What if Ali wasn't exiled for those years????

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by wordisbond, Feb 14, 2011.


  1. Il Duce

    Il Duce Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,972
    45
    Nov 18, 2010
    jm36,

    'Because, 'Smokin Joe' was a better fighter in 1969, then in 1971.
    Joe was quicker, hit faster and harder, utilized his right-hand much more, and
    his defense was miles better.
    Look at Joe from 1968/1969, his waist was thin, and he had a 'V' shape.
    He rolled and slipped punches much better.

    Joe's quicker body attack would have worn Muhammad down quicker, taking away his lateral movement by the mid-late rounds (8-9-10)

    But thats OK, because in March 1971, its time for FOTC II.
    We already know that result.
     
  2. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,219
    13,240
    Jan 4, 2008
    Nonsense.

    I don't think he looked that extremely impressive against Quarry in 1969. He was hit plenty and Quarry held up well until his eyebrow cut. Jerry wasn't very impressed by Frazier's power either.

    Besides FOTC, Ellis and Foster were Frazier's best perfomances. Training for them was also the perfect preparation for Ali. It took him 11 rds to get to Mathis in 1968, but only a combined 6 rds for Ellis and Foster.
     
  3. johnmaff36

    johnmaff36 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,793
    578
    Nov 5, 2009
    Oh, ok, fair enough, but i cant see him being any better in '69 myself. I think most , if not all, Frazier men would agree he peaked in FOTC
     
  4. Il Duce

    Il Duce Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,972
    45
    Nov 18, 2010
    jm36,

    I think most feel that Joe was at his peak in the FOTC, because he beat Muhammad Ali.

    But, in my opinion, the earlier Joe was more of a complete fighter. Much better
    defensively.
    The '1971 Joe' was a little slower, as he was focusing more on one-punch power.

    The earlier Joe used good side-to-side movement, and angles. Unfortunately, in
    his bouts with Bob Foster and Jimmy Ellis, he was not required to use those tools.

    To use a baseball term, Joe was like a baseball player with a .350 average who would normally hit 30 home runs.
    But then decided to go for the fences, and though he could hit 50 home runs,
    his average declined to .300.
     
  5. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,219
    13,240
    Jan 4, 2008
    Yeah, it's there on film. This is just another one of Il Duce's "Liston took a dive" (although no real evidence whatssoever), "Terrell lost to Spencer after losing to Ali, which shows he was no good" (totally ignoring the fact that the very clear difference in Terrell's win column before and after Ali could have something to do with what Ali did to him), "Quarry was done in his rematch with Ali" (ignoring that he went on the best streak of his career afterwards).

    For some, logic just goes out the window when it comes to Ali and his opponents. Anyone with no bias, some boxing knowledge and two eyes can see that Frazier never was better than he was against Ellis, Foster and Ali. That's all there is to it, really.
     
  6. Il Duce

    Il Duce Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,972
    45
    Nov 18, 2010
    I wonder which bout was "The Fight of the Year' in 1969.

    OH,,,,I guess those writers at Ring Magazine, just never listened to BOKAJ.

    On Sonny,,,,,,,follow the money, or lack there of.
    There is only one-way Sonny could have made money (for himself) in both fights.
    And it sure wasn't by selling fight programs to the people in the arena.

    Ernie Terrell, he was ripped apart by everybody following his wins over 'Fast Eddie,
    George Chuvalo and little Doug Jones.
    Read the reviews,,,,,,,,,,'inept',,,,,,,,is the one word that is thrown all over!!
     
  7. guilalah

    guilalah Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,355
    306
    Jul 30, 2004
    Frazier would have been a danger against even an un-exiled Ali.

    Another question is the long term effect of fighting during those exile years. The benefit of not having laid off three years vs. the wear and tear of the matches he would have fought. How does this all add up by the mid-70's?
     
  8. Stevie G

    Stevie G Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    25,218
    8,761
    Jul 17, 2009
    That's it. March 8 1971 was Joe's peak performance. He got it all out on that night,and took a stroll through hell to beat Muhammad.
     
  9. johnmaff36

    johnmaff36 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,793
    578
    Nov 5, 2009
    Im not so sure its because he beat Ali, i think its more the case he was dynamite that night. Absolutely brilliant. As for the baseball analogy, you would be better trying to explain quantum physics to me. I havent a clue about it IL D
     
  10. Stevie G

    Stevie G Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    25,218
    8,761
    Jul 17, 2009
    Good question. Ali benefited,AND lost out,formwise,during those exile years. Even for a 1967 Ali,Frazier and Ken Norton would have been the toughest opponents that Muhammad would have faced in that timespan. Even the most biased Ali hater must concede that he came back,and did it all again,against a tougher crop of opponents than those prior to his ring banishment. With the exception of Sonny Liston,of course.
     
  11. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,219
    13,240
    Jan 4, 2008
    Yes, it was an exciting fight because it was evenly matched. Not because Frazier put on all time great perfomance.

    You are basically saying that Frazier would do the same to a peak Ali in 1969 that he did to Mathis in 1968. It just beggars belief.

    This is very, very flimsy. You could say the same about most unexpected losses.

    Wrong. He was ripped apart by everyone after being physically and mentally punished by Ali in 15 rds. He hadn't lost for five years prior to taking a bad beating by Ali, afterwards he lost two straight and didn't beat a top 10 guy again. Doing the math doesn't become much easier than this.
     
  12. Duodenum

    Duodenum Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,605
    293
    Apr 18, 2007
    During his first reign, he said he danced because punching wore him down. I think not going into exile preserves his legs more, and spares him the punishment he absorbed starting with the FOTC. He was largely flat footed for Bonavena, and I don't see that being the case without an exile. It wasn't necessarily beneficial for him to have stopped JQ so quickly in Atlanta. 15 rounds there might have made the difference against Frazier if he sucked it up to win over the distance. (With his heart, and the crowd support in Atlanta combined with Jerry's own sometimes questionable stamina and self defeating tenseness, I believe he would have pulled it off and looked much better for Bonavena as a result.)
     
  13. Stevie G

    Stevie G Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    25,218
    8,761
    Jul 17, 2009
    Going the distance with Quarry may also have set him up better for the FOTC.
     
  14. Duodenum

    Duodenum Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,605
    293
    Apr 18, 2007
    We know Ali rushed into the FOTC prematurely in advance of an anticipated adverse Nixon appointed Warren Burger SCOTUS ruling. Bonavena was work he badly needed, but Frazier was a drastic upgrade in pace and pressure from what Ringo gave him. If Muhammad had to fight Smoke following just two comeback wins, he was better off having himself pushed in both. As it was, the FOTC was fine preparation for Ellis, but Jimmy wasn't really the fish he was after. (Now, does Joe win the FOTC if the SCOTUS rules in Muhammad's favor before he returns from exile, when he can take the time he needs to fully prepare?)
     
  15. Kalasinn

    Kalasinn ♧ OG Kally ♤ Full Member

    18,318
    58
    Dec 26, 2009
    Duo, can you explain this SCOTUS thing to me please?

    I thought Ali had trained hard for the FOTC, but after 11 brutal rounds of debilitating body, kidney & hip punches, he started to gass.