Just watched this fight again, i dont think that this one gets the credit it should. The pace that these two guys fought is very very fast.If you watch a modern Heavyweight fight and then compare them the difference is like night and day. What do you guys think?
Exactly my thoughts. In fact I expressed myself in almost the same words somewhere on the web not long ago. :thumbsup
Yeah Ali had better stamina and was in better conditioning for this fight. He had 3 years of fighting under his belt by the time of this match up so he could stay up on his toes and move better for full 12 rounds. Frazier always performed at his best v Ali whatever people say he wasn't shot for that fight. he faced a better Ali.
Yeah, I think this fight gets very underrated. Sure, it's not as exciting as the other Ali-Frazier fights, but I think it's the best of them when it comes to technique and tactics. Sure, Ali did his fair share of holding, but when you compare to most heavyweight fights it was still a very good tempo throughout the match. For Ali this fight was among the best 3-4 perfomances he put up post-exile. He shows that he still has great speed and stamina and is very tactically astute. Frazier was probably not quite as sharp as in the first fight, but he was far from shot. This was the only one of the three fights where Ali moved a lot, and of course Frazier looked better against him when he was stationary than when he was moving. In "Champions Forever" Frazier actually said that he was more motivated for this fight than any other. Ali had famously called him "ignorant" before the fight and he wanted Ali to eat those words. It's a fight that I really like to watch. But the other two fights are of course much better in terms of action and drama.
Yes, we were treated to 12 rounds of royal action. Interestingly though, the fight could have easily ended as early as the 2nd round. Frazier was trying to bob and weave his way in when Ali dropped a real cracking right on his jaw. Frazier recoiled back and looked really hurt and ready to go. As Ali was about to deliver the coup-de-grace, the Referee, mistakenly thinking that the bell had gone, jumped between the two and stopped the action. By the time the Referee realised his mistake and action re-commenced, Frazier had recovered and the moment had passed. Had the Referee not made this terrible mistake, Muhammad Ali probably would have knocked out Joe Frazier in the second round of their second fight.
Ali might have had Joe on the canvas. I seriously doubt he would have knocked out Frazier in the second round. If Tony Perez was doing his job that night, Ali probably would have lost this fight because any other referee would have taken points away for the excessive holding and pushing down on Frazier's head. I think Ali's performance is overated in this fight because he did his best to make it a non-fight. A draw would have been the fair decision IMO for this fight. Ali didn't do enough to win the rounds the judges gave him and neither did Frazier. Either way, I don't think the judges would have let Ali lose two in a row to Frazier, even if some at ringside thought Frazier did enough to win the decision.
I have never really understood why some say Ali shouldn't have won that fight. He was clearly better in my opinion. Yes, he did quite a lot of holding, but if the ref had been harder on him he would probably have found some other way. I think Frazier had to rest in a lot of those clinches as well. I don't think it was as one-way traffic as people want to have it. Tony Perez, the ref, was of the same opinion. He said that Frazier seemed quite happy to catch his breath in the clinches as well, and that he didn't come down so hard on Ali's holding for that reason. I agree with you that it probably hadn't come to a knock-out in the end of the second round, though. At most I think Ali would have scored a knock-down.
It's good in spots, but Ali's constantly fouling, which he gets away with over and over and over again throughout the fight, really both damaged the entertainment value and marred the integrity of the match. Eddie Futch counted over 130 clinches instigated by Ali when watching the film of this match- and as one can see on the film, these aren't the "mutual" sort of clinches, where the fighters' arms get tied up throwing punches or they both fall into it; Frazier is coming in throwing punches, and Ali literally reaches out with the specific intent of grabbing him, then takes him behind the head, forcefully pulls him in and pushes his head down while wrapping his right arm around Frazier's left side to neutralize the hook. It was flagrant, intentional fouling and the referee really should have done something to prevent it. To the person suggesting that Ali wouldn't knocked Frazier out if the second round hadn't ended early: where are you coming from? Frazier was obviously stunned, but it isn't as though he was sagging helplessly into the ropes. He was on his feet defending himself with his guard up and Ali's follow-up punches were missing. There were only 10 seconds left in the round. Ali would have been lucky to get a knockdown, let alone a knockout. As for the decision, I really think it could've gone either way reasonably. Prominent sportswriters like Red Smith had Frazier winning. He was the one trying to make the fight in there; Ali was the one trying to make a clinchfest. It was a good fight in those stretches where Ali was unable to catch Frazier in a headlock or where he decided to put out little spurts of activity, but doesn't compare to either the first or third fights.
Red Smith is a notorious Ali-hater. He always tried to denegrate Ali. That's like hearing Paul Galico talk about Joe Louis or Ron Borges talk about Mike Tyson!:rofl
When you seriously use Red Smith as a reference, then that's a pretty good sign thar you're way off. "The spurts they fought in". To be a heavyweight fight there were a lot of punches thrown and generelly good action. Yes, Ali did pull Frazier in on some occasions, and the ref should have clamped down harder on that. But I don't think that's the whole story. Frazier seemed quite happy to rest in a lot of the clinches and that's not too surprising. It is tiring to chase someone like he did for most of the fight.
The point about the holding is that Ali took away Frazier's whole game with that foul and wasn't reprimanded. A short-armed fighter cant do much about a tall fast guy reaching out, pulling him in, and pushing his head down. Bruno did it with Tyson in 1989, and Richard Steele reprimanded Bruno within a minute or two. Obviously, Ali has the added advantage of being much faster and a better boxer than Bruno, so he could pepper his short opponent with long-range shots and as soon as he misses he just grabs. What exactly could Frazier have done ? His game is to get inside, Ali's game should be to keep him on the outside. Neck-holds are supposed to be prohibited. Having said that, yes, the fight was still a much better fight than anything you would expect to see among modern heavyweights. I doubt Ali was on the verge of a stoppage in round 2. Judging from all those moments in Manila when Ali was drilling Frazier with ridiculous amounts of leather -his best shots - and Joe kept coming and landing punches back, I think the fight was just getting started. The neck-holding was probably the one thing that prevented this fight equalling the other two, but it worked for Ali. Cant blame the guy for doing what he can get away with.
All right, Dave Anderson of the New York Times also had Frazier winning, for one. Or you talking about Ali in reverse?