practically everybody that fought both Foreman and Shavers said Shavers hit harder. Shavers had 2 problems, he started boxing in his 20s and by the time he got title shots he was past 30 and he had a suspect chin himself. Nobody with a suspect chin could have become champion in the cutthroat field of the 70s.

jonsnow92:
Hear Hear..Totally Agree.

Im talking about fighter for fighter..Holmes vs Tyson in their Prime.

Hard to say. But remember Holmes had a solid chin, had tremendous reach advantage and was a better ring general than Tyson with greater endurance.
Tyson struggled against those that could take a punch and also move him around. The Holmes jab would be working all day to keep Tyson away but who knows a Tyson hook might reset his brain, lol.

If you move Ali, Foreman, Frazier into any era they will win titles and probably dominate.

This Weekend!!

Anthony Joshua fights Joseph Parker

Who's your favourite?

Click here to bet on your fighter ➡️ www.betdey.com/search/6/12431

afrodoc2:


*You are right on Holmes. Those guys clocked 34-38 and he suddenly catapulted to the top at 29. And all those Tim Witherspoon and Gerry Cooney that Holmes was beating would never have been legends in Ali's era. Holmes was great but no way would he have dominated the 70s.*

On Ernie Shavers practically everybody that fought both Foreman and Shavers said Shavers hit harder. Shavers had 2 problems, he started boxing in his 20s and by the time he got title shots he was past 30 and he had a suspect chin himself. Nobody with a suspect chin could have become champion in the cutthroat field of the 70s.

Exactly. Although all Great fighters pad states/numbers by fighting relatively Unknown people but these Golden guys fought great fighters as well..Fought hem a couple of times self. Holmes despite fighting Unknowns, he still couldn't rise up the ranks fast enough to fight any of them.

jonsnow92:

Also if Holmes was that good i think he should have climbed up the ranks fast enough, He didn't get his first chance at glory till he was 29, when all the other greats were finished..Also he lost all his comebacks too.

Holmes beat Norton while Norton was champ. Also Holmes wasn't a showman and wasn't an Olympian. These are the things that turn fighters into contenders at an early age. If you have no Olympic record, it will take you 7 years to reach where an Olympian will reach in 1 year. Also people will be ducking you as the fight money will not be enough to put themselves at such risk against you. Also Holmes didn't turn professional till 24. . . so he became World Champ in 5 years without Olympics. That's laudable.

Michael Spinks did not beat Holmes either. I think that was white mafia judges trying to stop Holmes from tying Marcianos record.

hensben:
Phenom too good Abeg. This him latest jam 4am at 4 point na mad jam.

I swear down

afrodoc2:


Bert put Tyson at no 14. Points he made against Tyson were that he had just 5 years and he didn't do too well when he faced other greats.
Against Holmes he said Holmes did not face any greats in their prime and fought many also-rans. That was the same point made against Lennox who he said would be about 18 or 19.
One thing he weighed heavily was how you did against other greats in your era and your fighting ability as opposed to just W-L record.

I think that ranking was being unfair to Tyson, Very few champs were as dominant at their peak like Iron Mike. His trade mark was ending fights n record time that should count for a lot. He was one of the fiercest hitters in the game. He was sent to jail at 25yrs his peak.

In my lifetime Tyson is my best heavyweight and most explosive boxer, I dont really care about all those Hollyfield and Lewis type boxers who will spend 80% of their fight hugging and romancing the opponent


https://www.nairaland.com/182880/greatest-boxer-all-time-tyson

Ibime:


Holmes beat Norton while Norton was champ. Also Holmes wasn't a showman and wasn't an Olympian. These are the things that turn fighters into contenders at an early age. If you have no Olympic record, it will take you 7 years to reach where an Olympian will reach in 1 year. Also people will be ducking you as the fight money will not be enough to put themselves at such risk against you. Also Holmes didn't turn professional till 24. . . so he became World Champ in 5 years without Olympics. That's laudable.

Michael Spinks did not beat Holmes either. I think that was white mafia judges trying to stop Holmes from tying Marcianos record.

He beat a 35yr old Norton who's seen better years.. Also as regards the Olympic path to stardom, Holmes lost his olympic trials too, so it wasn't as though he didn't want to follow the olympics path, he tried and failed.Whereas been a Champ in 5yrs of turning Pro is laudable, It still doesn't take away the fact that Holmes never fought any Great.

