What fight was Ali closest to his peak years after the layoff?

Welcome aboard New Comer, In answer to your thread, Muhammad Ali was nowhere near his peak year of 1966 or 1967, his peak years in the ring as World Heavyweight Champion. When Muhammad Ali returned to the ring on Oct 26 1970 against Jerry Quarry after a 43 month layoff due to his legal trouble for refusing military induction, he did not resemble the champion who stopped no.1 WBA challenger Zora Folley on March 22 1967 by KO 7. Ali retained some speed, but was lacking in reflexes, timing, stamina, and his footwork was limited in spurts. Ali's body appeared thicker and he appeared to punch harder, he stopped Quarry due to a badly lacerated eyebrow, TKO 3. He looked vulnerable in his next bout on Dec 7 1970 against Oscar Ringo Bonavena. Against Bonavena, Ali proved himself in a tough battle but he was also vulnerable, something that a 1967 version of Ali was not, actually he did sign to defend his title against Bonavena on May 27 1967 in Tokyo, Japan but Ali's legal issues had started to surface even more, Ali was officially stripped of his title and boxing license on April 28 1967. In the fight against Bonavena, Ali started to tire, fighting flatfooted, took too many shots to the head and body. Even commentator Howard Cosell even commented that Ali looked terrible until the three knockdown rule took care of matters for Ali as won won by TKO 15. The Rope A Dope was an invention that Ali invented because his legs had began to fail him, he was resourceful but the head shots against other opponents began to cause Neurological damage in the long run. So in a nutshell, Ali was nowhere near his peak years against Joe Frazier, Ken Norton, and George Foreman.

 

I.think Quarry would have won the first time if he hadn't been cut. Ali improved afterwards.

 

Ali's peak years during the 70s, at least in my opinion, were the later half of 73 and 74, mainly being Norton II, Frazier II, and Foreman (haven't seen the Ruddi Lubbers fight so I can't comment on it). The reason for this is because he wasn't overweight, he came in at 212 for Frazier and Norton (only other fight like that is the Bonavena fight) and 216 for Foreman with only Quarry I, Frazier I, and Bonavena being lighter.

Now while Ali was by no means bad in those fights, he still was rusty. You don't come back from 3 years of inactivity and fight that class of fighter and look good. For Norton and Frazier, Ali was able to dance for the first half of the fight which (correct me if I'm wrong) he didn't do at any other point during the 70s. Of course, these fights aren't without their flaws. Some people think Norton defeated Ali in the second fight. The constant clinching Ali did to Frazier is a valid criticism. Foreman COULD have given Ali a tougher fight if he didn't get injured in training.

As Richard said, Ali was nowhere near his peak years when he was against Frazier, Norton, and Foreman. 73-74 Ali couldn't hold a candle to 66-67 Ali because apart from chin, experience, and a newly reborn hunger following the Norton defeat, the old Ali had nothing on the young Ali.

 

For myself I dont think we ever saw Ali's prime,I believe it would have been during his years of exile. All the best here Mate there are some good people here.

 

Quarry II,NortonII,Frazier II and the Foreman fight were the nearest Muhammad got to his sixties self.

 

That is exactly what I think about Ali's second career! He showed us some positive things we would not have known about him if there had been no return, but he was nowhere near his 1966-1967 years, in speed, reflexes, stamina, and timing. I also agree that we never saw what would have been his prime.

 

He wasn't the 60's Ali he was a different style fighter but I agree that and Frazier 2 he was his best post exile ..

 

It was evident in his comeback fight against Quarry that he was not the same boxer. Stylistically, post-exile Ali moved further and further away from pre-exile Ali which each fight. While he had moments and even rounds up through 1974 where he looked similar there was never anything close to a full fight where he looked like the young Muhammad.

 

I saw the bout between Muhammad Ali vs Rudi Lubbers live on ABC's Wide World Of Sports on Oct 20 1973 from Jakarta, Indonesia, Ali looked good winning a unanimous 12 round decision, Lubber's had a poor defense, but that version of Ali was miles apart from the 1966-1967 version of Ali.

 

The interesting thing is that, in terms of age and accrued wear and tear (or lack thereof in this case), Ali had the potential to be closest to his peak vs Frazier IF not for the ring rust and the need for more actual fights to get him back to the best possible second career form.

There would never be a return to peak - there were irreversible deteriorations - but still closest to peak in the first Frazier fight might’ve been achieved in ALL possibility and real time potential if Ali had been sufficiently trained and conditioned back in (including a few more real fights).

By the time Ali really hit his best stride in terms of conditioning and executions, timing etc., (see Norton II), he had 12 more fights under his belt, including the FOTC.

While those fights might’ve honed him they would’ve also taken away from him in terms of wear and tear - the FOTC being a prime contributor. And Ali was of course a few years older by 73 so some further, natural deteriorations would’ve figured also.

So since the FOTC, I might simplify it and say that Ali took 3 steps forward and perhaps 1 step back - but the net 31/32 yo Ali from Norton II through to Foreman was still that much better overall than the Ali of the FOTC.

 

He never was the same because the stuff he did in the 60s against left overs wouldn’t fly against proper iron. God sake, watch him against Foster, Bonavena and Norton. They weren’t good and they exposed his soft underbelly when it came to his way of fighting.

 

Richard I agree completely with what you wrote.
But you did not address his question: remember that you are still under oath.
Seriously though, there was no question about whether he was at or even is it hinted at whether he was near his peak.

He asked what fight was he closest to it?
That could mean he was 99% of his peak, or something under 50%-neither credible, but the example holds.
It could be another fight not mentioned yet like against Quarry 2.
Or something already named.

 

Think so? I thought a rematch was pointless.

 

Hello. I noticed that I'd originally forgot to put Frazier II. I've now amended it.