The flaws in Ali's game

Mature...? I'd say they were more illegal than mature. I'd grant you that Ali was a supreme strategist who did adapt his game to deal with Frazier. You can see this as early as the first round of II where Ali learned to hold his right up high in range and put more pressure at the beginning on the slow-starting Frazier. Ali was actually going for the KO.

However, I'd assert that a prime Frazier could be favored to defeat even a 1967 Ali -the first time.

 

There wasn't much holding in Manilla. Not nearly as much as in the two previous fights. Instead Ali kept his hands up better (didn't drop the right as much) and actually gave Frazier a good go on the inside at times. Considering his declining physical abilities this might very well have been his best performance.

 

Actually there was no comparison between I and II and III. Watch the first one again if you don't believe me. Mercante wasn't having it.

 

I've watched it many, many times, and I think Ali holds a lot. Mercante warns Ali early, but then he doesn't follow up. Padilla did it better.

 

Padilla does what better...? He warned in round 2 and never followed up. In '71, Ali grabbed behind the neck about 5 times in round 1. Mercante yells at him twice and warns him once. In '75, Padilla is content merely to touch Ali's holding glove in round 1, then warns him twice in round 2.

Both had to decide how far to go when it became clear that Ali was going to continue to hold despite the warning. Disqualifying him was really a non-option considering the magnitude of any Ali-Frazier match. Mercante struck me as exerting far more control over Ali than either Padilla or Perez. You take Padilla. We disagree.

 

We do.

Ali did get away with a lot of holding, really.

 

...enough so that it may require an asterisk for me attached to some of his wins. His aura gave him allowances that it should not have. Now, all greats get gift decisions now and then, but Ali's being allowed to continuously flout the rules raises questions. Hell, Hopkins lost a point in the 9th for holding against Pavlik and it barely happened!

 

You'd be wrong

 

Bring it on.

 

Clearly Ali was nothing like the same speed, same reactions, same stamina and much more lethargic, he used nothing like the same movement. He also got cocky and fought the wrong fight

The way Ali dominated the first few rounds would have continued throughout the fight

 

He should have been docked point more often, without a doubt.

 

Frazier was a notorious slow-starter. The first few rounds indicate little if anything unless you're George Foreman. In addition, Frazier applied the kind of pressure -psychologically and physically- that was designed to slow damn near anyone down. And that includes Ali -who compared fighting a faded Frazier with "dying".

Prime Ali's stylistic flaws were apparant throughout his career -again: low hands, a right that dropped with the jab, a defense reliant on reflexes, discomfort on the inside. 1. Frazier had a style well-suited to exploit those flaws. 2. Styles make fights. Do you deny either of these assertions...? Frazier had a left hook from hell, he came in low and was very effective in close which is precisely where Ali was not effective. I would seriously question your description of Ali in 1971 as "lethargic" -he was less mobile, sure but let's not pretend that Frazier had nothing to do with that. I would also question your dismissal of Ali's stamina for the same reason.

Either way, I asserted that prime Frazier could be favored against 1967 Ali. Denying even that possibility is unwise.

 

I posted this in another thread regarding the match up, the only way Frazier stands a shot is if Ali seriously underestimates Frazier, but he'd win the rematches (as he did), heres my take:

Has anyone actually watched Ali-Frazier 1 or the series recently? And how many have watched it in full?

Ali arguably won 4-5 of the first 6 rounds, he was giving Frazier a pasting early and easily outlanding him. Then Ali's lesser stamina came into play and a prime Frazier with superior stamina took over.

Ali actually won 2 more rounds. Frazier beat the crap out of Ali late in the first fight and you could give him 2 10-8 rounds, but theres only 3 points in it against a rusty, slower Ali with far less stamina.

How does '71 ALi compare to 60s Ali? The speed is notably slower. Ali has less spring in his step. He doesn't move as much and fades down the stretch, taking more rounds off. He simply doesn't have the stamina of the prime Ali. Give Ali the stamina he had in the 60s and Frazier is up against a much more formidable opponent

How the hell does Frazier beat a prime Ali when he can only win by 3 points and he only started winning rounds after an older Ali faded?

Now Ali won widish decisions (the thrilla in manila was stopped but it would have been a wide UD), when they rematched, still past Ali's prime when he adapted and won wide, Ali is further past his physical prime than Frazier but Frazier had slowed a little himself.

Prime Ali wins a wide UD or possibly stops Frazier, he was peppering Frazier in all those fights and a mor athletic Ali may land flusher shots for longer

 

I watched Ali-Quarry I earlier today. The fight only lasted three rounds, but I was impressed with how easily Ali dominated the fight. He moved very well and his jab was as good as ever. His game had declined only slightly when looking soley at his first fight after the three year lay off.

Ali physically wasn't the same after the lay off. Ali during his pre-exile days never had physical problems going into fights. However, after the lay off his hands had become soft and he was in a lot of pain. Injections were administered in the dressing room before every fight post-exile.

His legs were only reliable for brief periods. In his prime he could box over a sustained period of time without any touble. Ali hardly turned flat-footed during the 70's, although he was more prone to becoming just that as time passed.