Ali provides a detailed analysis of his destruction of Cleveland Williams & others

Ali looked do much better pre exile because he was facing competition that was literally MILES better post exile.

 

They were better, but not miles better. Liston, Patterson, Terrell, Folley, Chuvalo and Cooper were not by any means shabby opponents. Liston and Patterson, for example, are probably both better wins than any that Dempsey or even Holmes have on their record.

 

fighters like Quarry, Patterson, Bonavena, Chuvalo, Frazier, Ellis were still fighting near the top when Ali came back after exile. But i agree that he fought better fighters than most of his 60s opponents cuz ali in the 70s fought the peak versions of Frazier, Foreman, Norton, Lyle, Shavers etc when his own peak was 1965-67.

 

I venture that it was a combination of this and also that his own peak had passed.I beleive we never saw his prime ,it would have been those years he was in exile,imo.

 

This was Ali at his best, and Williams near his worst. Still I prefer to focus on Ali's skills impressive skills. The speed, power, accuracy, and timing were brilliant even if he was in there with a bi-pedal punching bag.

 

There are claims though that Ali had planned all along to make it a quick affair, since he knew Williams was past it and didn't want to prolong the thing. Of course, he would hardly set a plan like that in the motion until he'd actually been in the ring with the guy long enough to be convinced that the plan was the right one. Especially not against someone who had a punch, which Williams after all still did.

 

I think the Frazier that beat Ali in 71 would be hell for a pre-exile Ali...Ali was on his toes more Pre-exile but not as strong....Frazier was filled with more energy than Liston and while fighters like Liston and Foreman
were the perfect foil for Ali....Fighters like Frazier and Norton and some of the smaller quicker more energetic guys like Doug Jones spelled trouble for him...

 

To each his own opinion, but frankly Ali looks a hell of a lot faster and seems to sport a greater work rate in his younger years. Of course, the only way for me to prove this is to look at actual punch stats in a number of his fights from both periods as well as to compare side by side footage from both the 60's and 70's.. I don't have time for that kind of project right now, but everytime I look at his earlier showings, it just seems that way to me. He looks a lot smoother, cleaner, swifter, etc. Some have also credited the 70's Ali as being " stronger ", but the 60's version was actually more effective at getting men out of there. In 1971, Ali was coming off of two very fresh wins over two quality contenders, so I can't use the excuse that he was bouncing right out of retirement. I do feel however that 4 years of being out of the ring along with 4 years of age, slowed him down a little, yet he still gave peak Frazier the battle of his life, and would even beat him in their next two meetings.

Had Ali never gone into exile, I think it likely that his experience and momentum would have continued to compile, and by 1968-69 we might have seen an even better version of him than what actually amounted. With both Ali and Frazier eating up the opposition, they probably would have met maybe 2 years earlier than they really did, hence a less experienced Frazier. I can't imagine Ali losing under all of the above circumstances.

 

You like to say this, but with what basis? Why was a 215 lbs Ali stronger in FOTC than 212 lbs Ali was four years earlier? Exactly what during that long inactivity had made him stronger even though he was basically the same size?

Already in 1966 Ali took punches to the body by Chuvalo all night long without showing any real effects. He said himself that the punches didn't affect him and that he actually let Chuvalo hit him to show as much (which also is confirmed by the film). Chuvalo claims Ali pissed blood afterwards, but there doesn't seem to be more backing that one up than there is for "the long break" in the Cooper fight.

 

This is my analysis as well. Frazier's greatest chance if they met in 1969 would be if Ali would have been very overconfident. If he lacked in preparation he would be in for a looong night, no doubt.

It should also be noted that Chuvalo said that Ali was both slower and had less workrate in 1972 compared to 1966, this despite the second fight being a 12-rounder.

 

Good points. I don't know if strength had anything to do with it or maybe it was quality of opposition, but 60's Ali was definately more effective at dispatching opponents. In 10 world title fights during the 1960's, Ali stopped or KO'd 8 of his 10 opponents. The only two men who took him 15 rounds, were a prime Chuvalo who had one of the greatest chins of all time, and 6'6" WBA champ Ernie Terrell, who according to some, Ali purposely kept standing to punish. Muhammad's ability to finish quailty opponents during the 70's did not appear to be quite as concise.

 

It was pretty much in the rematch. Sure, Frazier had slowed down a bit, but so had Ali (compared to the 66-67 version).

Frazier won it cleanly, but had Ali won just two more rounds on the judges cards he'd be the winner. It would have been controversial, but he would have regained his title.

I've never heard that about Frazier's temperature before. But I think he'd said that it was the best perfomance of his life, and I'd agree, even if he looked terrific against Foster and Ellis as well.