Correct you are.Il Duce wrote:I thought Muhammad Ali reached his 'peak' in March 1971.
Unfortunately, he lost when he was at his 'Professional Best'.
It Happens Sometimes.......
And deep down some of them know it.
And it pisses them off.
Correct you are.Il Duce wrote:I thought Muhammad Ali reached his 'peak' in March 1971.
Unfortunately, he lost when he was at his 'Professional Best'.
It Happens Sometimes.......
yancey wrote:Correct you are.Il Duce wrote:I thought Muhammad Ali reached his 'peak' in March 1971.
Unfortunately, he lost when he was at his 'Professional Best'.
It Happens Sometimes.......
And deep down some of them know it.
And it pisses them off.
Giancarlo wrote:yancey wrote:Correct you are.Il Duce wrote:I thought Muhammad Ali reached his 'peak' in March 1971.
Unfortunately, he lost when he was at his 'Professional Best'.
It Happens Sometimes.......
And deep down some of them know it.
And it pisses them off.
Obsessed much with Ali?
And that Joe did.Ezzard wrote:I think if you set these guys to fight once a year from 1966-1981
Ali wins more times than Joe.
Joe wins the contests where both are closest to their peaks.
I wonder how good he was in those first few at bats back in spring training? How would he do in his 3 rd at bat vs The Top Pitcher in top form of his day?Il Duce wrote:scallum wrote:If LeBron James takes off 3.5 years right now from bball will he still be the best when he came back ? No Elite #1, athlete can take off that much time and expect to remain the best.
See...... Ted Williams {Baseball}
I would say it's not fair to pose a question such as this that likely favors Ali. Some will feel uncomfortable at such a suggestion.scallum wrote:So who wins between Ali who took 3.5 years off vs Ali who didn't take time off?
Il Duce wrote:Did you see what Karl Mildenberger did to the 1966 Cassius Clay.
10-1 Underdog..........Karl Mildenberger.............
http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:22881Ambling Alp II wrote:Mildenberger did not do much vs Ali. Ali defeated Mildenberger quite easily. Next.
My guess is that was meant for Joe's ears....just to eff with his buddy Joe.Senya13 wrote:http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:22881Ambling Alp II wrote:Mildenberger did not do much vs Ali. Ali defeated Mildenberger quite easily. Next.
"Questioned in 1973, Ali said that Mildenberger, not Frazier, was his most difficult opponent to date."
Fighters rarely seem to give answers that jive with reality in those instances. I don't know why, but that is often the case.Senya13 wrote:http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:22881Ambling Alp II wrote:Mildenberger did not do much vs Ali. Ali defeated Mildenberger quite easily. Next.
"Questioned in 1973, Ali said that Mildenberger, not Frazier, was his most difficult opponent to date."
See Buzz's take above.Senya13 wrote:So he made a random pick from opponents he defeated easily (as was the claim here) as his most difficult opponent? Why would he do that?
That's true of course. It is also true that Frazier won the big one where both fighter were closest to their primes. Joe won the one that mattered the most.Ambling Alp II wrote: We can argue all we want about Ali and Frazier but ultimately it come down to this: Frazier only won once and Ali won twice.
Chronologically, Ali was closer to his prime in 1971 than the later 2 fights. However, he was a better fighter in 1974 and 1975 than he was in 1971. He had to get rid of 3 and a half years of ring rust. It takes more than 2 fights to do that.hhaehre wrote:That's true of course. It is also true that Frazier won the big one where both fighter were closest to their primes. Joe won the one that mattered the most.Ambling Alp II wrote: We can argue all we want about Ali and Frazier but ultimately it come down to this: Frazier only won once and Ali won twice.
Irrelevant question.Il Duce wrote:Does anybody think that Karl 'Milde' Mildenberger would had lasted 12 Rounds with Joe Frazier
in September 1966.
I think not...................
"Don't agree that the first fight was more important." AAIIAmbling Alp II wrote:Chronologically, Ali was closer to his prime in 1971 than the later 2 fights. However, he was a better fighter in 1974 and 1975 than he was in 1971. He had to get rid of 3 and a half years of ring rust. It takes more than 2 fights to do that.hhaehre wrote:That's true of course. It is also true that Frazier won the big one where both fighter were closest to their primes. Joe won the one that mattered the most.Ambling Alp II wrote: We can argue all we want about Ali and Frazier but ultimately it come down to this: Frazier only won once and Ali won twice.
Think of Jordan when he came back. He was out of the NBA for about 1 and 3/4 seasons. He came back towards the end of the 1994-1995 season. He was very rusty. He clearly was not the same player.
However, the next year, he preseason games and the 82 game season to get rid of some the ring rust. While he was not as good as he was in prime, he was a much better player than he had been when he first came back.
Don't agree that the first fight was more important. If Frazier would have won the 2nd or 3rd fight, his and Ali's legacy would have changed significantly.
Those fights were much more fair. Ali was not rusty. Ali was older and had taken more punishment so the past his prime excuse for Frazier doesn't fly.