How many heavies in the last 25 years could beat Joe Frazier, Does it hurt ALI?

Frazier was a small heavy

Any big heavy with serious power - Klitshko, Lewis, Bowe - is gonna have too much brute power for him

I'm going on this theory based on the devesating George Foreman loss

 

:huh Sanders and rahman :huh



Maybe say Holmes, tyson, lewis, vitali but none is a foregone conclusion :hat joe could smoke wlad and vice versa

 

Styles make fights a Frazier was the wrong style for Ali, but Ali still won in one hell of a fight in Manilla!

Who would beat Ali? Probably, Lewis, Vitali, Vlad, Tyson (at his very best) Ali would have beated Holmes in his prime.

 

First, lets address a few things:




i) Styles make fights! Just because fighter A can beat fighter B does not mean he will beat fighter C! There are just too many examples of this. In this instance, just because Foreman was able to blast out frazier does not mean that everyone who bares similarity would be able to do it.


ii) In short, no, this does not hurt Ali. He had a great rivalry with the next best heavyweight of his era and treated the fans to one of the highest quality, yet most brutal, fight trilogies we have ever seen. If anything his legacy is enhanced by his willingness engage the best, and not harmed but the possibility that other fighters of the modern era would have been a shot to beat frazier to various degrees


iii) To varying degrees there are fighters i'd give a shot to beat frazier, but certainly not 25. This is my personal take on things:


i) Fighters I'd make a slight favorite:

Larry Holmes: IMO, He'd be the best chance. Rock solid chin, power, piston jab. I'd make him a betting favorite personally

Lennox Lewis: stylistically a good chance if he could hurt frazier early, but the longer the fight goes and the stronger frazier gets the more likely joe may get to landing that hook on lennox's jaw. Frazier carried his power into the later rounds too

Prime Tyson: Man, that would have been something to see! IMO Tysons combination of speed, power and defence in his prime would make him a slight betting favorite IMO


*Even money shots:

Vitali: Has the tools to do it, but could he deal with 12 rounds of sustained Frazier assult?
Bowe: See above, stamina may become an issue as well.


*Outside chances:

Holyfield: Would have been hell of a war, but I just cant see him getting past frazier. I know that is hardly a logical or detailed analysis, its just a gut feeling.
Wlad: Has the tools but..........
Generally repsonds poorly to pressure
Not the greatest chin in the world and it would be definately be tested.
Again, he has the tools but given his past history, he's a long shot at best.





I hope this offers some reasonable perspective to both sides of this argument.









Sage

 

Do you think that boxers just don't age? Do you think that James Toney and Larry Donald were just far too much for Holyfield at any stage of his career, and would have easily bested Mike Tyson, Riddick Bowe, Michael Moorer, and all the other elite fighters Holyfield beat? Do you think that Kevin McBride and Danny Williams were just too good for Mike Tyson at any time in his career, and were far superior to guys like Razor Ruddock and Tony Tucker, who Tyson thrashed? Do you realize that there has only been one man in the history of boxing to win the heavyweight championship past the age of 40 (and that that was, ironically enough, George Foreman)?

1. It is rather inconsistent of you to first argue against the acceptance Foreman and Holmes' opinions, then subsequently make an argument based entirely off Foreman's opinion two paragraphs later.
2. Fat and age ARE a disadvantage. Would you like for me to bring up some cherished purely statistical points as regard a fighter's average record, say, before and after the age of 35?
3. Just watch some bloody film. Holmes and Foreman are visibly less sharp, fast, powerful, active and well-conditioned if one simply gives the film a cursory inspection.

Your argument here is palbably weak.

 

Please don't say Vital Klitschko would have defeated Muhammad Ali. He isn't knocking Ali out, and he sure as hell isn't outlanding him either.

:-(

 

I think that boxers age, but maybe they don't age as fast as the division gets stronger. Meaning: When they (Foreman/Holmes) lose at 40+ it is MORE because of the opponents and LESS because the age.

That two things are different, because one is Foreman's statements regarding other boxers and the other one is regarding his OWN body.

You simply cannot trust how boxers see their opponents: I just watched what Larry Holmes had to say (after being TKOed the first and only time). The reporter asks "How does the punch of Mike Tyson compare to Earnie Shavers and Ken Norton and others etc?" And what does Holmes say? The others punch MUCH HARDER THAN TYSON. It's ridiculous. It's a similar to the statement (I mentioned before) of Ray Mercer (claiming that Lennox UD12 hit him much harder than Klitschko TKO6). It's unbelievable. I also remember Brewster saying that he knew (while fighting Klitschko I and being knocked down) that everything was going sweet as planned. I mean, come on, there is obviously some misconception going on regarding the assessment of the opponents and oneself.

I am not so sure about FAT FOR HEAVIES. Fat offers protection. There are a lot of top heavyweights who are fat, e.g. Samuel Peter. Ali wasn't the leanest either.

Foreman and Holmes are phenomenons. Since they could keep going for so long we have to assume that their peak was later than usual.

1) What fight?
2) They may have been slower but the chin got stronger and the body fat protected them more than before. So just because they (Foreman, Holmes) were slower doesn't mean they had less chances.

But again the topic is "Frazier".

 

Do you actually believe any of the bullcrap you write?

 

I agree and even Lennox Lewis would have his hands full.
Heavyweights of today may be bigger, but definately not better.
Substandard would be the word.

 

How many fighter in the past 20 years COULD beat Fazier? We are talking heavyweights here. One punch could make the fight.

A better question is how many fighters would have a reasonable chance of beating Frazier. A few, I think.

 

I hope not.

 

I believe that fat offers protection against hits.

I believe that Ali wasn't the leanest.

I believe that you cannot trust boxers' assessment about their own performance especially when they LOSE.

Which of these statements do you consider "bullcrap"?