As for the 49th fight, I also believe He won that bout and was robbed.

afrodoc2:


Hard to say. But remember Holmes had a solid chin, had tremendous reach advantage and was a better ring general than Tyson with greater endurance.
Tyson struggled against those that could take a punch and also move him around. The Holmes jab would be working all day to keep Tyson away but who knows a Tyson hook might reset his brain, lol.

If you move Ali, Foreman, Frazier into any era they will win titles and probably dominate.

Controversial talk. Prime Tyson would have KILLED any of those 3.

20 year old Tyson would have Killed Mohammed Ali. I would bet both my testicles on it.

raumdeuter:


I think that ranking was being unfair to Tyson, Very few champs were as dominant at their peak like Iron Mike. His trade mark was ending fights n record time that should count for a lot. He was one of the fiercest hitters in the game. He was sent to jail at 25yrs his peak.

In my lifetime Tyson is my best heavyweight and most explosive boxer, I dont really care about all those Hollyfield and Lewis type boxers who will spend 80% of their fight hugging and romancing the opponent


https://www.nairaland.com/182880/greatest-boxer-all-time-tyson

Almost everybody on that thread agreed agreed that Tyson was well below Ali, apart from Coogar who often argued authoritatively about things he knew nothing about.
I only have one question: Have you watched the full fights of the greats from the 70s? See, Tyson would have been at best no 4 behind Ali, Foreman, Frazier. Tyson had power but Foreman had more power, Shavers had more power, Ron Lyle and Frazier were close. The difference was that most of them also had strong chins.

Tyson ran through a weakend division. The guys he beat did not accomplish anything legendary before or after Tyson and whenever he met another great he struggled. 1980's heavyweight boxing was not great, the 80s belonged to the welterweights and middleweights.
Foreman came out of retirement after being an actor and a pastor and was running through them also in his 40s and none of them could knock him out the way Ali did when he (Foreman) was in his prime.

Nihilstjnr:


Controversial talk. Prime Tyson would have KILLED any of those 3.

20 year old Tyson would have Killed Mohammed Ali. I would bet both my testicles on it.

Your opinion, your very very wrong and isolated opinion. You will just be a eunuch for nothing, Tyson no send you reach that level o.

There is no controvery in this, all the reknowned analysts and historians like Bert Sugar, Bill Cayton, Al Bernstein, Max Kellerman place Tyson several rungs below Ali. Only people that grew up watching Tyson or heard of him and didn't educate themselves about other eras rate Tyson higher than Ali.

When you talk of the strongest chins in history you are talking about George Chuvalo, Ali e.t.c. Nobody ever knocked down Chuvalo and nobody ever knocked out a prime Ali.

raumdeuter:


I think that ranking was being unfair to Tyson, Very few champs were as dominant at their peak like Iron Mike. His trade mark was ending fights n record time that should count for a lot. He was one of the fiercest hitters in the game. He was sent to jail at 25yrs his peak.

In my lifetime Tyson is my best heavyweight and most explosive boxer, I dont really care about all those Hollyfield and Lewis type boxers who will spend 80% of their fight hugging and romancing the opponent


https://www.nairaland.com/182880/greatest-boxer-all-time-tyson

Thank you.

In terms of explosive punching and technique, I have never seen a heavyweight boxer fight like Iron Mike.

I used to watch his old training videos and interviews with cus damato all the time.

Iron Mike's footwork alone was ridiculous.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_kbC36JESs

A heavyweight that moved like a featherweight.

If you appreciate the technicalities of boxing, especially as a person who has ever entered a ring, you will realise how this guy's technicality was almost supernatural

afrodoc2:


Your opinion, your very very wrong and isolated opinion. You will just be a eunuch for nothing, Tyson no send you reach that level o.

There is no controvery in this, all the reknowned analysts and historians like Bert Sugar, Bill Cayton, Al Bernstein, Max Kellerman place Tyson several rungs below Ali. Only people that grew up watching Tyson or heard of him and didn't educate themselves about other eras rate Tyson higher than Ali.

When you talk of the strongest chins in history you are talking about George Chuvalo, Ali e.t.c. Nobody ever knocked down Chuvalo and nobody ever knocked out a prime Ali.

Ali never faced anybody with Tyson's ability or destructive power.

For example, I'm confident that if it was Tyson Ali tried that Rope-a-dope move with, he would have left the ring in a bodybag, because he would have several broken ribs piercing internal organs.

There has been nobody has quick and as explosive as 1988 Iron Mike in the history of heavyweight boxing. Ali lost to an inside fighter like Joe Frazier. Mike Tyson was the ultimate inside fighter. Not only could he unload those deadly hooks and uppercuts, his defence game in that era was ridiculous. You couldnt even touch the man.

