Why isn't Ali's performance in Ali vs Frazier II as highly rated as the Fight of the Century?

This was excellent. I did not remember it as being that tough a fight.

 

Lazy analysis imo

 

Because if you score the fight objectively and dispassionately Frazier actually won it.

 

OK mate

 

Because Ali lost FOTC

 

Ali was never as good in the 70's as he was before being stripped of the title in the 60's.

Therefore he was past his prime in the 70's.

You call that lazy. I call it logical.

 

That's not what I called lazy.

 

We got there... I actually walked out of the cinema after the 6th round, honest . stay safe guys.

 

Because it was a boring fight where Ali clinched Frazier repeatedly, the fight was void of any drama. Apart from Ali rocking Frazier in the 2nd round briefly. Added to the fact it was only 12 rounds and not for a world title, it just didn't seem to have the same impact.

And of course it will be overshadowed by fights 1 and 3, because of how good they were. Kind of like how Gatti vs Ward 2 and Barerra vs Morales 2 were overshadowed by the better fights in the trilogy.

 

It was one of his best dominating performances just did not have the drama of the other 2 fights. Ali was so good he needed to be diminished to make his fights more competitive.

 

It wasn't a dominating performance, it was alot more competitive than you may remember. If you rewatch the fight you might be surprised. Just look at the scorecards here amongst fans, the majority only have Ali winning by 2 rounds at most. With quite a few having it a draw and some have Frazier edging it, i personally had Ali winning the fight by a few points myself but it wasn't one sided.

https://eyeonthering.com/boxing/super-fight-ii-muhammad-ali-vs-joe-frazier-ii

 

When I say dominating I mean he won it more clearly. The other 2 fights were much closer.

 

Fair enough

 

This....horrible job of referring a fight

 

What were you referring to, then?