Ali v Foreman eliminator to fight Frazier 1972, does it change history?

I totally agree the improvement since his Bonavena fight was palpable.

 

***

 

And thank you for giving me something worth playing off of. I don't create threads, being strictly a reactive poster, and I prize thought provoking disagreements which often change my opinions. Not having the powerful thick skinned self assurance of a published source historian and dissector like Springs Toledo or Steve Compton, I'm also corrupt enough to be embarrassingly susceptible to flattery, so I thank you for yours. (The true Golden Rule that what one does to one side of the equation must be balanced on the other side, so I remain conversely subject to negative feedback in identical measure.)

Extending what Rudyard Kipling wrote in his 1910 classic poem, "If," when I can treat Praise and Criticism as dual imposters like,

"Triumph and Disaster, and treat those two imposters just the same:,"

-perhaps I'll finally be on my way to what he described as authentic manhood sometime within my lifetime.

Meanwhile, generous words, however brief, do help sustain my motivation to continue towards that goal in the meantime.

 

Dubblechin beat me to it. Lunberjacking-developed tensile strength, Archimedes, quadratic equations, Kipling accidentally recapitulating Buddhist Philosophy...
We need more of this kind of poetical intellectual rigor!

kewep it up Anubis, & please explain the inspiration for your moniker.

 

I've posted under a few pseudonyms on this site going back to my initial activity here in April 2007 (never as the result of any ban, but merely wanting to see if like Stephen King as Richard Bachman, I could recreate myself without being recognized under my former user names, to gauge whether I was making any progress in my posting evolution.

Anubis happened to be my favorite visual character in ancient Egyptian theology while growing up. (My father was born and grew up in the aftermath of Tutankhamen's tomb discovery, so like many children of the era between world wars, it was his childhood dream to become an archaeologist. While I never shared his fantasy, he certainly passed his own childhood interest onto me.)

While this very long ago ceased being a primary site for me to post at, you can see I've contributed once in a while since creating my Anubis account in April 2008, and although I've very long since moved on, it's interesting from time to time to return, see how things have changed here, and even occasionally post for nostalgia's sake if the spirit puts me in the mood. (Normally though, I only lurk without signing in.)


Here's what I posted just over three years ago under my now extinct best known pseudonym about making mention of Kipling as it pertains to boxing:

http://www.boxingforum24.com/showpost.php?p=8638738&postcount=19

Not only do I make reference to "If" by Kipling (a framed copy from 1910 which hangs in the wall of my bathroom and has since the 1990s), but this classic literature lead off an online profile article about Max, then in his early 90s.

The nonagenarian, dignified, intelligent and highly literate Schmeling was very well aware of Rudyard Kipling of course, had seen that cyberspace tribute when it was brought to his attention (there was a photograph of him with a humbled, or perhaps slightly embarrassed smile, as he held up the printed page with Kipling's poem leading off that story about him), and was reportedly very deeply touched that late within his lifetime, others in America would choose to go on the internet and apply what Kipling (who lived to see the German's complete reign as heavyweight champion) had written about what it meant to truly be a man about Max himself.

Flattered or slightly embarrassed, I'm glad Max Schmeling knew within his lifetime how much he meant to people around the globe who knew, fully appreciated, and had come to discover and love what he truly was as Kipling defined it.

Posts #36 to #43 on the following page from Halloween 2011 contain some of the weirdest reply exchanges involving fun I ever had with my Anubis pseudonym. I plummet to the floor of the Mariana's Trench with post #40.

http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=354209&page=3

Mcvey and I are vehemently opposed on most boxing related subjects (however, when we do agree, watch out!), but that's never interfered with or compromised how much fun we've been able to have in humorous exchanges over the years with my various guises (many which he'll never suspect were me, as I'm secretive about much of it).

Now here's the widely flattered avatar I used for this account while avatars were still allowed here:

http://pic.pilpix.com/9/9364/anubis-god-of-the-underworld.jpg

 

People think because Ali upset Foreman under adverse conditions in Zaire, that it would always be that way between them. It takes a trilogy to sort things out sometimes, unless the first two fights are blow-outs. I don't consider Zaire a blow-out. To say that Foreman never had a chance at beating Ali isn't being realistic. That was Ali's greatest night, and one of George's worst in terms of fight plan and things going against him such as the wrath of a whole nation and an only partially healed cut. Ali would have been at very high risk in any fight against George, at any point in their careers.

 

Not prime Ali.

 

For me Ali's win in Zaire is very comprehensible since he beat George at his own game. Foreman showed that he couldn't compete even when he had Ali right where he wanted him.

Forget about the heat and Foreman's fatigue - he hardly won a round even when he was fresh. Well, I suppose you could give him rd 2 if you score highly for aggression, but even in that one Ali was landing the cleaner blows. You could also score rd 5 for George for doing the majority of the work through the round, but it was still Ali who did the most damage when he crashed home clean power punches during the last 30 second of the round.

Ali landed the more telling blows and did more damage in every round, while George wasted too much energy on hitting arms, elbows and air. That pattern was obvious from the start and would be the same under any conditions.

All through the fight it was clear that Ali could land his straight punches in between Foreman's swings almost at will due to superior technique, timing and speed. And Foreman couldn't surprise Ali with anything, so even when he landed big blows Ali managed to brace himself or ride with them.

Thats why I can't see that George really has the tools. He has power and strength but preciously little that can throw Ali off. If he manages to cut the ring off, Ali can still do what he did in Zaire. Even with a normal temperature and humidity Ali would outland Foreman and bust his face up, since he obviously could land straight punches with ease in between Foreman's swings. He'd either score a late stoppage or win by points.

 

Here is one possible scenario.

Say Ali beats Foreman in 1972 (plausible), then looses the rematch to Frazier by a narrow margin (also plausible).

That could make Frazier's position unassailable for a couple of years.

In that situation we could see some downright bizarre counterfactuals.

 

True.

And let's say Joe retires after that. Surely he'd be in contention with Joe Louis as the GOAT.

And as for Ali's continued career... Who would he face for the vacant title? Norton would probably be the only one that would be a series threat to him, so he still would have an excellent chance of regaining the title, but it wouldn't at all be the same as Zaire.

 

I tend to think that Ali was always going to outlast Frazier, and possible Foreman as well.

Of course he doesn't have to come out of this as the consensus GOAT!

 

Assessment spot on as always.

 

No. In this scenario I think most would be divided between either Louis for his long period of dominance and Frazier for his shorter but just about perfect reign.

The opinion of Ali's place would probably be hotly disputed. He'd probably be quite like Tyson in that some would say he was unbeatable in his prime and would be the GOAT if it wasn't cut short, and others would say that he was somewhat exposed when he stepped up in competition. But he'd probably be higher ranked than Tyson by most since he never lost during his prime and still would have wins over Liston and all other notable contemporaries except Frazier.

 

:good