Frazier retires after FOTC, how is he rated?

This is one part I don't completely agree with. I think opinion would be split about just how much Fraziers' win over Ali meant. Some would say that Frazier showed his superiorty by clearly beating Ali, but others would say that a rusty Ali still gave Frazier one hell of a fight and that a prime Ali would have won.

 

very sorry ,my mistake ,i am a twat !!! i should read the whole thread and now i see it , it is a good post. TA :good:good

 

I think Joe's a top five HW. I'd place him in the top 3 if he retired after the FOTC. (I rate him over Foreman because I believe he would have defeated more of history's other greats if at his best.)

Smoke did some good work following the FOTC.

His win over a streaking Quarry in their rematch was a masterpiece, one in which he displayed a fine jab and surprising right hand. He did well enough in the Foreman rematch to raise some questions about how a peak Frazier might have done against George. (His mobility nearer 200 pounds would have been better than it was at 224-1/2. He might have drowned Foreman in deep water. Peralta showed that a man Frazier's size was capable of giving him hell.)

He proved with Stander that he did not need to be coming forward to win. Backing him up wasn't enough in and of itself to beat him. Would Ali have prevailed in Manila against FOTC Frazier? (I have no doubt that Muhammad would have repelled a Frazier challenge in 1968 or 1969, but it would have been no cinch.)

 

I think his reputation is compromised by retiring after FOTC. His performance in Manilla is incredible. By being linked to Ali in arguably the greatest heavyweight fight of all times Frazier name is written in the stars. Series are always more memorable and he proved his grit in that fight. His wins after his loss to Foreman showed he remained at the top of the division. I think a convincing win over Norton would have vaulted Frazier to an even high status (a difficult fight for Frazier, in my view). But Frazier went out near the top, and that's no shame. (A convincing loss to Norton would have knocked Frazier down several notches, so it's probably best he didn't take him on.)

I have to take strong issue with one post. Frazier is not better than Ali. The FOTC was a close fight. Frazier rose to the occasion and fought the fight of his life. For his part, Ali helped Frazier out by screwing around. He started playing and let Frazier come on at the end and hurt him. Ali proved a lot in that fight, too, standing up to a withering assault from a determined Frazier. Ali was overconfident and had yet to grasp the extent to which his loss in reflexes required a change in style. Had the Frazier of FOTC met the Ali who beat Foreman, Frazier would not have won the fight. That Frazier would have lost to Ali in the 1960s I think is beyond question. It was a moment that indicated how remarkable Frazier could be at his best, but it is not a moment that vaults Frazier to a position over Ali.

 

Yes, and he'd be a consenus top 4 heavyweight or so if they were all in their prime, not in their last two fights and nearly 40 (Walcott) and Ezzard was a dead man walking.

He gets credit for beating Moore as it all came together for Moore later on in his career regardless.

But despite that he was still floored by two of the three fighters among his greatest wins, and damned near beaten by two of them regardless.

 

It's depressing because Frazier's greatest fights were his largest downfall.

The Ali fights were draining. He could have simply not faced Ali again (Remaining 1-0 against him) and instead taken on the likes of Norton, Foster, Shaver's. Far easier and less damaging fights. He'd definitely be held in higher regard with simply a against Ali and another dozen wins or so against quality opponents.

 

They were not dead men walking. Hell Ali was vs Holmes, but not Charles, Walcott, and Moore.
They may have been past 30. But they were still top fighterss, and would have been top dog had Marciano not been there. Old shot fighters dont get rank number 1.
And relly the only person to have been close to beat Marciano in title fights was Walcott.

Evey one else got beat down pretty badly.
And no Charles does not count. He was clearly beating in foght 1, and won one mere round on all 3 score cards in the rematch.

 

My answer is yes. He makes the top 4 or at the very least, top 5. Losing the next 2 matches he had with the greatest along with two very bad one sided poundings from Foreman, depreciated his value quite a bit. Give him the win over the Ali and cut it off right there at around 27-0, and he's in pretty good shape.

There are some who might have criticized the fact that he had too few fights, had he retired in 1971. But then again, as it is he only has something like 33, including 4 losses and a draw with cummings, yet he's still in most people's top 10.

 

It's an interesting question whether any version of Ali post exile could have beaten FOTC Frazier. It's very hard to say, but interesting to ponder.

 

I've always felt that Norton's greater height and cross-armed defense left him open to Frazier's hook downstairs, and that Joe's bob and weave style would have gotten him under Ken's overhand right. Frazier's lower center of gravity would have also favored his being able to make Norton give ground in my estimation.

Is there a particular reason why you believe Norton would have been especially difficult for Frazier to contend with?

 

Norton was awkard and big. Foreman could back him up, but it would hard for Frazier. It's wasn't the hooks that Norton was especially vunerable to, but uppercuts. I'm not saying Norton beats Frazier, but that I don't think it's an easy fight. Norton carried a punch, and Frazier was hittable. Of all the dream fights I would like to see, this one is way up there.

 

I thnk Ali would have won the FOTC had he not started goofing around. He was killing Frazier through most of the first part of the fight. I don't think Frazier could have finished the fight had Ali kept up the pace. All that silliness on the ropes let Frazier gain the advantage. When he hurt Ali in the 11th, it took a lot out of Ali, and the ****** business in the corner was what allowed Frazier to land that shot. Ali blew the fight. I know that sounds like I'm taking something from Frazier. I love Joe Frazier, and this was his greatest moment. But if Ali had not taken off some middle rounds with clowning, it would have been a different outcome.

 

Ali wouldn't stay on the ropes and ship those punches for fun. He was tiring and probably wanted Frazier to punch himself out, but Frazier wasn't Foreman. Im hindsight you might say that FOTC was one fight when Ali didn't make the best decisions, but he did what he thought was right at the time. No way did he lose that fight beacuse of a lack of concentration or motivation.

 

I disagree with your interpretation of the fight. Ali was playing around with Frazier like he was working out on a speed bag. Remember that? The audience was booing him. In fact, the audience was so pissed that their allegiance noticeably shifted. Ali was clowning long before he got tired. Ali tired when Frazier took the wind out of his sails with power punches. It wasn't like Manilla. Ali was much more focused in Manilla. Ali blew the FOTC. He should have taken the fight more seriously.

 

In ultra weak divisions they do.