
So it has all come down to Ali's non-boxing dodging and a ducking
and who is right and wrong. At this point, it is hard to discuss the "refusal to serve"
issue, because we will never know why he chose to do what he did. The only thing that it
did do is take a few years of his boxing. After 1967, he was never the same.
If he would of been fighting in 1968 and 1969, he would likely have been the champion
longer that he was. the period between his victory over Foreman, who was defeated before the bout started, and his last bout with Trevor B. was clouded with controversy and one
could see the erosion of skills year-by-year.
In many polls, MUHAMMAD ALI often rates one or two among the heavyweights.
Of course, what Muhammad Ali are the voters using when they judge. If it was the
Ali of 1964 to 1967, he had the speed and movement but would that be enough to keep the likes of Louis, Marciano, Frazier, Dempsey, and Tyson from stalking him and knocking him out or out slick the likes of Johnson, Tunney and Corbett.
If we were talking about the Seventies, could-he rope-a-dope a MAX BAER or JAMES J. JEFFRIES or a LENNOX LEWIS without catching a big right hand to the body and head that would leave him heading for a ten count.
If we were talking about the Seventies, then his best defensive skill of rope-a-dope would
be dangerous ground against the likes of LOUIS, MARCIANO and DEMPSEY. IF JOE FRAZIER could knock him down, if KEN NORTON could break his jaw, and if LEON SPINKS
could beat him big time, then the Ali of those fights would be in trouble from any of the top level heavyweight champions of all time. Personality and popularity are skills that cannot or should not be used to judge the best ever or the pound-for-pound top ten.