Muhammad Ali 1966 vs the best versions of Frazier/Foreman/Norton

Maybe...But the covering up on the ropes is one of the times Ali was critiqued for having an essentially failed rope-a-dope strategy. You can argue he had more choice & it was better than keeping his hands low.
I do not know if Ali was usually "playing around' when his hands were low-this technique allowed him to have more speed & land more shots.
Except with a high volume slugger like Frazier it may not have been the best choice.

 

Me and Futch disagree with that. Maybe you'll find one of us slightly more credible than the other but it's still a good line-up all together.

 

As much as I admired Joe Frazier, Muhammad Ali beats both Frazier and Ken Norton by clear unanimous decision. He had the reflexes, timing, speed, footwork, stamina, and movement to frustrate them both. There would be no layoff to cause rustiness, also he was quite active in 1966, during his first title reign he was not dropped by anyone. Ali would stop George Foreman, because of Foreman's obvious weakness, lack of stamina. There would be no need of the Rope A Dope strategy as he could dance non stop for 15 rounds if needed, without missing a beat.

 

Ali beats em all

 

Frazier is always tough for Ali but the pre suspension version of Muhammad would have had too much of everything, except sheer brute power, for all three.
Ali takes a close decision over Frazier, stops Foreman in 6 and schools Norton on points.

 

I saw that fight live on closed circuit television on Nov 22 1965 with my dad and uncle. He was toying with Floyd Patterson for insulting his religion and for calling him Cassius Clay, which he would continue to do afterwards. I was very young but ws amazed at the speed of Muhammad Ali, who by the way was 23 years old in that fight.