Does anyone believe Fraziers greatness took a hit with his losses to Foreman?

Frazier is a little overrated

 

That same logic applies to Foreman, if Frazier wasn't good enough to win the title from Ali, we never would have heard of him.

I don't have access to those ratings, I guess I just have to trust you on this. However, Frazier's ranking status wasn't the one in question. Where exactly were Pires and Paez on those lists? Top 30? Is that enough for Foreman to be highly rated like that? I certainly don't think so.

 

You tell me?
Ali was not allowed to fight from March 1967 until October 1970 .
So realistically its 62-66
Johannson
Machen
Cleroux
Lincoln
Spencer
Persol
Hilton
Rischer
Johannson retired in April 63 so he wasnt really on the radar.


Machen drew with Williams in 62 he could have been an opponent, but didnt fight a rated opponent for 2 years [64] losing to both Patterson and Terrell.Machen was no6 at the end of 63 and no 9 end of 64.The most likely candidate imo.

Cleroux? Briefly rated in62 but lost to Folley and DeJohn that year and tumbled further when Folley beat him again in 63.

Lincoln? No 6 at end of 65 but lost to Machen that year and was kod by Wiliams in 63 never rated again.

Spencer? No 7 end of 65 no 3 in 66 Ali defended against Liston in and Patterson in 65.In 66 Ali defended against Chuvalo,Cooper London,MIldenberger and Williams. Spencer lost to Lincoln in 65 and to McMurray in 66 but could have been a possible foe if they could have sold it to the public..

Persol had only fought 2 heavies then he was banged out in one round by Ali's sparring partner Ellis , he was only in the ratings at the end of 66 ,[no 9 ,] a non-runner.

Hilton? Rated at no 9 near the end of 65 then lost to unranked Davila ,beginning of 66 kod by Cooper and lost to Ellis.Another non runner.

Rischer? Lost to Machen in 62 kod by Williams63 lost to London and Spencer 65.Very Briefly rated no8 end of 64 after upsetting Cooper .
Not a viable opponent.

Eight names but only one realistic opponent Eddie Machen , imo.

That's one against twenty one.:think

 

Yes, Ali's record is better than Frazier's. Thanks, mine was a genuine question to get context of what 21 missed contenders means, :good

But why have you bothered to go through that process of elimination for Ali's 'missed opponents' but you just leave Frazier with the maximum starting number of 21 ?

Surely you could get rid of some of those names on Frazier's for the same reason Ali not fighting Hubert Hilton doesn't really matter.

 

Do I have to fight both sides of the argument? Surely its for you to make the case about who isnt eligible? It was worthwhile in one sense because it confirmed what I thought , and it also posed the intruiging question of how would Ali have done with Machen in the early 60s?

This whole scenario would not have taken place if the words, Frazier and cleaned out the division had not been typed.atsch

 

I didn't realise the point of discussion was to just take one side of an argument and twist the information to make a point. You seem to be saying applying the double-standard is the right way to make a point. I prefer it if everyone at least tries to find a fair and balanced way of arguing their side. I feel it's more productive.
Besides, it's a waste of time to argue and explain why Frazier not fighting Amos Lincoln or Eduardo Corletti isn't a big deal.

I agree that he didn't.
But he almost did.

 

Joe Frazier cleaned out the biggest names that counted from 1968-1972.
It is three years as a great fighter where he matched any champion in history in terms of cleaning out over that kind of time scale.

Mike Tyson

Rocky Marciano

Both had the same level of key wins.

George Foreman

Riddick Bowe

Joe Frazier possibly surpassed their kind of domination.

 

Is any of the conformation I just provided untrue? Surely it is for you to make your case not me?

 

.


Let's look at this statement
Frazier fought
1968
Mathis .Unranked
Ramos Ranked,[ on the basis of beating 1 ranked fighter Terrell who had been ruined by Ali. Ramos was a hyped false alarm. Terell had just been trounced by Thad Spencer and had lost his last 2 fights..Ramos beat one nobody after losing to Frazier then was stopped in 5 by Chuvalo.]He had 27 more fights after being sacrificed to Frazier, winning 4 and being stopped 8 times.
Bonavena ranked.

1969
Zyglewiscz Unranked
Quarry Ranked

1970
Ellis Ranked
Foster Unranked

1971
Ali Ranked

1972
Daniels Unranked
Stander Unranked
10 opponents 5 ranked, 5 unranked.

 

It's completely irrelevant if he deserved to be ranked or not, what does matter is that he was, pretty high I might add. Bonavena, Quarry, Ellis and Ali were the biggest names of that time period, they're not many but there's no way you can't dispute the fact that Frazier beat the biggest names of that period, the number being irrelevant.

 

What we have is a total of ten fights in four years, with only five of those being ranked that's 50%.
Those not included in what is your time scale are
Liston
Lewis
Martin
Patterson
Foster
Jones
Cooper
Peralta
Urtain
Garcia
Bodell
Norton
Lyle
Terrell
Roman.

I've excluded Bugner because he did face him later.

 

He fought the biggest names and the best of those times, period. All those names, they were either past their best or still underachievers. Why do you keep mention those names as if there was anyone on that list, in that time period, better than Bonavena, Quarry, Ellis or Ali.

 

No, not me. Got better ways to waste time here than explaining why Joe Frazier didn't need to beat Jose Urtain and the like to 'clean out the division'.

I already made my case a few pages back. If Frazier had beat Foreman in '71 or '72 then we could say he cleaned out the division. But he didn't.

 

I mention them because they were all rated contenders during that time scale .
ALL RATED CONTENDERS THAT FRAZIER DID NOT FIGHT, SO HE DEMONSTRABLY DID NOT CLEAN OUT HIS DIVISION .
It should not be too hard to grasp.atsch