The Fight Of The Century was the best of the Ali-Fraizer trilogy

Regardless of the clinching,on the criteria of their three fights with each other,I see Muhammad as being at HIS best in their second fight. Just as fast as he was in the first one but sharper and in better shape. He was as near as he could get to his sixties best during this phase of his career.

 

FOTC was the best. I didnt even think the Thrilla was that close. Frazier had a few good rounds mid fight but it was clear he had less left in the tank than Ali. The second fight sucked and should have been a draw or a DQ for Frazier. How you let a guy ruin a fight with so much incessant clinching is beyond me and how that guy is judged a "winner" is equally mystifying.

 

The full grown adult FOTC version of Ali was not going to get knocked down the likes of Sonny Banks and Henry Cooper. Frazier would have been even more deadly against the pre-layoff version.

 

FOTC was the best, both men were the closest to their primes and ready and fit

a lot of people like to undermine this fight because Ali lost but this was the greatest of all 3 and Ali's biggest fight

 

I think you are correct here...Ali was stronger,rested and more mature physically....that Frazier was a beast and never quite the same, I dont know if it was because Joe became an overnight sensation? or because of the girls,booze, etc. that came with it. Also Joe had a singing group and because of this win got jobs in clubs more because of who he was then because of musical talent

 

I agree the first of the three bouts between Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier was the best one, but the third one was the worst because Ali to permitted to hold excessively in it.

- Chuck Johnston

 

Prob because Ali was robbed in the first fight clearly.

Ali is 3-0/vs joe

 

The FOTC was better in terms of build up, conditioning of the fighters, and the action.

 

There's a reason why only one of their fights was known as The Fight of the Century. It was arguably the biggest fight ever, the first time two unbeaten heavyweight champions had met, the one where both men were nearest to their best, and it actually lived up to all the hype.

Both men were well diminished by the time they got to Manila. No one thought Frazier had that much fight left in him, though it was still a great fight. I imagine the FOTC gets ignored/underrated in some quarters because Ali lost.

 

You know it's funny, although Ali takes the series 2-1, Joe definitley benefited more from the trilogy. Well to me anyway. I've never really given Ali that much credit for his victories over Frazier, which is probably downplaying Ali, but I can't help the way I feel.

 

My $0.02?
I'll number my comments. Not being arrogant since many on board have more knowledge than me.
1) The FOTC was THE best. Posters too young to appreciate the buildup to this one were denied a true boxing moment. As a senior in HS, its ALL we talked about in the hallways the whole day; it was fought on a Tuesday nite by the way, something the money-grubbing system would never go with at present.
2) I loved Ali but, for those who think he won, 'bullocks' as the Brits say. It was round per round scoring but the 15th cemented it for Joe not to mention the 11th which may have been an even better round for Joe. To the great Joe's credit, he laid it ALL out that night which, basically, ended his dominant career.
3) To give Ali credit, against his camp's urging, he fought Joe a scant 80-90 days after Bonavena. Had they waited until early summer we might have had a different result.
4) Second fight? Yes, Ali hit him in the 2nd but, for the most part, Ali held Joe behind the head throughout the fight.
5) Manilla? A great fight BUT...two fighters well past prime and you have to take that into consideration in calling it one of the all-time great fights.

 

I think the following is a most succinct way of putting this particular fight in it's proper perspective.