Suppose Ali had a strong 15th round in the FOTC

Plenty of close cards and a great thread.

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...-muhammad-ali-i-fotc-50th-anniversary.664266/

 

That's correct mate yeah I think the only aspect to my scorecard that may be a bit different to quite a few others. Is that I gave Ali quite a few of the early rounds and I think some other scorecards may see it a bit differently.

To me Frazier/Ali 1 reminds me of Leonard/Duran 1.

Alot of people seem to think that Frazier and Duran won pretty convincingly but I've never quite seen it that way myself in my own personal opinion.

I also had Leonard/Duran 1 a very close fight aswell 8-7 to Duran.

 

I alao see Montreal aa similar to FOTC in that sense. Very close on the cards, but no major doubt on who the better man on the night was.

 

Good posts guys. I think the thing is Duran and Frazier won many of their rounds more convincingly than Ali and Ray won theirs which, while led to them looking more dominant in the overall fight than the scoring system allowed i.e. it didn't get to be completed refelected on a scorecard. I hope that makes sense.

 

I have never understood why people make excuses for Ali like ,,not being active. He had a comeback fight and crucified Quarry. Lets squash this myth,,Ali was 29 years old for Frazier, prime for a heavyweight and he got thrashed

 

That's a crazy take.

Never in the history of boxing has a man at the top level, that relies on speed, reflex and timing been out of the ring as long as Ali was and come back and improved or even retained the same physical capability. Frazier won - Ali didn't get thrashed, he took and gave a beating. Both fighters nursed their wounds. Frazier getting worse and Ali improving after the fight quells any myths of it being one-sided.

Facing Quarry isn't anything close to facing a peaked Frazier. By the very same logic, Evander beat a prime version of Mike Tyson cos he was only one year older than Ali was when facing Frazier and his results suggested he lost nothing - McNeeley, Mathis Jnr, Bruno and Seldon.

 

The post-exile Ali was physically diminished; no dispassionate observer would dispute that: the reflexes, the timing, the legs were not what they were, but he arguably accomplished more, much more. We can appreciate Joe without denigrating Muhammad.

 

Ali did get thrashed, he was drunk on Fraziers left hook in the 11th round, as hurt as Ali has ever been and Joe sent him air borne in the 15th .
.

 

Does forty three months of inactivity negatively affect an athlete who relies on speed, timing, and reflexes? And do you believe boxing is the most unforgiving of sports?

 

I agree with this old post of yours, you said Futch knew Frazier took a "tremendous beating" and "one that lasts".

They both beat the crap out of each other.

 

We have different ideas of thrashed.

What Ali did to Terrell was a thrashing. What Louis did to Schmeling was a thrashing. What Hagler did to Sibson was a thrashing. Frazier won one of the greatest fights ever and was physically worse off than the guy that he beat - rounds were fairly close on a rounds won basis - that's not a thrashing.

The point remains, no world class athlete can be removed from their sport in their prime for 3+ years and return as good as they were, just because they're still relatively young.

 

Boxing is the most unforgiving of sports. Cus alluded to that when he watched the post-exile Ali train. A fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a second is the difference between a swing and a hit, and a swing and a miss.

 

"I have never known of any athlete who could remain inactive for 3 years or more and then perform at a level to fight a top contender.”

- Cus D'Amato