Zora folley on Ali v Louis

No I don't.

 

Yes, I totally agree. Ali at that time was really something.

Besides, it comes straight from the horse's mouth. Zora Folley was in there with Muhammad. And Folley was an excellent fighter in his own right - and perhaps more important in this regard, a thinking fighter. Who am I to disagree. atsch

 

Folley actually did pretty well for three rounds against a boxer who was himself a very fast starter for somebody who wasn't noted as a one punch slugger. Zora took two of three rounds against an opponent who got off to a fast start against Ernie Terrell ("The Octopus" himself being a boxer who scored first round knockdowns in some of his matches).

What Folley didn't know about Ali yet is what Eddie Futch so famously deciphered, that jabbing every time Muhammad jabbed could throw Ali off his rhythm.

Doug Jones did well enough against him to get their bout named as Ring Magazine's Match of the Year for 1963, although the future champion was yet to suddenly produce the quantum improvement from his first fight with Cooper to his challenge of Liston that Holmes later displayed in stepping up from Arrington to Shavers. That offers an intriguing clue as to who might have given Ali a surprising amount of difficulty.

Athough he's never mentioned as a fantasy challenger to Ali, Dwight Qawi had just the sort of counterjab and knack for cutting off the ring to give Muhammad headaches. As for the fact that Ike wasn't a true heavyweight at his peak, don't forget that when he was overweight, out-of-shape, and well past his prime, he did extremely well against a version of Foreman who was the most physically powerful heavyweight contender or champion who has probably ever lived, for as long as Dwight lasted.

Ike also held Holyfield to a spit decision in their first meeting, before the universal implementation of the 12 round limit, and compelled Mike Spinks to arguably produce the most evolved boxing exhibition of his career. I'm not suggesting that Qawi could have decisioned Ali, just given him a lot more trouble than most might predict.

Place Eddie Futch in the corner of Larry Holmes (as the Easton Assassin ultimately did), and that creates a viable combination for disrupting Ali's rhythm, although Larry's jab was not primarily a counter jab.

What Folley lacked was toughness and youth. But he didn't give Muhammad many oppotunities to employ his lean to the left, through his use of singular punches to Ali's body, and untelegraphed right hand leads to the head. Zora was also missing the sort of counterjab needed to exploit Muhammad's susceptibility to having his rhythm disrupted that way.

Trying to implement such a strategy in reality against somebody of Ali's calibre would be a very demanding task however. I want to express that if I was in Folley's shoes, I would have tried boxng Muhammad exactly as he did. Within the limits of his ability, I feel that Zora really did the very best he possibly could have done against Ali, and deserves the same credit for his effort that Frazier does for how he tried to box in his rematch with Foreman.

 

Ali always gave the first round away. he liked to move and use footwork whilst checking his opponent out - check Liston, Williams, Cooper 2 60s fights as examples. Ali probably didn't have much respect for Folley's power and took a few punches cuz he wasn't that worried. Hard to jab a lateral fast moving target which Ali was at his peak - look at Terrell's attempts. Norton did well jabbing against a stationary Ali (as did Bob Foster)- check Norton 2 fight- first 5 rounds against a constant lateral moving Ali. Best way to fight Ali was to get in as close as possible but you're gonna take shots doing so - that's the risk.

 

Folly is a bit off in this remark, I belive win or lose, Dempsey and Marciano would track Ali down and pound away at the body. Both fights would be pretty close, and the verdict could go either way. Marciano and Dempsey could slip Ali's jab, and work Ali towards the ropes were they could do the most damage. Dempsey would have a better shot at it because of his speed. As for Louis, I have a hard time seeing Joe 's Shuffling style being effected vs Ali. If Conn could do it, Than ali perhaps could also. Though Conn got nail though out the fight, so Louis will also find his target. Non of em will ko Ali of couse, Ali has perhaps the best chin of any heavyweight champ, or near it. I put only Marciano, Jeffires, and perhaps Jess Willard on Ali's chin level.

Ali also didnt have a style all of his own. He was used before. Corbett in the 1890's. Billy Conn, Gene Tunney and Jack Delaney, Tommy Loughran also. Ali and these guys are of the same breed in regards to styles, speed. moving out of the way, and jabbing to the head. Ali didnt bring anything new. Now he perhaps had the best footwork than this guys, with Loughran and Tunney being a close 2nd.

A Ali Tunney fight would be hard to judge, not sure how it will go. But it were sure be a boring affair.

 

Folley never got hit by Louis.

Ali against Marciano would be more like an exhibition than an actual fight.

 

Ali would make Marciano and Louis look slow as they went after him, but Dempsey and Tunney are different stories.

Ali had issues with good hookers and jabbers early, mid way through, and late in his career. Any one of the above fighters could in theory beat him.

Folley, though technical and well schooled was a bad match up for Ali because he lacked speed, size and power.

 

Ali of 64-67 beats any hwt who ever lived although his toughest tests might come in the form of tyson 87/88 & louis.
Marciano & frazier would also do well but well in defeat.

 

I think that during Alis pre exhile career he looked invincible at times. He was so fast that it was hard to imagine anybody catching him but even then it would only have taken sombody with the right style.

Once you have a fighter with the stylistic tools to give Ali trouble his style comes back down to earth.

 

It could be many things but one thing it would not be is boring.

It would be well worth the pay per view.

 

:good

 

"...had a style all his own. He swung from side to side out of a weave and threw his whole body forward and upward. The blow would land with the whole weight of his body behind it. And he threw it fast, like a bullet." -Jack Johnson on Jack Dempsey.

It seems Ali wasn't quite the only unique heavyweight champion to come down the pike.

While Muhammad was an innovative heavyweight, he did have his problems with other unorthodox competitors, such as southpaws Karl Mildenberger and amateur Marine boxer Amos Johnson, and of course Kenny Norton. It's probably a little easier for a puncher/swarmer to contend with an unusual style than it would be be for a stylist to solve uncommon tactics.

Before submitting this post, I reviewed Ali/Frazier II in it's entirety, and while Muhammad won handily, it still wasn't exactly a cakewalk for him. Dempsey had size and reach which Frazier lacked, as well as a bigger punch from both sides, a less open defense, and superior mobility with his pigeon-toed lateral movement on the balls of his feet, and his spring-loaded strike forward. When Ali did clinch Dempsey, one might do well to remember Jack's "Mauler" nickname. Such a pairing would be no picnic for either.

 

Someone made the great point that Folley was in there with Ali, but he wasn't in there with Louis. Ali took 7 rounds to take out Folley. Louis would have only needed 1 round.

I'm not saying Ali might not have beaten Louis, but it isn't a given the way a lot of folks think.