Ali beating Foreman was a more incredible performance than Frazier beating Ali

Not really, since Frazier beat Ali, who beat Foreman.

...who beat Frazier, who beat Ali, who beat Foreman, who beat Frazier, who beat--

AUGH! atsch

 

Could you say that since Ali beat Frazier twice subsequently, that it was harder for Frazier to win, as it was proven Ali was better twice at later times. So it took an amazing effort by Joe to win.

 

I prefer Frazier's win.
He beat a more proven champion over 15 rounds, a guy who was a proven championship distance fighter.
Foreman had a huge reputation when he faced Ali, but was really built on two 2-round victories.
Of course, Ali was extremely impressive in beating him.

 

You could argue either way I suppose, but I went for Zaire. Frazier was actually the betting favourite and most experts' pick to win, while Ali was the heavy underdog against Foreman.

Also the way Ali beat Foreman. I mean, had you said before FOTC that Frazier would win through pressure and wearing Ali down with body shots, only the most ardent Ali supporter would dismiss it out of hand. But trying to convince people beforehand that Ali would beat Foreman by laying on the ropes and then knocking him out...

 

These are great points.

 

I dont think it was ever proven TWICE that Ali was better. Ali did everything he could to minimize what actual fighting there was in the second fight. How many people today would get away with no point deductions after 140+ (no exaggeration) initiated clinches. Even then I dont really think Ali showed any superiority.

 

I'm not agreeing fully with what I said, I was just throwing out a theory.

Also should have your DVD in the post tommorow.

 

I prefer Frazier's performance but Ali beating Foreman was probably more "incredible".

 

What he said.

 

Pretty much yeah :good

 

I'd take Frazier's win retrospectively, though at the time it seems like Ali over Foreman is bigger.

 

False.

I don't really care that pretty much that whole generation got duped into thinking Foreman would destroy Ali. That's on them, and doesn't factor into my opinion on the fight itself at all.

Likewise, whether they had Frazier as a slight favorite at the time doesn't diminish him dealing the still fearsome ALI his first career loss.

Ali beat Foreman with strategy.

Frazier beat Ali with everything else there is in boxing.

The latter is a bit more incredible to me.

 

If I could vote neither, I would.

Ali was rusty and what he formerly relied on, reflexes and skittish footwork were beginning to betray him. Now, he was getting down to using his ridiculous chin in combination with his still formidable skills and deteriorated talent to win. Frazier's had the antidote, though, constant pressure, incredible pace and stiff enough power.

A better win than Ali beating the one-note, completely overrated Foreman, who was shut down by Young, a pale imitation of Ali in so many respects. The blown-up Foreman's kryptonite had been discovered and he would never be same.

 

Tough to say. Beating Ali > beating Foreman, obviously, but that's not all there is to it.

Absolute peak Frazier won a decision over post-exile Ali. What's more, if you go throughout all of heavyweight history, you won't find a fighter better suited to beat Ali than Frazier. His style is the perfect foil for Ali's.

I don't think the same can be said for Ali-Foreman, where past prime Ali beat peak Foreman, by knockout, the only time that ever happened to George.

The odds, too. Ali was a considerable underdog to pull his win off, Frazier a favorite.


Whatever, I still voted for Frazier-Ali