Did Ali lose his speed after the 3 year lay off?

Thing is, Ali was only seen as a good champion in the 1960s. When he came back, the newer exposure he had drew attention to what he had been. People had begun to appreciate how really good he had been in the 1960s by the 1970s.

When all icons come along their profile is never highest right at the beginning when they are actually at their best.

Although boxing was a mainstream sport in the 1960s it was still being mainstream within a sport. Muhammad Ali by the 1970s, what I call the colour Tv generation, had projected Ali himself as simply mainstream full stop. He was A-list by then.

Was he slower in the 1970s? Yes. Had he lost his speed? No.

In the 1970s Ali was where he would have been had he never been away. If anything there was arrested development.

I have studied his last fight before the exile with Zora Folley. Ali had begun to sit down more in that fight. He was no longer dancing for dancing’s sake. He was maturing even then and his style was beginning to show a better economy. Just as effective but less flamboyance.

Many are confused about this. They think less dancing shows he was slower. It dosnt. It shows he is more relaxed, more in command. The dancing itself was not the boxing. The boxing was still good. Punching still keen and accurate.

 

Yes, he had lost speed and stamina just like any top athlete do if they are inactive for such a long time.

A top pro is not “conserved" by a long inativity, they decline.

That was a given back then, but nowadays there are some who claim otherwise. Perhaps because they feel it otherwise takes the shine off of Frazier's win.

 

Nobody maintains the same level all the way from 1964 to 1971 even if they are active. Larry Holmes was not the same in 1985 as he was in 1978 was he?

I think Ali produced the level in 1971 that he would have been achieving by that point. Joe Frazier beat a great fighter. Ali had just beat two guys better than 99% of the challengers he had in the 1960s and he got more rounds in that period than Frazier had since Ali returned. Truth is Frazier always would have been good enough to win that fight since frazier was the best fighter Ali ever fought.

 

He couldn't move like he did in the 1960's...he became a "punching bag" in the 1970's. Using his"rope a dope"...lying on the ropes...hoping the other guy would punch himself out....he couldn't avoid 'em...so he took 'em...and why he ended up like he did. Historians say that if he never came back in 1970 against Jerry Quarry...
...fought...Frazier...Norton...Foreman...he might have been a footnote in boxing history...but he became
"Ali" because of what he did when he came back...

 

He had slowed down and Cus D'Amoto was one of the first people to spot Ali could no longer get out of the way from punches like he use to. I also agree with others who said his stamina took a hit.

 

Seriously? Ali was 29 in 1971, Holmes was 35 in 1985.

Bonavena had already lost to Ali's former sparring partner Ellis and would go on to lose to a 37-year old Patterson. Quarry had also lost to Ellis as well as to Chuvalo for christ sake, and his best win was a close decision over a 32-year old Patterson.

How do you equate that to them being "better than 99% of the challengers he had in the 1960s"? They weren't even as good as his sparring partner in the 60's. (Ellis was still Ali's sparring partner the year he beat Bonavena, which was the year before he beat Quarry.)

 

Read between the lines people....choke wants us to believe Ali was better in the 70s than the 60s so it makes the Liston defeats seem worse for Liston

 

I think mainly he wants Frazier's win to seem better. He seems to have a hard time swallowing that Frazier's best win was over a post prime opponent.

 

By 31-32, yes. By 29 I'm not so sure he would have lost anything. 3.5 more years as an active champion would have given him more experience, though.

 

No, it's still a great win for Joe. No doubt about that. Ali showed in his very next fight that he had plenty left.

 

I watched the Cassius Clay-Doug Jones fight last night, for some reason.

I don't know if Ali was slower when he returned. He wasn't exactly fast in the Jones fight. He was thinner, definitely, in the early 1960s. But I don't believe his hand speed or footspeed was slower when he returned in 1970.

Ali took some guys more lightly than others. But I'd argue he never really showed any drop-off in hand speed until 1973. Then he remained fairly consistent from 1973 to 1975. Then, starting in 1976, he got significantly worse each year.

Frankly, I thought he looked far worse throwing punches in the Spinks rematch than he did in the first Spinks fight (even though he was thinner for the rematch).

By the Alzado exhibition in 1979, he was pretty average to below average.

For Holmes and Berbick, he was a mess.

 

Muhammad was marginally slower when he came back. This was inevitable.


He was still very.....very fast post 1970 till around '75 I think.

 

Well I said there was already evidence of Ali making adjustments in this department by the Folley fight. IF he had continued to fight that was the direction he was already going in. Sitting down more. Circling less.

 

The jab and right cross was still very fast , but the combo's weren't there and the foot speed slowed a tad.