Tyson would have body bagged Ali. No doubt

Nihilstjnr:


Ali never faced anybody with Tyson's ability or destructive power.

For example, I'm confident that if it was Tyson Ali tried that Rope-a-dope move with, he would have left the ring in a bodybag, because he would have several broken ribs piercing internal organs.

There has been nobody has quick and as explosive as 1988 Iron Mike in the history of heavyweight boxing. Ali lost to an inside fighter like Joe Frazier. Mike Tyson was the ultimate inside fighter. Not only could he unload those deadly hooks and uppercuts, his defence game in that era was ridiculous. You couldnt even touch the man.

Tyson would have body bagged Ali. No doubt

Who were the great fighers that Tyson met? How many of them did he beat?
I appreciate the video showing the no-name opponents. Tyson did not have Foreman's punching power and he had great defence i agree but his chin was not superb, he was doing all that showboating against non-name opponents with puff puff punches.
Foreman for sure would have rocked Tyson's world. He had more power and a stronger chin.

afrodoc2:


Who were the great fighers that Tyson met? How many of them did he beat?
I appreciate the video showing the no-name opponents. Tyson did not have Foreman's punching power and he had great defence i agree but his chin was not superb, he was doing all that showboating against non-name opponents with puff puff punches.
Foreman for sure would have rocked Tyson's world. He had more power and a stronger chin.

1988 Tyson that beat both Spinks and Larry Holmes would have killed any goddam person.

I'm telling you this as someone who has worn gloves at least once.

That Ali style of Dancing around while Jabbing from range does not work on dogged inside fighters. We saw how Frazier beat Ali almost within an inch of his life TWICE. Tyson was Frazier on steroids.

1988 Tyson's defence was so hard that you just knew that there was no way you could land a punch without chopping two body shots in quick return.

88 Tyson was GOD

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.
Ring magazine has Tyson at no 9, Sports illustrated does not have him in top 10, Bert Sugar has him at 14. All rank him much below Ali.

afrodoc2:

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.
Ring magazine has Tyson at no 9, Sports illustrated does not have him in top 10, Bert Sugar has him at 14. All rank him much below Ali.

Those guys are comparing Legacies, not pitting two fighters against each other.

Obviously Ali will have the greater Legacy because of the the fighters he fought in his era, what he acheieved and his status as a cultural icon.

But if they bring Prime Ali vs Prime Tyson, nothing like rope-a-dope, or sting like a butterfly nonsense. Tyson would beat Ali back into reclaiming Cassius Clay

Nihilstjnr:


1988 Tyson that beat both Spinks and Larry Holmes would have killed any goddam person.

I'm telling you this as someone who has worn gloves at least once.

That Ali style of Dancing around while Jabbing from range does not work on dogged inside fighters. We saw how Frazier beat Ali almost within an inch of his life TWICE. Tyson was Frazier on steroids.

1988 Tyson's defence was so hard that you just knew that there was no way you could land a punch without chopping two body shots in quick return.

88 Tyson was GOD

Larry Holmes was 39yrs old and way way past his prime, Michael Spinks was a barely decent heavyweight in a poor quality era where Witherspoon, Bonecrusher Smith, Fat Trevor Berbick and co were champions.
First time Tyson met quality he folded. When Stoke face York city you think dey sabi but when they face Real Madrid you know say shoe get size. Tyson beat some decent fighters and lots of bums, at the first sign of adversity and legendary quality he folded like a canopy.

You were at best an amateur boxer. Hall of fame heavyweight champions, Hall of fame analysts and journalists all agree that Ali was better than Tyson, put some respek on Cassius Clay's name.

Nihilstjnr:


Those guys are comparing Legacies, not pitting two fighters against each other.

Obviously Ali will have the greater Legacy because of the the fighters he fought in his era, what he acheieved and his status as a cultural icon.

But if they bring Prime Ali vs Prime Tyson, nothing like rope-a-dope, or sting like a butterfly nonsense. Tyson would beat Ali back into reclaiming Cassius Clay

They were not comparing legacy. They were comparing prime quality to prime quality in a fight. Wetin concern such boxing purists with legacy when judging best heavyweight, most powerful punch e.t.c? It was explicitly stated that they were comparing prime quality for prime quality.

Tyson was great against bums and decent fighters, but let it not be like i am running the great man down. He was great but definitely not number1, 2 or even 3.
Please you have not answered. Which great fighter did Tyson beat in that fighter's prime?