I don't think it affected his legacy too much either way. It gave him the opportunity to win the title for a third time but it meant losing to a novice pro in the process. But Ali's legacy was already secure by that point. He got away with a few close decisions towards the latter part of his second reign (post-Manila) so 5 losses overall seems a fair amount to be reflected on his record even if three of them were when he was well over the hill.
Kind of like Sugar Ray Robinson, Muhammad Ali's idol, Ray Robinson, who won the World Middleweight title 5 times.
Kind of a wash .. thew whole three times champ thing means little when you realize he lost to a seven fight cruiserweight novice and then won it right back ... the irony is that Ali performed worse in the second fight than the first .. he was on a downward slide ... it was Spinks that went down terribly for a complete lack of training and focus ..
Indeed so, at least Ali got decent purses for his latter ill advised fights, sadly SRR latterly was earning purses that befitted the level of opponent he was facing which was in comparison to his heyday mere pocket money.
It hurts it for me. A highly suspicious performance. Losing to a 7 bout novice. I hope that I am wrong but Ali thew the fight so he could he the first man to win the title 3 times. Its the way he lost too. He basically let Spinks win..
Muhammad was definitely in better condition in the second fight than he was in the first and employed better tactics. But I agree that Spinks was nowhere near as good as he was in the first bout. Had Leon reproduced his form of the first fight,I still see Ali winning albeit by a much narrower margin - Spinks would probably have won at least three of the last five rounds but Ali would have banked enough of the earlier stanzas thus seeing him through to victory.
Ali was lighter , he was better prepared mentally but he was not better .. look at him .. his punches had nothing on them .. he looked physically weaker .. there is ni way his skills were better .. he implemented what he had better with a sound fight plan of jab and hold .. he stunned Spinks a few times the first fight , in the second nothing .. Spinks was much worse far more than Ali was better.
i´d it depends on who you ask. i assume for the legions of ali fans back then and today and for the general public and for the history books/websites the ´78 win not only helped muhammad´s legacy but helped it a lot. on the other hand i´m under the impression that for most of our small group of experts on this very forum it rather hurt his legacy.
Of course, losing to Spinks hurt Ali's legacy. Retiring as world champion with a 55-2 record (and having TWICE avenged his only two losses) would be better than losing three of your last four and people being embarrassed for you. I'm not one of those people who just dismiss late losses in a boxer's career. Especially when the guy who beats you only has seven wins and doesn't go on to do much of anything afterward. Even though 1977 was a bad year for Ali too, if Ali had ended his career with the 15th round against Shavers in Madison Square Garden, where he nearly put Shavers away, it would've put a nice bow on a great career. Losing is never good. You can look on the bright side, but a loss is a loss.
I neither think it enhanced or diminished Alis legacy, it showed a great champion who fought on too long, something the history of our sport has many examples of, but Alis legacy was made well before the Spinks bout. To think Clay/Ali early in his career proudly claimed and showed his ability to avoid punches, later on exhibiting the ability to absorb punches, sadly at what cost.
No human with clear psychophysical attrition effects after facing people like Liston (2 times) Frazier (3 times), Foreman, Lyle, Shavers, Norton (3 times), Spinks (2 times) and others could win a world title back and hold out 10 rounds against Holmes who in that fight landed his best shots with the intent of knocking him out and proving he was better than Ali. Only Ali could do It. Many of the new generations underestimate the greatness of Ali. Looking at the videos of his fights they think: "I would have dropped him too, he suffers too many attacks, he clings too often to the ropes, he's not a hitter, he doesn't have a tough face and a lot of other BS. The truth is that they dont know what means fighting for 15 rounds with the best punchers ever. Ali defended best of all, had the best chin ever, was the fastest of all, the most intelligent of all and had the most courage of all. Ali was the greatest, no doubt
Had Ali fought Norton instead of Spinks he'd have received a brutal beating. As it was he was so far gone that even his cherry pick of Spinks went bad. Ali getting back in the ring with Holmes much later tells me he didn't have a friend in the world to tell him the truth, only Pacheco leveled with him and he quit. Had Dundee and others left he might have stopped
Davey Pearl was the one that hurt Ali's Legacy , unintentionally of course ,, he was the difference from the first fight to the second but ultimately a wash