You know it also is incorrect to say Wlad has no uppercut. He certainly does, he just doesn't throw it unless he has the correct distance and timing, which has hapoened, he knocked down Peter with it. The commentary even said something like "what a punch." though that could be wrong.
So basically, Tua would have to be at his absolute best to beat the worst version of Ali? Makes sense.
You generally didnt need to resort to that, if you had average boxing ability, for a world class heavyweight! This is like asking, what if Ali had to resort to the rope a dope, against Hasim Rahman or Ray Mercer!
There are millions of people who lived through days gone by, and still know less than fuk all. You act just like one of them. To say either Frazier or Tua had no right hand is one of the most pi'sspotical statements ever. I think you are too stupid to explain what you actually mean, which is neither of them FAVOURED the right hand. Not the same thing at all.
Snap. 47 in my case. By his own reckoning ( Perry then Ali never had a left hand worth ****, because he never knocked anyone over with it.
This is actually an interesting fight in that they are both the others kryptonite. Tua's weakness was guys who could move and defend and were hard to hit. It does get any harder to hit than Ali. Frazier, was almost like Frazier in style, and if Ali was susceptible to left hooks, Tua was as good a chance as any to exploit it. Also factor in that if you believe in evolution and modern science, there is no doubt that athletes were better in Tuas time than Alis (compare running times from the 60s to 00s). It could actually be an interesting fight. Especially with Tua coming off wins over Corbett, Quarry and others.
He doesn't beat Ali but, because of styles I believe he gives Frazier hell. If you find that unreasonable ,tant pis.