AJ says prime Mike Tyson beats a prime Ali

How would he avoid it? He was near prime for the 1st fight and couldn't avoid it. Sure he wasn't prime, but I don't think the difference between a '71 Ali and a '67 Ali is enough to go from losing to not even being in a tough fight.

 

Because Ali had three years off, lost his speed and compensated for this by being on the ropes and absorbing punishment which made him a sitting duck for Frazier who fought very well on the inside. Even then, he still won two out of three times and only really lost the first fight because of ring rust.
If they'd fought earlier it would have been a very different fight

So? Tyson Fury fought basically nobody when he upset Klitschko, but he still upset him. Just because Frazier was better than most of Ali's opponents doesn't mean Frazier would have steamrolled him

 

to be fair Joe Frazier was Ali's toughest fight & Mike has that style

Mike Tyson couldn't keep that up for 12 rounds or have the heart of Frazier

Ali would beat Mike Tyson late fight.

Ali would not go into that fight mentally defeated like most of the men who fought Tyson.

Why do you think Otto Wallin did well against Tyson Fury? one of the reasons was simply he wasn't intimidated by him it's a big deal in boxing...

Ali would take Mike Tyson deep and drown him like he did against Foreman.

 

Are you serious? There's a huge difference between a prime fighter who fought regularly and was in or about to enter his best years physically as an athlete, and a fighter who hadn't fought in three years and had two tune up fights. The Ali in '71 was totally different to the Ali in '67

 

I would favor Mike. But, remember there were guys like Quick Tillis who gave Mike trouble. If Quick Tillis can give him trouble, then Ali winning is nothing crazy.

 

Ali would not have casually stood in front of Tyson like he did v Cooper and he didn`t in the rematch which is how he would have fought Tyson, with far more mobility, he was in pretty bad shape by rd 15 against Frazier, early on against Tyson he`d be far sharper than that, the first Frazier fight wasn`t Ali at his best, watch how many hooks he threw in the rematch, those hooks may have kept Tyson off him, they were fast and thrown everytime Frazier got inside, he was in better shape during that rematch, having said that Mike had better fundamentals.

 

Foreman weighed 220 v Ali when Muhammad weighed 216 in Zaire.

 

Debatable. ShovelHook does have a point about Ali fighting smaller guys and Tyson fighting bigger guys. All the guys that beat Tyson, except for Holyfield, were heavier than him. Ali could probably stick behind his jab and keep Tyson at bay but Ali was not a powerful puncher. If Ali kept hitting you he could hurt you, but his single punch power was not remarkable in of itself. Tyson, on the other hand, was used to knocking out bigger guys with his punch power. Prime Tyson was also pretty quick. He could weave around Ali's jab, as he did to Holmes, and land a few good shots of his own.

I never said that Ali declined, merely that increased age and loss of speed meant a change in tactics. He could still dance for a bit, and would at end of rounds to pick up the points. But generally speaking, he'd rope-a-dope his opponents and let them wear themselves out. He said he was going to dance around Foreman but he ended up doing just the opposite

The full effect of three years of Fury's booze and drug addiction have yet to be seen because Fury's yet to fight an opponent who can really bring it out of him. But we have seen the effect on his metabolism. Fury was something like 247lbs fighting Klitschko. Since he's been back he's never been under 255 and says he felt sluggish fighting Wallin at 256.

Three years completely out of the ring is an insurmountable hill to climb for most fighters. Ali made it look easy. Most fighters can't cope with that long a period of inactivity and a lot of the critics and commentators thought Ali would never win a title again until he upset Foreman.
For comparison, look at Mike. Yeah he was declining a bit before he went to jail, but three years in jail and four years total out of the ring meant he was never going to be the same again

 

Olu thinks its disrespectful, that's how bad its got. Two fighters weighing the same, both the best of their time at the weight and its disrespectful ???? Boxing snobbery at its best, I don't think ive ever seen a better example, its pathetic and stupid..I think its men that are uncomfortable with themselves, seriously

 

I agree they were different versions of Ali, but the difference was not profound enough to turn a clear loss into a clear victory. Ali might've defeated Frazier and I'd probably favor him to do so! But to say it would be easy is laughable, and reeks of fanboyism.

 

This content is protected

 

You are correct that some will not seem things objectively due to hero woshipping.
But you know enough about boxing that you also betray some bias here.

His werigh did not change much-but as they said before FOTC it was "redistributed" upwards.
What he lost was legs & mainly foot speed: & endurance to dance & move for 15 rounds.
Of course his style changed-it is easy to see he would clinch & go to the ropes much more due to his limitations.

Ring rust is also not nonsense-2 fights after a complete lay off for so long was not enough to be ideal to face Joe Frazier.
Most all experts see that. And it is in part proved because despite all the damage absorbed in FOTC, his best performances followed that bout, 1972-1974-when he had many other bouts to tune him up & test him.

He did try, by necessity, a more limited version of rope a dope against the tireless Frazier even in the first fight. By necessity.
I do not think prime Ali would have a cakewalk against Frazier.
But I think he would absorb less punishment due to his greater speed & endurance, & if they fought 100 times, the average outcome would be 9-6 rounds to Ali, by decision.