I think a case can be made for both alternatives actually (even if most probably know what I personally think), so I would like to hear your opinions on this.
It helped it, it allowed a new generation of heavys to establish a reputation. The wins against Foreman and Frazier look (are!) more impressive than if Ali had of met them as an established champ defending against undefeated Olympians.
That is true. But don't you think that Ali would have had a very long reign as champ if not for the exile? I mean, he could have beaten both Louis's and Marciano's records.
hard to say i dont think any exile should help a fighters legacy there will be arguements for both, but im saying no
I think he quite possibly could have beaten both records but his career would have been a lot less dramatic. Frazier and Forman would have been dismissed by historians as green kids who got rushed into a shot with an ATG and got exposed. With the retirement Foreman and Frazier had the chance to prove they are ATGs and THEN Ali beat them. So I guess from a cold stats point of view the break harmed Ali (it certainly deminished his skils) but when you look back at his complete career I think it helped him become what he his.
When do you think that his reign would have ended if not for the exile? Against Frazier, Norton, Holmes, someone else? Would he have retired undefeated?
From any standpoint, it hurt his legacy. In all probability, Ali wouldn't have lost for a long time, and the Frazier first would have been more competitive. It hurt his legacy.
Hard to say, motivation might have gotten to be a problem and he could have lost to a lesser fighter. Of the guys you've listed I don't think Frazier would have beaten Ali at any point in there careers but for the layoff. Norton is a funny one, he seemed to have style to beat Ali after his layoff, maybe that would have been a style Ali would have had trouble with even without the layoff. Holmes in 77-78 would have a good shout.
He would most likely find his first defeat in the form of Norton I, but even that is just speculation. Ali would have most certainly have a better record if not for the exile, that I'm almost certain of.
I disagree, without the layoff Ali fights Frazier in 1969 and a champion in his prime beats a young challenger by comfortable UD . With the layoff Ali goes 2-1 with a fellow ATG when past him prime (its true to say Frazier was also shopworn for the 3rd fight). Far more impressive IMHO.
the exile made him even more popular,but it hurt him as a fighter.took away his best years i feel bigjake
I think thats undisputable but for his legacy as a whole letting these young guys come up and prove themselves while he was retired and then coming back a beating them does a lot more for his legacy then a few extra wins and couple less loses.
I say it hurt him physically...but legacywise it helped him.If the Foreman fight had happened before exile,it would'nt have had the impact it did in Ali's career IMO.Even tho I think,an absolute prime Ali would have made George look silly in the ring.Too fast and too busy for George....would have got gassed just chasing Ali around that ring. And so yeah,the exile helped his legacy for sure.
But let's say that he never went into exile and ruled supreme for 14 years until he lost to Holmes in 1978 with 30+ defenses under his belt (I'm not saying he necessarily would reign that long, but if he did), could anyone dispute his standing as the nr. 1 HW? Wouldn't he have a good claim to be seen as one of the very best p4p, even?