It should have taken Ali 3 years (71-74) to fight for Hw title.

Im struggling to see a case for Shavers or Lyle as being these overwhelmingly better contenders for Joe in 71 and 72 than Daniels and Stander. Shavers had done absolutely nothing until five months after Frazier lost to Foreman and that was beating the shot Jimmy Ellis. He lost his next fight to Quarry who Frazier had already knocked out. Lyle didnt even turn pro until after the FOTC. In fact I have a film of Lyle as an amateur before the FOTC sparring with Ali, he tells Ali he is going to go spar with Frazier and Ali warns him not because Frazier will hurt him. Lyle indeed does go to Frazier's camp but instead spars with Ken Norton while Frazier gives him pointers. Lyle beat nobody of importance before Frazier lost to Foreman and in fact his first big fight came just after Frazier lost the title and that was his losing effort to Quarry. When a fat Vincente Rondon is the best name on your record (as was the case with Lyle and Shavers in 1971 and 72) then you cant complain about Frazier fighting a guy like Stander (who had stopped Shavers) or Daniels. The Daniels fight was what it was. Frazier wasnt going to take a hard fight after the FOTC and Daniels being from the south was perfect for Don Elbaum's plan of having a championship coincide with the Super Bowl that was being held in New Orleans. Its not like Frazier just picked Daniels out of the blue, that was an offer he got and was glad to go along with it. Stander was a more serious fighter which is odd considering he was unranked (although had been ranked as high as 8 as recently as January 72) and Daniels was rated 9 when the fight was signed and 10 when it was actually held. I dont think either Shavers or Lyle were head and shoulders over Stander at that point. Oddly enough some people have criticized Frazier winning a portion of the title from Buster Mathis hile saying he should have fought Lyle in 72 but Lyle got his top 10 ranking in 72 only by beating Mathis who was coming off two one sided losses.

 

Foreman's rating did drop in 1972. He went from #2 to #4 for not fighting a single ranked contender. Foreman wasnt ranked ahead of Ali when he challenged Frazier (I keep telling people to ignore Ring Ratings) the WBA had Ali #1. Foreman was rated as the "leading AVAILABLE contender" for Frazier. Foreman upset Frazier and then wanted to have a gimme against Roman. The WBA refused to sanction this bout because Roman was not rated in the top ten. When that fight was held they gave Foreman an option of defending against one of his top five challengers or be stripped. Those challengers were in order: 1. Ali, 2. Norton, 3. Frazier, 4. Quarry, 5. Lyle. Ali and Frazier were already scheduled to meet in their rematch so Norton got the call. When Ali "beat" Frazier it was an eliminator and Ali merely kept his #1 ranking and got the next shot at Foreman. Ali didnt get an immediate rematch with Frazier after the FOTC because both the WBA and NY frowned on rematch clauses (even though the FOTC had one) after the title had essentially been tied up between a handful of fighters for most of the sixties with all of the rematches between Patterson, Johannson, Liston, and Ali.

 

Shavers and Lyle were not a factor until the mid 70's.

 

no he didn't. But at the time it either didn't make sense to fight any one else or the opponents in question weren't available.

 

Good answer. Foreman deserved to be the underdog against Frazier because aside from his potential, statistically he had thread bare form at World level for being "leading available" or an outstanding contender.

 

You have to remember, there was only one title back then. The champ defended about 3x a year, that's only 3 heavyweight title fights a year.

 

George Foreman only defended a couple times in a year and a half span.In addition, ducked Quarry.

 

Fraziers prime was about 67 to 71..no reason for him to fight Ali after or Foreman when he weighed 20 pounds more from his real fight weight of around 205.I don't believe he beats foreman any year due to he struggled with power punchers,but his style had Alis number.i would say its more a hollow win for Ali any year after 1971.I think an immediate rematch would have favored Frazier still,i think it was bad management that waited until 74/75 to do rematches.

 

Hardly a hollow win for Ali after '71 as Muhammad was also past his best and Joe was still a very dangerous fighter - Look at the heavyweight ratings for 1974,for example,and say how many apart from Ali and George Foreman would have beaten him.

 

That was probably down to Quarry either being out of contention or money. After all why would a man who was more than willing to face beasts such as Ali,Frazier and Norton duck Quarry ?

 

Stylistically Frazier slowed he was a swarmer not outside fighter like Ali who improved after 71..in 74 he was sharper with the punches,and off the long lay off by then he regained his taste for the ring,guys like Norton troubled him due to his reach that could match Alis ,he certainly had the advantage style wise going in to those rematches with fraizer after 71.

 

Foreman admitted to ducking Quarry,for whatever reason is unknown,foreman avoided many fighters through his career 70's to 90's.

 

Norton and Ali werent what I would call "beasts" especially not Norton. Ali was perceived as too old for Foreman when they fought. But Foreman admitted that he ducked Quarry because Quarry was such a good counterpuncher, particularly off the ropes and was durable. These three things: his counterpunching ability, his ability to fight off the ropes, and his durability might all spell poison to Foreman. Some people act like its nuts to give Quarry a chance with Foreman yet while I Quarry certainly had his faults its not out of the realm of possibility to see Foreman working Quarry onto the ropes, Quarry fighting effectively off the ropes and using his durability to avoid the occasional punches Foreman lands before Foreman wears himself out and Quarry catches him with something late or takes him to school. Quarry had flaws but so did Foreman and Foremans flaws actually play into Quarry's style pretty well. Its a classic case of styles make fights where a lot of guys who could beat Quarry would get killed by Foreman but Quarry might have had some success that those guys couldnt. Id give a younger Quarry a better shot though. He was fading by the time he actually would have gotten a shot against Foreman unless they fought earlier.

 

It's equally feasible that Quarry would get sucked into a brawl which would spell disaster against Foreman. This is the scenario I envisage.