1967 Ali vs FOTC Ali

When these two versions are compared some claim that Ali pre-exile was just plain better whereas some claim that Ali actually had improved in some aspects for FOTC.

1. Ali is said by some to have been stronger in FOTC.

2. Others claim that Ali had improved his fighting in the pocket for FOTC.

Personally, I think both these claims are accurate for Ali in Manilla, where he was 225 lbs, had been lifting weights and showed his best infighting ever. But for FOTC he was 215 lbs and had just been back six months after a long lay-off. I think it's reasonable to think that he had spent most of that time just trying to regain as much as possible of what he had lost. In Manilla, on the other hand, he had had 5 years to adapt to his somewhat diminshed physical attributes (primarily speed and stamina) after the lay-off.

Your thoughts?

Ps. I do NOT want this turned into a debate about whether Ali of 1967 would beat a prime Frazier or not. I'm just interested in your views about how Ali developed/regressed in the four years leading up to FOTC.

 

I think he possibly could lay an ambush for and KO young Clay. He showed immaturity and recklessness at times, along with a chin that could be dented, so that's not an impossibility.

Actually Ali has some interesting things to say on this subject in Hauser's book.

EDIT: I think FOTC Ali could outbox young Clay as well, so a KO wouldn't necissarily be needed.

 

I don't have the book at hand right now, but will get back later with the quote.

Well, 20-year old Clay would develop quite a bit before he reached his prime. In the next four, five years he would not only fill out and get stronger and more powerful, but also actually become even faster IMO. Add to that him becoming smarter in his decision making and more econimical and precise with his punches, and you have quite a difference.

The only real area where I see FOTC Ali lose out to Clay is that he probably had a bit less stamina and workrate. But he would more than make up for this with his superior ring smartness, strength and power. I think he would be pretty succesful at making Clay punch and engage at the wrong moments, and then countering with his more telling blows. A bewildered Clay might actually be suckered in to the right late on while trailing on points and then be finished off (like so many were). Otherwise, I think FOTC Ali wins the decision.

Clay could just not smother him with punches, like he did Jones, nor outspeed him, like he did Moore. A lazy jab and older Ali directly tags him with the right, a half-hearted flurry and he pays for it with a much sharper counter combination. He would have just about no margin for error and he was still to young and green to cope with that IMO.

 

I'm talking about 20-year old Clay here. The one who got floored by Banks, rocked and almost beat by Jones, and badly hurt by Cooper. Would I favour the Ali who walked through skillful and experienced Jimmy Ellis like he was nothing, against him? You bet.

 

20-year old Clay. 25-year old Ali would beat any other version of himself.