Ali vs Frazier II 1974

Robinson · Post by **Robinson** » 25 Feb 2008, 01:58

Hey guys how did you score this fight ?

As much as I love Frazier and really wanted to give it to him
I had the fight 116-113 Ali or 7 rounds Ali, 4 rounds Frazier and 1 round
even.

I know that a great many feel that Frazier won or that Ali won
with sheer domination.

How did you guys see it ?

Kym

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 25 Feb 2008, 02:05

I'll just state the obvious. It was a fight that is 99% better than the shit that's on television and even ppv's today, but it wasnt the encounters that the first was or even Manila. It was a cross roads fight for both men, and it was either going to make or break them.

That's why I find it sad that this fight is the least talked about of the series, though I can understand why; Joe was no longer champ, neither was Ali, and it was a one way ticket ordeal to a championship again. If Joe won, he would have more than likely suffered another crushing defeat at the hands of George Foreman. But Ali won, and we all know what happened there.

Myself, it was a tough bout, but it wasn't this life and death battle or closely contested fight that some have made it out to be. There is a major difference between a fight being competitive and a fight being a struggle of life in the balance.

Ali won it. End of story.

Maybe for fun, later on, I'll YouTube the bout (if its even there) and score it, although it is a fight I have seen on quite a few occassions, and there is no argument I could make for Joe Frazier being a winner of anything but a loss to Ali.

Robinson · Post by **Robinson** » 25 Feb 2008, 02:10

I think it is on YouTube, please let me know how you score it.

To be honest this is the fight of the 3 that I have watched the
most, partly because I got in o VHS aggeeeeessss ago.

The others I only got the full versions of in recent years, and
have less time to wathc.

I always watch this fight and get frustrated at Frazier who just lacks
that little bit of activity that would perhaps make an argument
for his case in victory all that easier.

Ali does hug alot, and gets away with it, but he fights this
bout with the lesson of the first fight having been learned
I think.

I am going to re-watch and try to score the first fioght soon enough.

Kym

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 25 Feb 2008, 02:23

I tried to be generous to Frazier because I am an Ali fan, so I probably gave a couple of rounds to Frazier that I would generally give Ali. But, with that, I had Ali winning by a point. If I had been less generous to Frazier I probably would have had Ali winning by at least one more point. I don't think this fight deserves any more scrutiny than any of the countless close fights in boxing history, I can name closer fights where I had a harder time trying to decide who the winner was than I did here.

As for the holding, I think that if Lewis and Klitschko and Ruiz can hold so much then its kind of unfair to single out Ali. Either all of these guys should lose points or we should take it for what it is. Holyfield held as much against Tyson as Ali did against Frazier, yet no one ever criticizes Evander for it.

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 25 Feb 2008, 02:26

Can't understand why a surprising number of people think this was a robbery?

8-4, 116-112 Ali.

Robinson · Post by **Robinson** » 25 Feb 2008, 03:58

True in the case of Holyfied against Tyson many commend him for his strategy.

Though I guess Ali is criticised against Frazier because of the height difference.

Ruiz just makes anything he does boring. Im sorry to say that but, as much as i try I can not get excited at anything of his.

Ali atleast when he holds, leans and ties up makes Ali faces :)

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 25 Feb 2008, 04:00

Wasn't that the "fight" where so-called referee Tony Perez

gave Ali 119 warnings for pulling Frazier's head down

without ever taking away a single point.

Is that "boxing" ?

Or is that a FARCE ?

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 25 Feb 2008, 04:04

Whatever it was, Ali won, no question.

& don't come at me, Gran, with a, "you're an Ali shill, etc" barrage --- I just got through a marathon with Alp in which he labelled me an Ali hater, so I don't need to go through that in reverse.

Robinson · Post by **Robinson** » 25 Feb 2008, 04:12

Your a confused self hating Ali loving hater.

I must agree that with the ref warning Ali for constant holding, a point should atleast be deducted, otherwise what is the point of a warning ?

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 25 Feb 2008, 04:15

Robinson wrote:Your a confused self hating Ali loving hater.

I must agree that with the ref warning Ali for constant holding, a point should atleast be deducted, otherwise what is the point of a warning ?

Or am I a self-loving, Ali-hating lover?

I wouldn't know, I'm confused...

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 25 Feb 2008, 04:23

Robinson wrote:True in the case of Holyfied against Tyson many commend him for his strategy.

Though I guess Ali is criticised against Frazier because of the height difference.

