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

Williams being peak Ali.

 

In my opinion, the Williams fight is the most impressive performance Ali ever gave, displaying speed, timing and movement that he never fully regained in the 70's and therefore shows him in his prime.

You call that lazy. I call it logical.

 

Yes that's what's lazy. That line of thinking right there.

It doesn't consider the context of the fight at all.

It doesn't consider the level of the opponent Ali faced.
It doesn't consider that Williams had been shot and had to have surgery.
It doesn't consider Williams was 15 years into his career and would never again defeat a ranked opponent.
It doesn't consider that its 4 years since Williams had last beaten a ranked opponent.
It doesn't consider that Ali had already twice stopped the man who had twice stopped Williams, in performances which were far more impressive.
It doesn't consider he then dominated the bigger man in Terrell, a man who had also beaten Williams.

It is based purely on how Ali himself looked, not based on how his opponent looked.

If it is logic you have used to deduct that Williams is a peak Ali then you might need to rethink your approach to using logic for a subjective sport such as boxing.

But I don't think you have considered any of those previous points, which is why I think you've been lazy in your analysis.

 

My God, you are one SERIOUSLY patronising troll and you put so much time and effort into it as well...

You're overlooking the fact that the Williams fight is regarded by many (including Ali himself) as his best performance but, hey, that doesn't matter, does it?

Because we all know that anyone who has this opinion is lazy, illogical and nowhere near as intelligent as you are and we all so desperately need to rethink our 'approach to using logic'.

No doubt you will respond to this with another condescending thesis but I won't read it.

You're on the blocked list - attention is what trolls thrive on and you've had more than enough from me.

 

OK mate

 

I thought Ali looked better and fresher in the first fight. Back when this was esb I put my scorecard on classic and had the fight to Frazier but only by a point. Ali's punches were crisp clean and hard, they really bounced off Fraziers head, it was a lot closer than one of the scorecards suggested.

To answer your question, I think hardcore fans look back on the fight as both fighters being closer to their primes, so it is remembered more fondly. The third fight, as great as it was, was scrappier and not as a well rounded fight as the FOTC.

 

The reason that Muhammad Ali vs Joe Frazier II was not as hyped up was that they had already engaged in such a super anticipated battle in The Fight Of The Century on March 8 1971. In their first meeting, Joe was the defending champion, unified the belt by defeating WBA champion Jimmy Ellis by TKO 5 on Feb 16 1970, Frazier was undefeated. Muhammad Ali was also undefeated, he won the title on Feb 25 1964 by defeating Sonny Liston by TKO 7. He defended his title 9 times, the last defense being on March 22 1967, stopping Zora Folley by TKO 7. Following the Folley bout, Ali was stripped of his title and boxing license for refusing to submit to the military draft. Ali had never lost his title in the ring. Ali returned on Oct 26 1970, stopping no.1 contender Jerry Quarry by TKO 3, then on Dec 7 1970 stopped Oscar Bonavena by TKO 15. In FOTC Frazier retained his title by a unanimous 15 round verdict. Meanwhile Joe had lost his lustre when he was dethroned by George Foreman on Jan 22 1973 by TKO 2, dropped 6 times in that short title bout. Ali also had his winning streak snapped as he was defeated by unheralded Ken Norton on March 31 1973, Norton broke Ali's jaw. Ali won his rematch over Norton on Sept 10 1973 by winning a split decision over Norton. Ali vs Frazier II was sort of an eliminator to see who would seek a title bout against champion George Foreman, as neither Ali or Frazier were champion. It was a good fight on Jan 28 1974, but Ali clearly dominated Frazier this time, almost ended it in round 2 when Ali wobbled Joe at the end of round 2. Ali went on to win by unanimous decision.

 

Okay... And? This means what exactly? You seem to base your belief of what people think Alis best performance is off of a YouTube comment section of Ali vs Williams..Youtube commenters aren't the brightest and objective of the bunch @lufcrazy has clearly outlined the extent Williams was incapacitated in his fight against Ali. He has also stated that one fighters performance depends on the ability of the opponent - which is pretty damn obvious itself. Having trained on and off at ABCs for years I can make myself look spectacular against an incapacitated opponent or a someone new to the sport.

It's nothing to do with being condescending or patronising. You've made a statement, Luf has debunked it with his reasoning and you have completely failed to muster a valid response.

 

Don't you start as well.

I suppose Ali came to the conclusion that this was his best performance by reading what people wrote about it on YouTube as well...

I've explained very clearly why I think it's Ali's best performance and why whatever his name is was being condescending so just go back and read my messages because it's all there and I'm not going over it again.

Thank you.

 

Bump.

 

So what DID you call lazy? Your post/meaning is not clear at all.

 

The conversation has already taken place mate.

 

Didn't realise you had been appointed the arbiter of when a conversation is over. Conversations are ongoing on this forum, as I understand it. Kind of the whole point, isn't it? Perhaps put a little more thought into your posts, as your contribution to this conversation is about as clear as chocolate.

 

I'm not the arbiter, it was a back and forth with another poster.

The full conversation is there to be observed if you desire mate.