i think ali deserved the decision in the FOTC.

True. I've consistently scored FOTC as 9 - 6 to Frazier

 

Big Ali fan here.

Was gutted when I heard the result on the radio (at the very top of the BBC world news, no less !) Didn't have access to watching it live.

Heard that ALi claimed he won, so I figured he might have been robbed.

I've watched it a few times since.


9-6, 8-6-1, 8-7, all within reason.

My own score was 8-6-1 and if I had to take a second go at it, 9-6.


Frazier won.

No doubt about it.



(Ali won the third decisively, despite any nonsense about not wanting the 15th.)


But the biggest of their three meetings, the FOTC...

That belongs to Joe.

 

Frazier clearly won their first fight and arguably won the second one.

 

Hello everyone, new guy here, I'd like to share my thoughts:

TFOTC was one of Ali's worst performances (if not the worst) up until then. Ali had lost so much during exile. He was out of shape, he didn't have the necessary endurance/stamina to outclass Frazier for 15 rounds.

YET, if you score this fight on a round-by-round basis (which could be considered unfair), I think Ali won, 8-7. I can understand why most people think Frazier won, especially with the 15th round KD leaving a huge impression.

The decision was mostly political in my opinion. One of the judges had it 11-4 in favour of Frazier, which is totally unacceptable. The other judge and ref were much closer to the truth, but their cards were unbelievably inconsistent. They agreed on rounds 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 11 and 15. They totally disagreed on rounds 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 14, and they slightly disagreed on round 12 (ref had it even, judge gave it Frazier).

If it was such a clear unanimous victory for Frazier, then there would not have been so many discrepancies on their scorecards.

 

Great fight, but it wasn't THAT close.

If it was that close, there's no way the cards wouldn't have gone Muhammad's way, just like they did in every other close fight he had. Ali was too much of a box office rainmaker for close fights against less popular fighters to go against him.

 

I disagree. Ali gained popularity after beating Foreman and regaining the title. Right before the FOTC Ali was quite disliked by most.

 

Ali was in great shape and put up a great performance but had not fought anyone who was as relentless and determined as Joe Frazier was on March 8, 1971. Ali was fast and sharp and much improved from the Bonavena fight. Joe was just so intent on winning and put up his ultimate performance. That Ali probably could have beaten just about anyone in boxing history.

 

You've hit the nail right on the head. Muhammad was Public Enemy Number One among the boxing establishment during that phase.

 

People like this make my head hurt. Ive met few, if any, unbiased people who felt Ali won that fight. Period. Every person Ive ever met who felt Ali won the FOTC (and Ive met very few people in general who felt he won it. VERY FEW) seemed to either be a blind Ali fanboy, or were still voting along the old "Ali represents change and Joe represents old establishment" b.s. political lines. Joe won that fight and did so convincingly. It was a great fight. It was a competitive fight. Frazier won. End of story.

 

clark - Ali was sharp and in "great" shape if you compare him to some of his really weak performances like the one against Young. Compare him to Ali from '67 and you will realize that it was just a shadow of Ali.

Stevie G - So you're saying that Ali was Public Enemy Number One among the boxing establishment after beating Foreman, but you agree with Rock0052 that he was so adored during the FOTC that if he had done slightly better, the judges would have gifted him the decision?

klompton2 - Really? Reading a post you disagree with makes your head hurt? Then I suggest you cease with all forum activity or you'll most likely die of migraines lol. I see that "Frazier won. End of story." is your best argument. He was so convincing that one of the judges and the ref disagreed on the outcome of 7 rounds. Even Ali haters agreed that the other judges scorecard was bogus.

 

Did those judges disagree on who won the fight? No? I didnt think so. The fact is that if you score this fight like a modern day amateur competition you MIGHT be able to make a case for Ali winning more rounds. Maybe. But professional fights arent, and especially werent, scored like that (even amateur fights werent scored like that back then). Its a FIGHT not a pitty pat contest. Joe Frazier landed the harder punches, forced the fight, and was far more dominant in the big rounds than Ali ever came close to being. He dropped Ali as well which if the fight were even close would have sealed the deal. What is the argument for Ali winning? He landed more flicking jabs? Ask yourself what the criteria is for scoring a professional fight: Clean Punching, Effective Aggressiveness, Ring Generalship, Defense. Both fighters landed a ton of punches so clean punching might be a wash but then you defer to power and Frazier takes it in the majority of rounds. Effective aggressiveness Frazier takes in his sleep, with Ali being forced to the ropes and taking punishment in a majority of rounds Ring Generalship goes to Frazier, and given the number of punches landed it would be hard to claim either guy was a defensive wizard in that fight but if you are looking to give Ali brownie points you might find him edge this category. Throw in the punishment Ali took in 11 and the KD in 15 and its ridiculous to suggest he has a case for winning. Thats why posts like yours make my head hurt. Not because I disagree with you but because its such a stretch that trying to wrap my mind around it is a strain. Its like the idiot who called Ali-Chuvalo 1 close and the proceeded to spend about 6 months reviewing the fight round by round. He never finished by by about round 15 Ali needed a KO to win. Some people, like yourself can convince themselves of anything. Even that Ali had a case for winning the FOTC.

 

No doubt Frazier won it, but it was still closer than Hagler-Duran.

 

That judge was just incompetent. He stated that he felt aggression counted as much in the scoring as landing double the amount of clean punches as the opponent. That's just insane. How is it effective aggression to take twice as much punishment as your opponent?

If you win fights that way, you're certainly losing the war.

 

But Ali did not land anything like twice the # of clean blows. And they were significantly lighter overall.

Klompton is right on the money. There is no realistic case for Ali winning, & no way it was at best a fairly close-definitely not very close-very clear victory for Frazier.

Power shots & controlling the action/aggression means something.
Trying to credit merely # of shots landing throws out the meaning of what is winning throughout the history of Professional boing-& common sense about what it means to win a fight.

If we weighted rounds proportionate to success, not just assigned rounds, such as a 10 point must system, the results would be even clearer.
At least that has often been a legitimate way to decide fights, intuitively & officially.

Ali should have crawled across the ring on his hands & knees & declared Frazier the legitimate champion. Since he promised to. Especially after all his cruel abuse that was a betrayal. Frazier had given him money no questions asked when Ali was in need, & tried repeatedly-at the highest level-to get Ali reinstated. I understand that much later he admitted Joe won.

Ali is my GOAT, but it is scien-terrifically (sic) established how often folks delude themselves, see reality in ways consistent with their self-image, ego & psychological identification: then later construct a rationale for their intrinsic bias.

But using the scoring system in place, I cannot see it being any closer than 6 rounds for Ali.

Very few can.

 

klompton2 - They didn't, that's the whole point. If 2 judges disagree on 7 rounds and it turns out to be a Split decision- then it's plausible. But to disagree so much yet still have an almost identical score is what makes it so suspicious.

Frazier landed "harder" blows, I agree. But if Frazier landed a ton, then Ali landed 4 tons. Overall, Ali inflicted more physical damage to Frazier, there's no need to mention what Frazier's face resembled after the fight? And the KD sealing the deal is a moot argument, since this fight was scored on a round-by-round basis! All the KD did was seal the deal for the 15th round, at least that's how it should have been, in my opinion.