Would a technically sound Muhammad Ali work?

I thought his fundamentals were pretty solid as they were. A major change in his style and kills might have led to a worse career not a better one. The guy found what worked for him

 

Every fighter has his own style or should have, so he got decked by Henry Cooper on June 18 1963, it can also be attributed to immaturity and inexperience. An experienced fighter would have known not to toy with Cooper, who by the way had a very dangerous left hook. But that proves true, on May 21 1966, Muhammad Ali did not play around with Cooper, he instead gave Henry 14 stitches, the title bout was stopped in round 6. there were no knockdowns in that fight. Against champion Joe Frazier on March 8 1971, Ali had only 18 rounds in 43 months since his return in Oct 1970, and he did struggle against Oscar Bonavena on Dec 7 1970 before stopping Bonavena in round 15. Ali had no business playing around with a very determined Frazier that night, who did earn the victory. Frazier decked Ali in round 15. Ali was in his peak in 1967, we never got a chance to see his prime as he was banned from 1967 until 1970 due to his loss of his boxing license as well as his title.

 

he was technical sound.

 

A good guard might have given him the wins against Frazier and Norton. Undefeated until 36 years over 2+ generations of HWs would strengthen his case for the nr 1 at HW, I think.

 

If Ali had sound fundamentals I think no question he would have been the number 1 heavyweight all time. His lack of solid fundamentals was what lead most likely to his Parkinsons and his later decline. Had his defense not been based on his speed and had he been able to throw a left hook to the body, something Angelo Dundee said he couldn do and had a more solid jab rather than a flicking one I think he would have fared much better against Frazier, Norton, Jimmy Young, Earnie Shavers etc than he did. He like Roy Jones after him relied too much on his speed and athleticism and later had to rely on his iron chin, which of course Roy didn have.

 

I think his success was built more on natural athletic gifts - his quickness, coordination, agility, etc - more than his technical knowledge. He may have known how to, and applied it when he needed to, but like Tyson fell in love with his power, Ali (pre-exile) knew he was quicker, better and stronger than anyone in front of him. Couple that with the crazy courage and endless energy of youth, and basics can take a back seat.

A few years later, and the calendar takes no prisoners (that, and he was utterly inactive during the layoff - no evidence at all he did anything to stay even in decent shape,barring training for the Marciano computer fight) ... his go-to game plan was letting guys hit him. He claimed it was all "scientific", co-opting the phrase from the Old Mongoose, but Moore was great at using angles and minimizing impact. Sometimes Ali did, but frequently just let the other guy whale on him, blocked and parried what he could, but many of those shots landed with great effect. His courage and solid chin managed to weather most storms, but one of those traits can only last so long.

If he'd truly learned the art of defense, and if only that technical aspect from Moore, who boxed successfully over a career that saw almost three times the number of bouts Ali had, and well into his 40s, Ali might have either done better, or paid a smaller price at the end. We'll never know.

Just my .02 ...

 

By his own words Moore said he didn’t have a lot to do with Foreman. Saddler did most of it, Archie wanted to change a lot of things and believed he had a lot of latent ability.

 

"Use what works, disregard what is useless " a quote from. Lee Jun Fan.
Ali through obvious trail and error , from many amateur fights discovered something that worked for him.
He used that to its maximum effectiveness.
A high guard, slipping, instead of leaning away, using the jab from conventional hand positioning, closing a combination with a left hook for a better defensive posture is better technically speaking.
But some fighters ( Ali , Jones jr) it probably would've slowed them down. It may have been the difference between slipping and riding a punch, and getting ko'd by the same punch.
Being more technically sound may have saved Ali from unesassary punishment late in his career, but would he have had the same success he did early in his career if he was more technically sound? If he were more stiff and predictable, as being sound technical can sometimes be.
Ali used his gifts to its maximum effectiveness. He could do things the average boxer simply couldn't do.
What is it to be conventional and sound technically and lose much more?
You don't become Muhammad Ali.

 

Sometimes tinkering with a guy’s style takes away what made them special. Foreman trained by Gil Clancy doesn’t look like the same machine who beat Norton.