No Fighter In Heavyweight History Could Outpoint 67 Ali

I'd agree i think. Frazier and Holmes would be dangerous, but i still think he'd get by both.

 

No fighter is unbeatable. I think Frazier would outpoint the '67 Ali just like he did during FOTC. Yes, Ali was faster back then, but you can't run from Frazier. He'll catch up very quickly and doesn't mind eating a jab if he has to. Ali's most succesfull moments during FOTC were when he was loading up and throwing big combinations, when he ran he was eating big left hooks. He was also a bit less strong and hard punching.

Marciano for the same reasons has a good chance as well as Joe Louis, with the aid of a knockdown for instance, Holmes and Lewis although i don't favor them, certainly can win one out of three.

 

Tunney, Holmes, Bowe, Lewis and both Klitschko's could defeat the 66/67 Ali on points. Could being the key word. Ali had issues with good jabbers at all stages of his career, and wasn't a shut em' out type on the cards in some of his fights.

 

I dont recall Ali doing much running in the FOTC,he layed on the ropes and took those hooks ,stupid strategy against a fighter with Fraziers stamina and determination. 18 rounds in 3 and 1/2 years wasnt enough preparation to fight a Smokin Joe at the top of his game. Prime for prime he beats Frazier,imo.Marciano didnt have the hand or foot speed to beat Ali,Lewis would be tough but a close dec for Ali.Holmes would have the best shot imo.

 

The Ali who fought Terrell was in a different class to the one who fought Frazier. That Ali didn't need to load up. He threw 8 punch combos with no problems. Constant Lateral footwork away from his left hook like he did against Liston will beat Frazier. Still be a tough fight as Frazier will always land a lot but not as many.

 

what? like it didn't against Liston. If Patterson danced he may have lasted longer LOL. Also notice Ali got off the ropes quickly against Liston. He didn't let himself be trapped there and controlled the centre of the ring in the 6th.

 

In my opinion, no one takes the better part of a trilogy against Muhammad Ali. Lewis, Holmes and Norton have good chances of beating him once in three fights. I'd make Holmes and even Lewis slight favorites with Norton as a very live underdog.

 

Zora Folley took two of the first three rounds from the 67 Ali. But Folley didn't have the chin or recuperative powers to stand up to, or recover from, the fourth round hook which Muhammad decked him with. Larry Holmes did. It's important to note that Ali got off to a fast start against Terrell and Williams, but Folley's skills and experience blunted that preference of the champion's.

Put Eddie Futch in Larry's corner, and Holmes could pull it off. Like Folley, he could stand his ground, land singular punches to Ali's body from outside, score with untelegraphed right hand leads (just like Folley), and use his jab to offset Ali's jab to throw Muhammad off his rhythm.

Holmes had the height, strength, speed and reach which Folley lacked. He was also capable of going 15 fast rounds when in prime condition. Ernie Terrell was able to defend himself well with his hands held high, and Larry could certainly do that.

Dempsey had the combination of handspeed, footspeed, reach and bodypunching necessary to also give Ali headaches. I favor Muhammad slightly in that one, but wouldn't be surprised if it turned out against him.

 

Several times after round 6 Ali tried to dance because going toe to toe obviously wasn't working. It never lasted long though, because Frazier caught with him every time. You can dance away from a slow Liston or Foreman (not that he did), but you can't dance away from a relentless puncher like Frazier or Marciano. That is not to say he can't win, but he's surely looking at a stylistic disadvantage that might cost him.

Let's face it here - who really tested the '64-'67 Ali outside of an after 6 round quitting Liston ? I mean it was a great performance by Ali in making Liston look like the 8 to 1 underdog instead of favorite and overcoming the fear.. but it doesn't have THAT much bearing on how he would handle a Frazier or a Marciano. Terrel, Patterson with back problems, a shot Williams etc, they are good but don't pose the tests that the former mentioned do.

If a 180lb Cooper can nearly lay him out with the left hook, then it's not that much of a stretch of imagination that Marciano could knock him down and win enough rounds with pressure, workrate and unorthodox punching to have his hand raised after 15 rounds. Now i don't really like the "If Cooper could..." argument, you can also say "If Walcott lasted 3 more rounds...", but my point is that Ali was not invincible or unbeatable. No man is.

 

Comparing a slow, aging Liston now to Frazier stylewise?atsch

 

The FOTC, was certainly one of the greatest matchups in heavyweight history, and one that Frazier deserves much credit for. We have to consider with all fairness however, that Muhammad Ali, had only fought on 2 occasions over the previous 4 years, and lost a lot of valuable time between the prime ages of 25-28. When I look at clips of him pounding the likes of Terell, Liston, Patterson and a few others, its clear to me that this was a faster, more energetic, and tenacious Ali, who also may have possesed a bit more power as well. Let's think about the heavyweight picture of the late 60's for a moment. By 1967, Muhammad Ali had all but cleared out the division's top talent. Had he been permitted to continue, his next opponent might have been someone like Buster Mathis, who I think he would have destroyed. I think Ali would have kept his momentum going had he stayed in the sport, and due to a lack of opposition, probably would have been pushed into a meeting with Frazier a bit earlier, perhaps around late 1968, or early 1969. With a peak Ali on top of his game combined with a slightly less experienced Frazier, I would have picked Ali to win a comfortable decision or dare I say late stoppage. I have all the respect in the world for Joe Frazier, as he is one of my favorite fighters, but a lot of folks make concessions for him being past his prime during the thrilla in manilla, but don't make the same allowences for Ali's layoff preceeding their first fight.

Now to answer the question of the thread, which is could anyone outpoint him in his prime. My answer would be, not anyone to that point in history. I don't see men like Dempsey, Louis, Tunney, Marciano, Walcott, Charles or any other champion preceeding Ali winning a decision. Later fighters such as Holmes, or possibly Lewis might have stood a chance given their reach, jabs, boxing ability and sting behind their punches. I wouldn't favor these men to win of course, but if they showed up on their best nights to face a cocky Ali in 1967, a victory on points might have been possible. Someone earlier mentioned the Klitschko brothers, but I can't see that happening. Both Klits, were to robotic like, and fought a straight up stance, that would have made an easy target for a much faster Ali. Factor in that these two both had the tendency to bleed, and that could have posed as a big problem in a 15 round fight.

 

Ken Norton arguably won all three fights with Ali-and I believe would've done the same thing in any time period.