Who was worse off between Ali and Frazier

Ali was rusty going into their first fight. As we know,Joe won but that fight took more out of him than it did Muhammad. He went into a slow decline afterwards. Although Ali never quite regained his 1967 form,he did make up some lost ground between 1972-74. After that he went into his own slow descent.

 

I Also tend to think that Muhammed, After the Fight of The Century, Did not often show his True capabilities, Loafing around with Ellis, Mathis, Mac Foster Lubbers. Ect, The second Quarry Fight was a good hint of what he was truely capable of.

 

I think that the layoff did more damage to Ali than FOTC+George did do Frazier.

Ali never could quite dominate his opponents like he did pre-layoff. His second career would have been disastrous if it wasn't for his intelligence.

 

Frazier, due to the much greater amount of punishment he'd taken in tough fights ... also injuries, wear and tear, and probably health problems.

Frazier took a lot of punches in his short career.
Ali didn't really start absorbing punishment until the Bonavena fight.
Sure, the layoff hurt, but Frazier by '73 was worse off than Ali by '71.

 

i thought Joe looked great in the Stander fight but bloated in the Foreman fight. I may not have been conditioned right. age and peak quotient (I got that from KO mag) also play a factor

 

This, plus I totally agree with you. Pre 67 Ali could, and did dominate fights from start to finish. If he lost a round, it was because he just took
that round off, rather than the other guy was getting the better of him.

That rarely, if ever, happened post lay off. Unless of course it was against someone of the calibre of Desperate Dunn.

 

Fully agree with all of this. Along with the second Quarry fight,we can also add Norton II,Frazier II and the Foreman bouts to the equation.

Those fights were Ali at his post exile best.