So much is made of Ali being better before the exile. In some respects he was, but pre exlie Ali gets cut down and stopped by a prime Foreman. The older Ali was bigger, tougher, smarter, more skilled and deceptive than the pre exile Ali. That rope a dope style if employed by pre exile Ali gets shattered like fragile glass against a '74 Foreman. And what if he tries to box and move his way to victory? I doubt that works either as Foreman would cut down the ring and a few good shots would send Ali reeling. Ali fought essentially the absolute perfect fight against Foreman that night.
The best Ali would be too quick for any hwt champion before or since. Great boxers like Johnson, Tunney, and Ali would outsmart, out speed and outbox the best Foreman.
The Ali of Liston 2 fight only fought 1 round that day. Would like to have seen more of that version. Big, fast, and confident.
You could argue, maybe due to experience of the tough fights with Frazier and Norton Ali was accustomed mentally/physically to cope with the Foreman onslaught. Apart from Liston, who didn't exactly show much in the 1964 and 1965 fights, Ali didn't really fight anyone in the 1960s. Terrell might have been his second-most dangerous opponent. Foreman was another level of animal to the likes of over-the-hill Folley and shot-through-the-lung Williams, and the Brian Londons, Doug Jones and Henry Cooper.
That's true. A lot of people say that Ali was clearly better pre exile. Yet he looked better against far weaker competition. It was clearly weaker opponents. In reality though his prime almost surely occurred during exile.
Ali had to use gimmicks to beat Foreman in 74. He needed nothing but brilliant boxing to beat Liston and tough top challengers like Terrell and Chuvalo in his prime.
George chuvalo was a pretty damn tough and strong heavyweight who gave a 60's Ali a pretty good night's work though. And Karl mildenberger, though not exactly a word beater turned up to give a good account of himself as well. This is to go along with the fights you already mentioned liked Liston, Patterson, Terrell, etc.. Muhammad Ali was in his twenties. In stellar shape. Faster than he ever would be with the experience of 10 title fights wth a gold medal and a few meetings with some very good guys.. And while he was certainly leaner in his early championship days I don't necessarily agree with the author that he was "smaller" than he was against foreman. He finished the 60's somewhere around 210-213 lbs.. He was maybe 215 against foreman. And he certainly didn't grow in height or arm length during that time frame.
I think this hypothesis has merit. I don't think Ali had mastered the clinch pre exile as he had by the time of the Foreman fight. Him pulling on George's head like that really gave him an advantage. (Terrible refereeing to allow it to continue all fight long with nary a warning, but anyway.) Pre exile Ali would have had the concidence to try and outspeed and outmaneuvre George. Had the fight taken place in the sweltering heat of Zaire, Ali may have found himself gassing, but maybe without the guile and experience to change tack. George in Zaire was a far, far more formidable proposition than an old, slow Liston. It's not out of the question that Foreman can win this.
Mentioning Ali and Chuvalo in the same sentence is an incredible disservice to the line of great fighters with ATG characteristics. Go follow another sport dumbass.
None of them tested him as Frazier and Norton did. Defeat to Frazier especially. Ali's showing against Frazier in 1971 was a revelation to many, but he lost. It's arguable that he needed these setbacks to truly prepare him for the task of conquering Foreman. I wouldn't argue it strongly at all, I'm not convinced either, but generally it is a hypthesis that has some merit.