He had amazing recupertaive powers then. So he'd probably stayed on his bike for some 5-6 rounds, then having 3-4 rounds of Joe cornering him and having to hold and/or doing battle, then getting back moving - and so on. In the end I think it would have been a hard-fought UD for Ali.
The thing that strikes me about mobile-boxers in with pressure fighters is the difference between their deciding to come down and fight, and their being made to come down and fight. I think that's a world of difference, I really do. I watched the Gushiken-Rios fight yesterday, and it's as good an example as any. Rios, early, stayed mobile, but went flat footed to punch with Gushiken in two and three. He won both of those rounds. But after round four, he didn't win another round on my card. The reason was that he was made to come down after that. Getting hurt to the body had damaged his engine and he just didn't have the speed to get out of the corner Gushiken's middling pressure put him in every time. And the whole fight changed. Gonzalez-Takayama, same thing. Takayama makes the fight close when he's chosing when to come down, but as soon as he's made to come down, he can't fight in the same way. That difference fascinates me. Fights are won and lost in the difference between the two. When a box-mover gets pulled down he starts to lose rounds. Now Frazier brings the fastest pressure in the history of his division. He has a high work-rate and is an expert body puncher. He has any points for aggression in the bag before any fight begins. In short, he can win rounds on the cards when Ali is on his toes, but how many rounds can Ali take from Frazier when he is forced down? Ali trained for coming down in '64, but I think it was strictly an emergency measure - something he understood, in the abstract, but not something he knew he was going to have to survive when he went into the ring. I think that was different in '71, and after that.
Well, FOTC was the first time he really had to put it into practice in a way, but with less athleticism. Anyhow, I think his gameplan in FOTC was much influenced by him not really being sure just what he had left. Consequently he went out hard, knowing Frazier was a slow starter, and punched like a fiend. Not a bad plan really, but risky, and it backfired. '67 Ali would know better just what he could pull off and what he couldn't and laid up a less risky plan as a result, IMO. But all this is speculation. What we do know is that Ali won two out of three and that there is little basis to say that Joe was further from his prime in any of the fights. That's enough for me, although the speculating is always interesting.
There is so much going on between Ali and Frazier in this regard. I really think they are the most interesting pairing in all of history as far as these things go. I think the levels of complexity here are more extreme than almost any other fighters that actually met at HW more than once...there is so much going on.
Chuvalo did not catch Ali on the ropes, he went there by choice, just as he let George pound on him, do you think a peak Ali lets Frazier take those free shots? Ali was 29 when he fought Frazier ,same age as Frazier was when he fought Foreman. The night Frazier beat Ali he was a great fighter but that was ONE night. WHen Frazier fought Foreman , Frazier was 29 ,and had 29 fights with 145 rounds of ring action.people say he was shot. Frazier had been in 4 real wars . Ali Quarry Bonavena x2 When Ali fought Foreman, he was 33 and had, had 46 fights with 262 rds of ring action. Ali had been in wars with. Frazier Norton x2 Bonavena. But Joe is shot, and Ali is prime.:huh I am not a hater of Frazier ,but neither am I a fanboy ,his record v ATG's . W1. L 4. He met ONE real banger and got used as a yo yo. His management avoided an old Liston whom Ali destroyed. He did not fight Al Jones, Ron Lyle,Mac Foster,Ken Norton,Thad Spencer,Jose Garcia,Leotis Martin or any other punchers of real note.he went life and death with Bonavena whom a rusty Ali kod ,after looking terrible for 14rds. Frazier was a very well managed fighter, until Durham slipped up and put him in with George.
There sure is. Hate sound nostalgic, but when again will we see such a perfect rivalry? Perfect in every sense, not onlye styles but also temperament. You couldn't write it better (and you write a damn good article, by the way). While FOTC is easiest on the eyes, I personally like Manilla the best in a way. Two men with their bodies not quite responding like they used to, and instead having to rely on tactics and will. A lot of will. Seeing Ali bringing out not just every tool in the box, but also an inhuman amount of will, just like Frazier, is simply as awesinpiring as it is painful to watch.
