Joe Frazier vs. Superheavyweights

Your surity astounds me given Ali's greater success agaisnt top line opponents and his experience controlling these superior men inside. Wlad as a clincher is in no way more advanced than Ali. Both are rudamentary, Ali has shown himself able to control one of the greatest in-fighters ever in boxing with his rudementary skill, Wlad has controlled the likes of Chagaev in this way. I can't see where the leeway is to label Klitschko "better" at all.

Ali was always in top shape for Frazier, whom he regarded as the #2 HW in history by the end of their series. He did take breaks against other fighters for this reason, but not against Frazier in I and not against Frazier in II. He's on the ropes because he's trapped there. Of course, this doesn't mean that Frazier can force all opponents to the ropes. It's a matter of styles. But it's certainly not a matter of smarts, as you've implied.

I've boxed, i've talked to fighters, unless you mean proffessional champions?

Regardless of this total irrelevance, in what ways do you think Frazier will box Wlad differently than he boxed Young? How will this respect manifest itself?

Frazier was HW champion of the world. He fought 37 fights and was stopped 3 times, once in one of the most herioc filmed efforts in boxing history, twice by one of the most feared punchers in history. These statistics here are far, far more important than someone who once "buckled his knees" or what happened to him as an amature. Frazier is vulnerable to aggressive massive punchers - that's proven. Trying to line him up for a KO versus EVERY puncher he faces because of that is nonsense, not to say lazy. Frazier showed astonishing resiliance in Foreman I. The type of resiliance that NONE of these four are able to claim and that Lewis and Wlad cannot dream of approaching.

Lyle - the only time Frazier could really have matched Lyle was in a high-risk low-reward fight post-Ali II, pre Ali III. He decided to match TOP CONTENDERS on his comeback trail, but should be forgiven for taking men he knew he had previously met - the best measure of a fighters relative ability. He then fought Ali, he then fought maybe the biggest HW puncher in history for a SECOND time, then he packed it in. No window for Lyle, really.

Liston - ??????? Liston beat ONE ranked contender post Ali and was the most widely avoided fighter, probably since Burley/Williams/Booker, possibly more so. You want Frazier to fight Liston? Based upon what?

Norton - the men were friends. The fight may have happened were Frazier a long reigning champion.

Shavers - at the time of Frazier's retirement, Shavers hadn't even fought over the title distance. Of course the two never met. Are you just picking names out of a hat?

Foreman - huge puncher, met by Frazier twice.

I suspect that you're just repeating "Frazier avoided punchers" because you read it on the forum. A closer look reveals the truth, as is often the case.

Any fight between 68 and 71. I think YOU confuse getting hit with having a bad defence. A short, swarming fighter is going to get hit and going to get hurt Mendoza. It was true of Demspey, Tyson, Patterson. All have excellent defence. I think that Frazier had a better defence than Patterson although a worse defence than Demspey. Probably something equivilant to Tyson's. All were excellent. It is, of course, possible to list the men who buckled their knees, knocked them out, hurt them, put them down. Trying to draw, from that, the conclusion that they are chinless or have a bad defence is just bizarre.

Probably FOTC I is your best bet where we see Frazier repeatedly slip one of the best jab in history, including with his hands down by his sides for kicks. You can also see him out-jab the taller, rangier Foster based mainly upon defence in the first round of their fight.

 

Ali chinches more than Wlad. Ali has controlled better fighters than Wlad with the clinch. I see no room for calling Wlad the better clincher, at all.

Show me:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04Ft84Qm_Y8[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UI8EQTa1cbM[/ame]

The problem with making "elementary deductions" in the face of vast complexities is they are often wrong. Frazier is literally the perfect foil for Foreman; Cus D'Amato labelled him "unbeatable" against swarmers. That does not mean that Frazier cannot beat any puncher, and it does not mean that any puncher is invincible against swarmers.

You've been keen to look exclusively at the difficulties of the match up for Frazier. Let's look at the difficulties for another protagonist, Wlad.

He's never been in the ring with a fighter of Frazier's class.

He's never been in the ring with a fighter who can sustain pressure like Frazier.

To beat Wlad at his best(and arguably Vitalli) you need to take away his control of tempo/and or range. Here is a fighter that is built to do specifically those things throughout any given fight.

You're going to say this over and over again, I can see; i'm going to leave it alone after this. My final word is to repeat, again, that all fighters can be hurt and that aggressive swarmers are the easist fighters of all to hurt. You're prepared to write off Joe's chin based upon who "hurt" him rather than on the two out and out KO's he's suffered. I find that odd. I think the increasing desire of posters on the board to point to any examples of a fighter being hurt as evidence to be hurled against that fighter's chin as increasingly bizarre. Throughout this discussion with me you've been keen to stress that I need boxing experience to hav this discussion with you, but you can't seem to grasp the basic concepts of ring action.

Lyle was absolutley nowhere at the time Frazier matched Bugner. Why would he fight a guy who had fought 12 rounds only once, losing? What possibly reasoning has Frazier matching Lyle at this time?

Source?

And whilst I agree that it would have been a good fight, I have the same question again; why on earth would Frazier fight Liston when Liston had beaten one ranked contender in 5 years?

I don't think he looked particularly good between Ali I and Manilla. Frazier could have matched any number of fighters instead of Daniels and Stander; they were shitty title defences. He then matched the greatest HW in history for the second time. As to Norton, again, you're repeating yourself, i'll repeat myself. The two men were friends. Perhaps they would have been matched had Frazier reigned for longer.

So? How does this in any way answer my question? Why are you insisting upon accusing Frazier of ducking Shavers "conviniently" given their career paths? All these guys - the same question.

"Outside of Foreman"? Why sould it be "oustisde of Formena" though? How is that in any way justifiable? Did you know that, outside of Ali, Frazier fought none of the three greatest HW's in history?

I'm going to get to a proper skills breakdown later, but I don't have time right now. What I want to say right now is this - you have Frazier painted as a fighter with a poor defence and a bad chin.

Who was stopped only thrice against ATG's.

Have a think about it.

:roll:

Yeah. About what i'd expect. Impossible for you to provide credit for even the things he is filmed doing.