Does Frazier get enough credit for beating Ali in FOTC?

But he was capable of being as effective. Being able to dance more laps around an older opponent might have looked more entertaining but it was not winning him the fights as much as his punching. He was still as good in that he could still win the fights as good.

 

You're simply off on this one. He was at his greatest because he could hit and not be hit. His legs were his greets gift. They were not a matter of entertainment. They were his weapon. No one could get set against him. by 66 and 67 he was already hitting as hard as he would ever hit .. starting w the Bonavena fight and the Frazier fight he entered a new career , one where he took far more shots than ever before .. by no means was he as good let alone better than he was pre-exile.

 

You hit it on the nail, can't improve on what you wrote at all.

 

No he wasn't and the opponents who faced him a second time after his comeback agree with H .E .Grant and myself on this.

Patterson and Chuvalo both commented on how he could not sustain his attacks as he had when prime,pre exile.

 

No question post exile Ali was never as good. And would not have been even with the proper warm up time & fights.

His trainer can be seen somewhere dissecting at length the speed Ali lost,
Especially foot speed, & his endurance on his toes declined also.
He was still great, but absolutely more human & much more hittable later.

 

Even the 1967 incarnation of Ali would have had problems with Frazier and Ken Norton. Muhammad would have won but they'd have still been very competitive fights.


Yes,Frazier does indeed get credit for beating a slightly rusty,but still very dangerous version of Muhammad Ali. It was Joe's biggest legacy bout.

 

Still speaking Klingon then,Frankie

 

Sir, you need too see an opthamologist quickly, there is no compaison between the pre exile & post exile!!

 

ALI was phenomenal in his 1960s prime. But there was extra dancing he did then that was not necessary. Not all of it was required to be as effective. As a hyperactive youth he simply could not sit still and this reflected in his boxing style. He could move and change angle and direction, the perfection of timing was incredible. But a good portion was show. Once you create the opening that's enough. ALI would use the opening, score, then move as much to put on a show as frustrate the opponent. Later The timing and perfection was still there he just did not have the full three minutes of moving. It did not have to mean he got hit more (even if he did) and it did not have to mean he had a harder time beating the same type of men. The opponents also got younger. That was a big thing. Before he was the youngster.

 

I agree with all of these points,McVey. Although Ali could never get back his 1966-67 form,he certainly improved on his FOTC performance which was pretty damn good all things considered. When he was focused and in prime shape,his seventies best was circa 1972-74. And YEAH........YEAH.........YEAH............any other fighter would have been stopped by Frazier the way Ali was in the eleventh in their 1971 superfight. Both men went above and beyond in that one as far as balls are concerned.

 

It doesn't take a lot of working out.

Of course Frazier deserves full credit for his performance in the FOTC, because even that version of Ali was arguably far better than anyone Joe had previously faced.

 

its clear a s daylight, ali was not the ali of the 60s, if you cannot see that you have severe memory deficiencies!!

 

Good thing they both retired before they had to face the true ,fearless beast in David Haye

 

Come on Einstein, Lets talk about the ever imposing Haye ... Do tell, were you in the crowd when Marvelous raped Minter ???

 

He gets plenty of credit. Its the corner stone of his career and one of the main reasons he is regarded as an ATG.