Last paragraph says it all. Not sure if Frazier is the fastest to put pressure in HW history. What I do know is Ali is by and far the fastest most agile & athletic HW ever. He moved literally like a Welterweight, and punched with his jab as fast as SRR did. The difference between this and FOTC is indeed significant. I'll come around with some film comparison eventually. The fact that the FOTC is a close fight, and the strategy that Ali indeed used shows his resilience and I think outlines the differences between how a fight would be if Ali were at his peak. I think the difference between most boxer-movers versus pressure fighters is that Ali is far away more mobile and faster on his feet than most boxer-movers in comparison to the pressure-fighters they face. In fact, a Duran was just a very explosive quick pressure fighting machismo type of a guy that could suffocate SRL. The difference between their foot-speed and movement isn't much to make a point of. With Ali being so far and away exceptional and phenomenal for a fighter and a HW in generally, even his speed in comparison to one of the fastest pressure fighters is truly notable. That's the key difference here. Ali showed movement in 1974 when his legs were supposedly shot for 12 rounds. To say this Frazier was past it or much more past it to a peak version of other fighter is to say and speculate a lot. This ALi didn't jump on Frazier to bomb him out like Bojak points out and Pacheco has if you see documentaries on that fight. Ali did a sort of similiar thing in the third fight, but even then he showed movement. This Ali was far-away a bigger and more slowed down fighter. And even Frazier admitted he had to fight him, the heat, and then chase him. A prime Ali is truly being admonished here. It's a credit to Frazier in what he did in FOTC. But he did it against a man who had shown ring rust and was of for nearly 4 years. For a fighter that relies so heavily on reflexes, speed, and movement this is huge. Much more crucial than it would be for a fighter like Tyson coming back. In my belief.
Look-History says Frazier said no thanks to the WBA tournament to crown a king, and went after a state title. History also shows two of his title defenses as lineal champion were very suspect. History also show he was blown out by the only puncher he fought, and his resume is absent of dates with other big hitters. I'm sure there is nothing to it. NOT
Thanks. I'm taking it a wee bit more seriously now, which seems ridiculous, but there it is. Stonie's been helping me out a little bit. I try to get 1-2 things up on our front page here every week. Getting back to Frazier-Ali for a second, I just think the whole trilogy is totally different if they meet 3 times between 67 and 70. Against 70 Ali, Frazier was basically only ever going to win the first one, i think...i think...but an earlier series. Ali could win the first two and lose the last one. He could lose the first two (in my opinion) and win the last one. Maybe only Ali could win all three, but still. The actual series (in retrsopect) seems set in stone. A sixties series...i don't know. Anything could happen.
What I do know is the only true difference that we can point to favor a FOTC ALi version is that he probably sat down and punched a bit harder. But this when dealing with all the attribute differences is hardly as important. In my view.
No, history doesn't say that. History says that he stayed out of the WBA tournie - a move condoned by Ring magazine, by the way - to protect his contender status, won the same HW title held by Jack Dempsey and every single champion to follow him and then matched the winner of the WBA tournament and beat him. The rest is in your head. I think that there is no real reason to believe that Stander and Daniels are any worse than Sosnowski, and they are probably better. Neither do I consider either worse than Jack Monro. I suspect you are not holding these defences against either Vitlai Klitscko or Jim Jeffries. And yet every time we go through this, it is blatantly obvious that at no time was any puncher in a position to force Frazier's hand into a fight. In fact, claims that you have made to the contrary are amongst some of your most embarrassing. I have no doubt that you want to go through it all again now. Fortunately, I have the original thread to hand and can just copy and paste :good
Would Ali, or Ali-Frazier, been as interesting if it wasn't for the exile? Much as 60's Ali is absolutely beautiful to watch, I like the slightly more physically limited version of the '70's even more in a way. Then he has to show off real movement in FOTC, not the flashy athletic kind, and actual slugging in Manilla. No to mention Zaire. The timing just seems perfect between the two. And I haven't really meantioned Joe enough. Just made him seem like a foil for Ali. His perfomance in FOTC is just out of this world. The smoothness of his moves, the speed of the pressure and the sheer determination... Doesn't get better.
Tyson utilised planes of movement not utilised by another HW; post-exile Ali utilised planes of generalship and psychology arguably not utilised by any other fighter, but certainly any other HW. Well, filmed. Langford, maybe, I don't know. The Foster and Ali performances represent an organised speed of pressure not yet surpassed in the HW division. Frazier pulled of something really special in these two fights IMO and justified the Armstrong coparisons.