Would joe Frazier still be an ATG......

Yes. Entering the FOTC, he had already accomplished what Tyson had done prior to taking on Holmes and Michael Spinks. Mike established himself as the one and only HW Champion by consolidating the competing claims of the WBC, WBA and IBF, securing his legacy. Likewise, Joe expanded the minority NYSAC designation into dual WBA-WBC global recognition, then defended it in a decisive defense against an ATG LHW Champion. (Who as a result became a poster boy for the futility of trying to move up to claim the big prize. Actually, LHW Titlists have done fairly well in such attempts, with the exception of Bob Foster and a retiring John Henry Lewis. Even Carpentier had his moments against Dempsey.)

Take away the FOTC, and he still wins at least nine consecutive HW Title fights (probably more), ATG material by the standards of any era. And if Ali had never returned from exile, Smoke would have still had a chip on his shoulder to prove himself a worthy successor to Muhammad when Foreman came along. A first time match between Frazier and Foreman would have always been rough for Joe, but a quick loss would have taken little out of him, then he might turn the tables in a rematch like Patterson did to Ingo.

 

this alone is a very decent resume.. it ain't less then tysons.. compare foster to spinks. and for the rest with the excaption of holmes the rest of tysons opponents ar no better then the above mentioned

 

Yes. He fought the best available competition at HW since Shavers and Lyle weren't viable names yet. The only names left are Patterson, Foster and Liston. Frazier can't be blamed for Patterson's loss to Quarry which essentially ended any hopes for a matchup with Smokin Joe as they were all a part of that elimination tourney in the late 60's after Ali's exile. Mac Foster wasn't invited to the tourney so there was really no way a matchup could have been made in the late 60's/early 70's (not to mention the lack of any financial incentive and his loss to Quarry). Liston is the only legit contender left who Joe could possibly have fought but didn't. Then again, Liston wasn't a part of the HW tourney so it would have been nearly impossible to match them up considering the timing and Ali's imminent return.

 

I certainly also would have been interested in seeing Frazier take on opponents like these.

However:

The only way Liston was going to get a title shot after Lewiston was if Patterson had been awarded the decision by Harold Valan over Ellis. (And I do believe Floyd bested Jimmy in that one, and may well have felt compelled to validate his new reign by proving he could beat Sonny, something I think he was now smart enough and experienced enough to pull off over his rapidly aging nemesis.)

At no time during Frazier's reign was Norton ready to challenge for the title. His best win prior to Ali was former Liston victim Henry Clark. When Ken beat Ali, Joe was already a former champion, and Norton got his shot at Foreman on the strength of beating Ali. Kenny was blasted out by Garcia in July 1970, a loss he would not avenge for over five years, and too bad a defeat to overlook until he upset Muhammad.

Shavers had racked up an impressive string of knockouts, but wouldn't beat a real name opponent until Ellis, six months after Foreman dethroned Joe. Instead, Frazier made his final successful title defense against the one challenger who had previously knocked Earnie out. (I do think Stander was a reasonable challenger, if not a top name, a pretty tough guy who was able to lure Smoke to Omaha. He acquitted himself well, hardly ever took a backwards step, but couldn't prevent his face from getting chopped up. Watching Frazier-Stander though, I could understand how Stander outlasted and knocked out Shavers.)

Mac Foster may have gotten to Joe if he'd managed to beat JQ, intended as a sacrificial lamb, but an uncooperative Jerry didn't merely rock the boat, he capsized it, and Smoke had already repulsed the surprise winner. Mac was thus a needless risk.

Ron Lyle probably could have been sold as a viable challenger for Joe after his wins over O'Halloran, Ramos, Rondon and Mathis, but Frazier was already committed to Foreman by the time Ron kayoed Middleton in three at the outset of December 1972. (Then of course, right after Joe got bounced in Kingston, JQ took Lyle to school.)

Were Stander and Daniels truly suitable challengers for the HW Title? Of course not, but Lyle, Norton and Shavers were clearly not better qualified at the time, if at all. Liston was disgraced and discredited until or unless Floyd could dethrone Ellis, and Mac Foster was beaten pretty soundly by a career heaviest Ali in Tokyo in early 1972, so that's twice he got taken out of the running at inopportune moments.

How Norton evaded Lyle is more concerning, as they weren't friends and stablemates like he and Joe, and their primes were at the same time.

 

We'd have to judge from other fights. Having fought Ali does help make Frazier's greatness more knowable.

 

Without the Ali trilogy, he probably wouldn't make a lot of Top 10 ATG Heavyweight Lists, but probably would make into the Top 20

 

Good, knowledgeable post.

 

No, I think he's still a top 25 even 15 heavyweight championship for about 5 years. However it was his beating of Ali in one fight and the taking him to hell and back, that makes Frazier an ATG.

 

One thing that has to be determined on this board is how far down in the ranking do you have to be, to be considered an alltime great. I personally don't consider someone rated between 15-20 all time as a heaveyweight an all time great. Other might.

So what is. How far down the list can you be rated, and still be considered an all time great?