In which fight was Ali hurt the most?

Frazier I and III were the most grueling, but I don't think he ever got hit as hard as he did by Shavers. He said so himself.

 

"So called weird uppercut" What would you call it? In my books and Eddie Futchs it isn't really even an uppercut.
He beat monsters like Foreman because George fought a dumb fight he didn't need his youthful ability.The 2nd Fraizer fight is really an underrated showing of Ali's I loved that bout.

 

He knocked Coopman stupid with a couple of uppercuts so i'd sure hate to wear it regardless. Futch labeled it an uppercut but one that was telegraphed. An uppercut is an uppercut.

He beat Foreman because he was too good. Nothing Foreman could do would have sufficed.

 

You give Ali no credit for a The Rumble in the Jungle?!
He was in a phone booth ring that was soft & terrible for movers.
He had to adjust on the fly.
He needed a massive chin to survive even with Foreman's stupidity. At least once he was out on his feet.
His lead rights & rope-a-dope & provocations/psychological warfare were deployed brilliantly.
He put together a Great Fight.

You can critique him for holding & pulling behind the neck.
But very few fighters until that point in history had any decent chance against Foreman that night, under those conditions.
If you say it was only George's stupidity, I say you have a massive bias.

 

Foreman fought silly, Ali was going to win no matter what route he took he was not going anywhere, George was not making it to the final bell against someone who could fight, endure and think so well. Adjust on the fly? I never brought that personally. You must remember George was matched against Fraizer and Norton, one fragile the other small and matched to Georges every strength those are his best wins impressive at the time but in retrospect not really. Lead rights do not make for a good case for Foreman being so unstoppable, no fighter should endure them so often in one fight at the highest level he was a very inexperienced fighter with less then two hundred rounds when he won the title don't forget that. Ali schooled a relative novice at the championship level.

 

My point exactly, Foreman was inexperienced at that level Ali was too durable, savy, skilled and was similar sized to Foreman so the obvious thing happened.
Futch said it himself that Ali did not know how to throw an uppercut I can get the quote soon if you like.

 

I also liked Ali-Frazier II. One of Muhammad's best post-exile performances. Okay,it may not have been as dramatic or punishing as fights 1 & 3 between Muhammad and Joe,but a good fight in isolation.

 

Ali showed great intelligence in the fight.

 

In terms of being hurt from one single shot I'd say Cooper

 

Futch said he threw it wrong - I've seen any amount of quotes. It was still an uppercut and on the odd occasion it was thrown with bad intentions.

Foreman had enough experience within his own style he was just not good enough. Knocking out an ATG like Frazier is hardly the job of a novice despite your attempts to take away as much credit for the win (and Fraziers greatness) as possible. Same with Norton. Foreman had some serious assets.

 

You don’t back up anything you say, tell me all about Frazier and Norton’s deep resume if you take away Ali. I’ve explained many times why I don’t think George is that great H2H but you simply repeat yourself so, so will I.

70s George beat people made for him, a fragile Norton and a small come forward fighter who outside of Ali beat Quarry as his best win. He struggled and lost to fighters his own size who could fight and was nearly stopped in an amateurish scrap with Lyle these are facts.

 

At the very latest, Spinks II would've been the best fight to retire after.

 

X2.

 

Sorry this does not make sense. You take limited truths & cherry-pick negative information without trying to be Fair & balanced.

1) Ali was still great *and* fought a brilliant plan. Still he needed all his wiles & a great chin to survive.
2) Very few fighters until that point, under those tiny & soft ring conditions against that George Foreman were going to survive.
3) Norton was only "fragile" against the best sluggers in the world, rarely, & never by then.
4) So since Frazier was smaller, yet undefeated...That is your reason for deriding that win? Might as well never give anyone credit for beating Tyson, Tokyo Douglas was not brilliant either...
To say those wins are not really impressive at all is extreme & goes against all boxing expertise.
5) Lead rights were not the case for Foreman being so unstoppable. But it was part of an unconventional, unexpected & highly effective strategy. With the shock value & ALi's speed nit would have worked on most World Class fighters.
6) Foreman was an Olympic HW champion & 40-0 with 37 KOs. He only did not have so many rounds due to his successes.
Still that is more rounds than many others when they took the title.

Most people do not have the Ego Strength to admit when they are wrong.
But start a thread claiming that none of these wins-any I have mentioned, especially The Rumble in the Jungle-was very impressive.
You will quickly learn otherwise.

See "When We Were Kings" about the fight for a broader perspective.

 

11th round in the FOTC he was really hurt. Against Shavers, Ali said he didn't remember several rounds after Earnie nailed him.