Why is it tht Frazier is praised so highly???

If you're going to mention Bob Foster,why not Terry Daniels and Ron Stander also? Those guys had about as much credibility as heavyweight contenders as Bob Foster did.

Quitting on your stool isn't the sign of a fighter who wants to continue.

 

atsch

Frazier said he was willing to die, had the 15th round taken place.

Futch stopped Frazier from continuing, because he couldn't see, & got brutalised in round 14.

 

In Manilla, Ali won the first 3 rounds with the 4th being a little closer but still a winning round for him. Frazier closed the gap and dominated the fight from rounds 5 to 11. Ali might've stole a round, I'm thinking the 9th from memory, but Frazier was slightly ahead after the 11th round IMO. Ali won the 12th and rounds 13 and 14 convincingly. I don't get where people say Frazier was badly behind on points. Any boxing fan who's researched the fight knows that Red Smith wasn't a big Ali fan even though he had Joe ahead after the 14th round. Others at ringside believed the fight was a lot closer than how the judged scored it with Ali still ahead.

As for the question in this thread? Frazier deserves credit for beating the universally considered greatest heavyweight fighter in the history of the sport. There's no denying Ali wasn't the same fighter from the 60's, not as fast on foot and with slightly dimished reflexes. He was still very fast, and I believe he hit harder in the 70's because he sat down on his punches alot more. He had to, simple as that. Ali found out in his second reign that he could take a punch in the exchanges. He couldn't sustain the same movement on foot that he did in his first title reign which is the reason I believe he hit harder. The man couldn't run as much and actually had to stand, plant his feet and fight.

Bonavena and Quarry weren't walk in the park fights for a comebacking former champion and he won both. I can understand the argument how some Ali fans live and die on the basis that Frazier never fought the best version of Ali. I'll say Frazier fought a slightly different version of Ali who had to figure out for himself how tough he was because he couldn't escape the punches like he did previously. Frazier wasn't the same fighter either after exhausting himself in the FOTC, fought two contenders ranked inside the top 30 of the time and then was destroyed by the #1 contender, George in two rounds. Only his fighting heart allowed himself to pick his body up from six knockdowns. If Frazier believed Foreman was a threat to his title, I believe he would have trained harder and performed a lot better in the 73 title defense. The fight might not have been in sunny Jamaica either. Not saying he'd beat George, but the fight could have had a different outcome if Frazier targeted Foreman like he did against Ali. Frazier was noticeably slower moving forward and didn't show the same sharp head movement. Ali found him hard to hit. Who's to say Foreman wouldn't find that same version of Frazier hard to hit too.

To say Frazier isn't an all time great and overrated as a fighter is pure ignorance.

 

a smallish fighter with limited abilty and bad eyesight

This content is protected

hai guis

 

like ali

 

You say that like it's rare for a fighter to make such a claim.It's common for boxers to use such hyperbole before,during and after fights.And why wouldn't Frazier want to make such a claim? It portrays himself in a positive,gallant manner.For someone so apparently eager to continue,he sure as hell didn't show as much.

Frazier knew that Foreman was a threat - it was only the threat of having his titles stripped away that convinced Frazier to finally step up and fight a puncher.

Sure.So you do acknowledge that Frazier quit then?



And by the way,Lamon Brewster's eye problems started after his tremendous war with Sergei Liakhovich.The man that upset Wladimir Klitschko was fit,healthy and demonstrated much greater punch resistance than Frazier had ever shown in his career.And it's a little offensive to Mr Brewster himself to compare a proven injury like his to some questionable claims - made long after his retirement - by Frazier.

 

After his failure to meet a top contender in over a year and a half,the WBC gave Frazier a deadline to agree a fight with Foreman or face having his title(the WBC portion,anyway) taken away from him.

 

And incidentally,you failed to mention that the reason Foreman had failed to sign the contract at that particular time was because he had just missed his flight.The fight had already been agreed upon weeks prior to what would have been the formal announcement of the bout.

 

This is about right, except Foreman wasn't the #1 contender when the fight was made, Ali was, but George fit the description of a good fighter who was an acceptable opponent, as demanded by the boxing authorities and the Ali rematch was stumbling for various reasons- one of the main ones being the venue, which California emerged as favourite late 1972 and Fraizer's camp were totally against fighting there due to its rules (e.g. scoring system, fight stopped when gumshield spat out, etc)

 

**** off