Holyfield was taller than Tyson too. Holyfield and Ali are similar in height, as are Frazier and Tyson.

This of course was the same ref who sued Ali because Ali went on a rant about how corrupt the ref was because Ali believed that he was biased against him. This was the ref who saved Frazier when Ali had him hurt (not that I buy the idea that Ali could have stopped him, but the extra punches he would have landed would have helped.)

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 25 Feb 2008, 06:48

I Feel Fine wrote:
Robinson wrote:True in the case of Holyfied against Tyson many commend him for his strategy.

Though I guess Ali is criticised against Frazier because of the height difference.
Holyfield was taller than Tyson too. Holyfield and Ali are similar in height, as are Frazier and Tyson.

This of course was the same ref who sued Ali because Ali went on a rant about how corrupt the ref was because Ali believed that he was biased against him. This was the ref who saved Frazier when Ali had him hurt (not that I buy the idea that Ali could have stopped him, but the extra punches he would have landed would have helped.)

But remember, Ali was holding BEHIND THE NECK, SO IT IS AN ILEGAL TACTIC. Granberry is right that the referee did not take a point. Well, IT WAS THE POLITICS OF THE TIME.

Holyfield vs Tyson, BOTH WERE HOLDING REPEATEDLY. None of the two were holding behind the neck, though.

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 25 Feb 2008, 14:34

elmersalsa wrote:
I Feel Fine wrote:
Robinson wrote:True in the case of Holyfied against Tyson many commend him for his strategy.

Though I guess Ali is criticised against Frazier because of the height difference.
Holyfield was taller than Tyson too. Holyfield and Ali are similar in height, as are Frazier and Tyson.

This of course was the same ref who sued Ali because Ali went on a rant about how corrupt the ref was because Ali believed that he was biased against him. This was the ref who saved Frazier when Ali had him hurt (not that I buy the idea that Ali could have stopped him, but the extra punches he would have landed would have helped.)
But remember, Ali was holding BEHIND THE NECK, SO IT IS AN ILEGAL TACTIC. Granberry is right that the referee did not take a point. Well, IT WAS THE POLITICS OF THE TIME.

Holyfield vs Tyson, BOTH WERE HOLDING REPEATEDLY. None of the two were holding behind the neck, though.

Exactly which rule are you refrring to?

Please quote the rule verbatim.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 25 Feb 2008, 14:48

elmersalsa wrote:
But remember, Ali was holding BEHIND THE NECK, SO IT IS AN ILEGAL TACTIC. . .

Holyfield vs Tyson, BOTH WERE HOLDING REPEATEDLY. None of the two were holding behind the neck, though.

Exactly.

The halfwits posting here don't know the difference between clinching

and Ali's grabbing an opponent by the back of the neck and trying to jerk or twist his head off---a blatantly illegal and obvious foul that Ali was allowed to get away with endlessly by the same referees who never made him go to a neutral corner when there was a knockdown.

Robinson · Post by **Robinson** » 25 Feb 2008, 18:32

Granberry,

Ali got away with it because he was sticking his tongue out and making faces...

Its like cutting some one off in traffic, if you wave at them, its all of a sudden absolved.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 25 Feb 2008, 18:47

elmersalsa wrote:
I Feel Fine wrote:
Robinson wrote:True in the case of Holyfied against Tyson many commend him for his strategy.

Though I guess Ali is criticised against Frazier because of the height difference.
Holyfield was taller than Tyson too. Holyfield and Ali are similar in height, as are Frazier and Tyson.

This of course was the same ref who sued Ali because Ali went on a rant about how corrupt the ref was because Ali believed that he was biased against him. This was the ref who saved Frazier when Ali had him hurt (not that I buy the idea that Ali could have stopped him, but the extra punches he would have landed would have helped.)
But remember, Ali was holding BEHIND THE NECK, SO IT IS AN ILEGAL TACTIC. Granberry is right that the referee did not take a point. Well, IT WAS THE POLITICS OF THE TIME.

Holyfield vs Tyson, BOTH WERE HOLDING REPEATEDLY. None of the two were holding behind the neck, though.

Nonsense. Holyfield initiated most of the clinches, and while Holyfield didn't really hold behind the neck, Lewis did in his fight against Tyson and against many others and never lost a point. I watched Norris-Curry recently, and Norris pushed down behind Curry's neck in almost every round and never lost a point. Hopkins held behind Wright's head and never lost a point. Again, either everyone deserves criticism for doing this, or no one. Either all of these guys should lose points, or none of them should. You can't single out Ali.

