How was ALi viewed by press and critics in 1967 as a fighter ?

jokes aside, senor pepe should be able to shed some light on the topic

 

:deal

Where are you Senor Pepe ??

 

Nat Fleischer, a man who might generally be expected to favor old timers, asserted that in his opinion, Muhammad Ali was the fastest heavyweight of all time. He was ringside for Johnson-Jeffries, Dempsey-Willard, Louis-Max Baer, Louis-Schmeling II, and all of Patterson's title fights, so this is imposing testimony.

As of 1969 though, Fleischer also stated, in a voice over comment recorded for the Woroner staged Marciano-Ali superfight, that in his opinion Ali had not yet proved he was a great fighter. Indeed, in the minds of many, Muhammad would not prove his greatness until getting up in the final round of the FOTC made him a legend. His reputation for toughness had yet to really be established before the 1970s, and he was over eight years away from the ridiculous punch rate he produced in Manila. However, the supremacy of his combined hand and foot speed over that of all HW predecessors does not seem to have been questioned.

 

I have entered this thread,,,,,,,,,,,,

1967, viewed as a fighter.

That may be difficult, because many in the press and critics alike had strong views
about his military situation.

But that aside, many did agree that he was a fantastic fighter with superior
skills over his contemporaries.

Of course, the biggest question, was his ability to take a punch. Since no one
had really laid a glove on him, many said he had no heart. Which asks the question,
should he have let someone belt him in the chin, to prove to some boxing
pundit or critic that he could take a punch. Of course that made no sense.

The 'old school' boxing writers didn't like his showboating and rude treatment
of other fighters. The younger group of sports writers loved him, as he
injected life into boxing.

Sports Illustrated was pretty much in the middle,,,,as they were balanced in
there articles. They did not criticize Muhammad Ali, but focused more on
the ineptness of his opponents.

When the magazine was looking for possible Ali challengers, it always went back to
Jack Dempsey, Joe Louis and Rocky Marciano, as fighters who would have
beaten Ali.

 

look at my avatar re zora folley victory in 1967.

 

It was only after Muhammad had beaten George Foreman that he was recognised as,arguably,the G.O.A.T. In '67 he was probably looked upon as top 5.

 

By `67 everyone acknowledged he had great talent speed and size etc. As stated before could he take a punch?

The Liston fights had a stink around them that turned the public off to him.

When the only thing you can say about a fighter is can he take a punch? He must be pretty damn good.

Ali did defy the basics and that drove alot of boxing purists crazy. He pulled back from punches, held his hands at his waist and never really threw any body punches. He didnt fight inside at all and moved like a middleweight.

It was something never seen before in a man this size. Even the boxing fans that didnt like him knew that they were seeiing something special.

 

Not sure on that, I was reading ring Mag from a 1960's of Ali vs the all time greats.

It had Ali loseing to most of em as Marciano, Louis, Dempsey, Johnson, and a few others as victors over Ali.

I didnt think Ali crack most people's top 5 in the 60's imo.

 

If the opinions of former heavyweight champions are to be valued, he was generally rated pretty high ...

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...q=former+champions+have+different+views&hl=en



As of February 1967, Dempsey actually expected Ali to reign for another 8 or 9 years and retire unbeaten ...

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AAAAIBAJ&pg=780,1674199&dq=dempsey+clay&hl=en

 

There were actually some rumblings that he had the potential to be the greatest ever.

He went on to prove it when he returned from retirement without many of the tools that made his so amazing in the first place.

 

As early as 1964 Ali was popular in the UK. Maybe it was the excitement that he was the first HW champion to defend the title in England since Tommy Burns but they truly recognised him as a great champion by 1967.

 

Not all were impressed with Muhammad Ali,,,,,,

Even Ring Magazine was not convinced in his wins over Sonny Liston, and
his victory over Floyd Patterson was tainted, as Floyd had an injured back.

Ring had viewed that an Ali vs. Patterson II bout would answer all questions,
providing Patterson was 100%.

Ali and Patterson had a tentative date for a bout in January 1967.

 

great stuff Legend :good yes i heard that ali was highly rated in Britain. They refused Marciano winning that undefeated heavyweight champions computer fight and they had Ali winning.