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

There are those who made the case that Ali should have taken the decision in the FOTC. (Muhammad himself suggested this.) No dispute can be offered as to who won in Kinshasa, or who would have won if Foreman had beaten Zach Clayton's count. Only Dunn and Coopman were taken out faster among Ali's 1970s title fight opponents. Wepner lasted seven rounds longer than George. Foreman didn't just lose to Muhammad, he lost decisively, joining Blin, Bob Foster and Coopman as the only opponents counted out against Ali during his 32 fight second career. (Folley, London, Liston, Powell, Lavorante, LaMar Clark and Jimmy Robinson were the seven counted out during his first career.) Just 11 men counted out in 61 total bouts, and Foreman was the penultimate victim of this rare kind of win.

 

Ali over Foreman. As Bokaj has pointed out,Frazier was expected to beat Ali at the time. Muhammad dismantled George by the most unexpected method.

 

Ali KO 8 Foreman takes the cake without a doubt..... Ali was a 4 to 1 underdog in '74 Zaire.... Plus, Ali is 7 years older than Foreman, as well....

Frazier beating Ali in '71 was a great achievement, but Frazier was hot as hell in 1971, while Ali was still in need of another tune-up fight or two before taking on Frazier.... Frazier beat a very good Ali, yet Ali still had some rust on his frame in March 1971...

MR.BILL:bbbhat

 

There's an unshakable point, D.

 

I went for Ali beating Foreman. But it's not an easy call.

Frazier's was a great performance sure. But Ali wasn't quite ready for Frazier having not that long returned from about 3 years out of the ring.

Foreman was considered an unbeatable monster until Ali stopped him. Having said that. Foreman's preparation was far from ideal including his injury that postponed the fight a month or so.

 

Ali is greater overall, but Frazier, man to man is no less than his equal

 

Foreman brutally destroyed the only two people to ever defeat Muhammad Ali at the time - Joe Frazier and Ken Norton. He bounced Joe Frazier up and down like a basketball and simply flattened poor Ken Norton.

Ali got his jaw broken by Ken, and lost very clearly while was very badly beaten by Joe in the Fight of the Century.

So, the aging Ali VS. the prime monster that was George Foreman. Foreman had brutally KO'd the only two people to defeat Ali at the time, and then Muhammad comes along, wins most of the rounds, while lying back on the loosened ropes, beating George to the punch, and then stopped him.

It's the Rumble in the Jungle, and by a wide enough margin.

 

The shock of Ali beating Foreman was greater, but Foreman wasn't quite as good as people thought and the Young and Lyle fights proved it.

I would say Frazier's victory over Ali was more impressive.

 

Foreman looked less than impressive on his way to the title in some of his fights..(being booed at times...)...and then beating a shopworn Joe Frazier...a quick KO of Joe"King" Roman..and a quick KO of Kenny Norton...then fighting on of the dumbest fights ever and then being KO'd by a past his prime Ali in 1974...the Ali and Frazier of March 8,1971 were a much more proven commodity then the over hyped Foreman of the early 1970's...

 

How would you say Ali looked against Bonavena? The only time he had gone over 3 rds for the last 4 years.

All the above is reviosinist tripe, really. One of the main reasons (probably the main) that Frazier was favourite over Ali was that Ali hadn't convinced the keener observers since coming back. He looked good against Quarry, but the early cut meant that Ali's legs and stamina weren't tested. Against Bonavena they were and failed to impress, despite the strong closing.

There were legitimate concerns over how much Ali had lost and they were at least partly justified in the fight.

Yes, Foreman's bulldozing perfomances had glossed over defincies in his game, which Ali pointed out both pre and post fight. But the concerns about Ali was justifiably stronger before this fight as well, because of his strugggles with Norton and his age. Fighters over 30 rarely are succesful with fight plans relying on their legs against younger, stronger and more powerful opponents. This turned out to be the case in this fight as well, but Ali managed to pick a bear out of his sleeve and turn everything on its head.

It is the better perfomance.

 

I would n't be too harsh on Foreman. He was up against an Ali who had been in his best form since he was exiled,since the September of the previous year. Foreman simply did n't know how to deal with Ali.

 

I prefer Frazier-Ali in terms of the quality of the winning performance from a boxing perspective, but in terms of the gravity of the accomplishment I view Ali-Foreman as superior.

Looking at this rationally, Ali was in his 3rd fight back after a long period of inactivity, one of those fights was a 3rd round cuts win, the other against the smaller C-class Bonavena. Contrast that with the run that Foreman was on when Ali beat him.

So IMO Ali-Foreman is the better win and greater achievement, but from a purist point-of-view I think Frazier-Ali is a better exhibition of heavyweight boxing skills, as I think Joe was transcendent that night, very special.

 

Foreman was on a destructive run, BUT he hadn't been past the 2nd round in almost three years !

Also, most his opponents had been Z-class.

Of course, he was considered awesome, he WAS awesome, (and hindsight is 20-20), but with that benefit of hindsight he was seriously lacking the depth of top-level experience wins over top opposition, and he was vulnerable to be taken into the mid-late rounds against someone who could stand up to his power.

I believe beating a man like Muhammad Ali over 15 rounds is better, even a slightly off-his-best version of Ali.
But it's not clear cut.

 

True... Frazier & Foreman were at their peak or thereabouts for both fights, Ali wasnt at his peak for either fight as his peak period was 64-67.... it really IS that simple.

Ps. why the hidden poll McGrain ? its always good to view who voted for who, especially in the classic.

 

Interesting question ...

Ali over Foreman on the surface appears bigger as Ali was the older man and Foreman was considered invincible at the time ... however we have learned since that Foreman was over rated and far from invincible ...

Frazier over Ali was a terrific effort by Joe but when we consider that Ali was rushed back into that fight it is actually pretty amazing that Ali di as well as he did against prime Frazier ...

At the end of the day they are both pretty equal in accomplishment ..