Joe Frazier would always have been a tough opponent for Muhammad Ali. I can envision Ali winning the decision because the 1967 Ali had more speed and stamina than the 1971 version. He did not need to rest. Frazier was relentless with his pressure but Ali's speed was also relentless. At the end I can envision Frazier's face looking worse than Ali's but Ali would have known he was in a tough fight.
Let's say that Muhammad Ali had not been banned in 1967, Ali would have beaten Joe Frazier who I thought was a great fighter also, his manager Yank Durham was against his fighter Joe Frazier fighting then champion Ali, who had never been decked as a champion. Angelo Dundee would have had Ali in shape for that fight. Ali takes it like I posted, 9-6 in rounds but I think Joe wins the rematch in 1971 as Ali is starting to slow down as a champion and fighter.
Styles make fights Joe was a problem for any version of Ali. Depending on who does the judging I still like Frazier as the most likely outcome.
Was Frazier in 1971 necessarily at the same peak he'd reached earlier when he'd beaten, say, Ellis? Didn't he have some kind of health issue that night? Vaguely remember hearing about it.
But it was not too early for a Joe Frazier to beat an experienced George Chuvalo in 1967? I take it you are not a fan of a peak Muhammad Ali. Are you the same poster who does not care for Sugar Ray Robinson by chance? There are a lot of posters including myself who favor Ali as their favorite.
In Joe's autobiography he stated that Yank thought he wasn't ready in 67 but Joe personally thought he was. Assuming the logistics of their first encounter you would have an Ali smack talking Frazier and underestimating him while Joe maintains the same determination to defeat him. The knockdown is less likely to happen but that relentless pressure without the clinching of the second fight should pull it to a draw or close decision in favor of Joe.
Fair assessment, Muhammad Ali after his title defense knockout of Zora Folley on March 22 1967, stated at ringside that he was interested in defending against Thad Spencer and Buster Mathis. He had two potential fights scheduled, a rematch against Floyd Patterson in late April and against Oscar Bonavena in late May of 1967, he was an active champion, who did not have return bout clauses in his contracts as champion.
Peak Ali looked great against average to good opposition. His fans basically blame all the problems he had in the 70s on his exile. He simply fought tougher boxers in the 70s. Holmes, Lewis, Klitschko, Tyson would all dominate the 60s. Don't see how All is special for doing that, or deserves the accolades so many bestowon him.
Resumes mean squat, A fighter can only fight the opponents in his era, not from the past or future. I think you are on this site to gain attention, buy a dog or cat, people are laughing at you, you do not see that ? Actually those fighters that you mention were average to me just like Robinson and Ali are average to you. I feel sorry for you, don't make yourself a clown to others. Tyson is always making excuses why he lost to Douglas, a grown man needing another man to hold his hand to win, please. Excuses are like everybody's behind, everyone has one.
A couple of factors to this hypothetical fight: A 1967 Ali, not banned, not helped out by Frazier, doesn't necessarily do the betrayal and the divisory tactics amongst the Black community that got Frazier so worked up and motivated for the fight. This element of mental intention gave Frazier a bloody mindedness that matching the 1967 Ali with a physically abled FOTC Frazier, without the pre-fight tactics/drama, simply eliminates this major element for me. This changes the whole complexion of the fight IMO. Ali's best fighting weight was 212 lbs in prime and as @JohnThomas1 pointed out, whilst 213 lbs for the Frazier fight - he wasn't anywhere close to the same condition as the Ali that fought Williams, Terrell and Folley. His legs were softer, his stamina was much decreased, he didn't dance as well as he did - I think he looked athletically better 1973 through 1974 when he had more rounds in him and had started gaining back his fight conditioning. You simply cannot take a fighter like Ali, Roy Jones, Floyd, Camacho, Whitaker, Hearns, Tyson, Ray Leonard, Robinson - fighters that use their speed and atheleticism significantly as part of their sytles - out of the ring for 3 years and expect them to come back and be ready to face the fight that a motivated peaking Frazier type fighter brings to the table. One thing for me about a 1967 Ali is his distance negotation - he turned his head with punches that connected and whenever back touched the ropes either smothered incoming fire and tied his man up or ducked, rolled, pivoted and escaped - his footspeed was quick and his footwork was excellently poised to allow him to minimise danger moments. I think Frazier would always trouble any version of Ali but I do think a 1967 Ali that is fighting frequently, doesn't take Frazier lightly and doesn't work him up to that level of motivated intention, beats Frazier 9 - 6, maybe 8 - 7 in a close but clear victory as I trust him to throw the jab and right cross with enough frequency and sharpness to pick up the rounds and then have the feet, stamina and reserves to survive the deep water moments that Frazier will no doubt bring.
Actually, other than Frazier, the Muhammad Ali of 1965 through 1967 would have made Bonavena, Norton, Lyle and the boys look pretty much like Folley, Williams and Mildenberger. This is not to say they weren't a little better than his 1960s title opponents. I'm just saying that none of them had the tools to deal with that version of Ali.