I think its absurd the way people act on this issue. You want Ali to lose points for holding behind the head, yet you care nothing about Marciano's low blows, you care nothing of Tyson's elbows and forearms, you care nothing of Holyfield's head butts, you care nothing of Lewis holding behind his opponents necks. I think its a disgrace the way Ali gets singled out on this issue, as if he was the only Heavyweight champion who got away with bending the rules. What he did was not as blatant as what Marciano did, and Rocky rarely if ever lost any points. You guys are just singling out Ali yet again, as you do by making a fuss about every close decision he won. Every time Ali wins a close decision its supposedly a robbery, while other fighters who win close decisions get no scrutiny about it. Its absurd. Ali-Frazier II is not a controversial decision.

robinson wrote:Granberry,

Ali got away with it because he was sticking his tongue out and making faces...

Its like cutting some one off in traffic, if you wave at them, its all of a sudden absolved.

I guess its alright when Holmes holds behind the neck though, right?

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 25 Feb 2008, 18:51

Still waiting for the exact wording of this rule that elmo alludes to...

Robinson · Post by **Robinson** » 25 Feb 2008, 19:11

Holmes never pulled down on top like Ali did nor in the case you mentioned about Lewis-Tyson.

What fights you thinking of that Holmes was holding onto a fighter as in the case of Ali-Frazier II.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 26 Feb 2008, 00:30

Holmes never pulled down to my recollection but he did hold behind certain opponents heads which is something you're not supposed to do.

Not only did Lewis do so against Tyson, he also had his fight with Grant where he pulled behind Grant's head and threw uppercuts.

As I said, I'm not implying that what Ali did wasn't illegal, but its not the kind of thing that fighters tend to lose points over, and considering all the things that different champions get away with I think its absurd the way some of you focus on Ali holding behind the head as if it were a) the worst thing a champion has done and b) as if it were the only unpunished foul in boxing history. As if Ali holding behind the head is worse than the things Duran or Hopkins did, and as if they ever lost points for the things they did. Even Frazier threw some low blows, nothing too blatant and I'm sure many were unintentional, but when it comes to small shit the ref is rarely going to insert himself into the fight; it had nothing to do with "politics" or with the idea that "it was Ali." Ali never lost a point, but no Ali opponent ever lost a point either, and it wasn't because none of them ever fouled. And, again, what Ali did is nothing compared to what other fighters have gotten away with, and holding behind the head in particular is something that is rarely penalized. Ali isn't in the top 100 of the dirtiest champions, and I think the argument against Ali would be more legitimate if it was accompanied by criticisms of the tactics of other champions who were dirtier than Ali and who were also never penalized; including guys like Holyfield. But people here are quick to jump on the dingleberry bandwagon and single out Ali, and its getting out of hand.

Robinson · Post by **Robinson** » 26 Feb 2008, 01:02

I remember thinking when I first saw Grant v Lewis and just thinking how blatant a foul it was at those points in that short wild fight.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 26 Feb 2008, 01:53

Ali was stripped of all his fouls when he fought Jimmy Young.

Young was thoroughly prepared and negated each and every one of Ali's fouls..

That left Ali with nothing left to do but box.

And he wasn't very good at that. As his fight with Young showed.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 26 Feb 2008, 02:01

Yep, neither Ali or Young were any match for real boxers like Gerry Cooney. He was the master.

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 26 Feb 2008, 02:47

I Feel Fine wrote:Yep, neither Ali or Young were any match for real boxers like Gerry Cooney. He was the master.

BURN!!!!!

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 26 Feb 2008, 06:01

granberry wrote:Ali was stripped of all his fouls when he fought Jimmy Young.

Young was thoroughly prepared and negated each and every one of Ali's fouls..

That left Ali with nothing left to do but box.

And he wasn't very good at that. As his fight with Young showed.

mmmmmmmmm, right. Ali wasn't a very good boxer and only won all those fights in the 60's and 70's by committing fouls. You are the only one in the world who believes that.

Your posts are hilarious. Of course, none of them have any basis in reality but 10 out of 10 for imagination. Keep em coming, they crack me up.

Some kind soul said to me you might have a book in you but, thinking about it, "Alice in Wonderland" has already been written.

I notice the real boxing experts in "the best thread you ever read" had no time for your nonsense. I loved that whine you came out with when they totally blanked you.