I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Rexob
Middleweight
Posts: 6025
Joined: 20 Mar 2014, 15:17

Re: I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Post by Rexob »

Over achieved fought and lost to 2 great heavyweights and beat a few decent operators not a bad career.
Nile4000
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7098
Joined: 17 Sep 2005, 15:21

Re: I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Post by Nile4000 »

Rexob wrote:Over achieved fought and lost to 2 great heavyweights and beat a few decent operators not a bad career.
Should have went down to cruiser. I could see him besting Carlos Deleon, and Dwight QawI.
Tony1244
Cruiserweight
Posts: 24624
Joined: 03 Jun 2010, 21:31

Re: I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Post by Tony1244 »

Unfortunately, like a lot of fighters, he's better known for his losses. People remember Marvin KO'd in 1 by Holmes and Mike Tyson.

But he was a bit more than that. Very good amateur winning the AAU against James Broad Ax Broard. He beat Bugner by decision and I think Bonecrusher Smith but I may be wrong about that.

No was never a great pro, but like Bobick, Quarry, Ellis and others people remember his losses, because frankly he lost the big fights as a pro. Seems like a nice guy.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15097
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Post by Ambling Alp II »

Tony1244 wrote:Unfortunately, like a lot of fighters, he's better known for his losses. People remember Marvin KO'd in 1 by Holmes and Mike Tyson.

But he was a bit more than that. Very good amateur winning the AAU against James Broad Ax Broard. He beat Bugner by decision and I think Bonecrusher Smith but I may be wrong about that.

No was never a great pro, but like Bobick, Quarry, Ellis and others people remember his losses, because frankly he lost the big fights as a pro. Seems like a nice guy.
Thought he was a nice guy as well. Some of his amateur fights were on TV as well. I remember him beating Tony Tubbs. He did get crushed against Broad in the Olympic Trials.
In the pros I remember his fights on TV with Broad and Bugner. Bugner looked awful in that fight; he was making a comeback. (Bugner did have some surprisingly good results after that.)
Broad and Bugner were a lot bigger but Frazier didn't have too much trouble; especially against Bugner.

Yeah he did beat Bonecrusher Smith as well as James Tillis, though I don't think I saw those fights.
I remember the Holmes fight; it was on NBC in primetime. It was rare for Holmes to stop someone early.

He probably was better than he is remembered.
Tony1244
Cruiserweight
Posts: 24624
Joined: 03 Jun 2010, 21:31

Re: I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Post by Tony1244 »

Ambling Alp II wrote:
Tony1244 wrote:Unfortunately, like a lot of fighters, he's better known for his losses. People remember Marvin KO'd in 1 by Holmes and Mike Tyson.

But he was a bit more than that. Very good amateur winning the AAU against James Broad Ax Broard. He beat Bugner by decision and I think Bonecrusher Smith but I may be wrong about that.

No was never a great pro, but like Bobick, Quarry, Ellis and others people remember his losses, because frankly he lost the big fights as a pro. Seems like a nice guy.
Thought he was a nice guy as well. Some of his amateur fights were on TV as well. I remember him beating Tony Tubbs. He did get crushed against Broad in the Olympic Trials.
In the pros I remember his fights on TV with Broad and Bugner. Bugner looked awful in that fight; he was making a comeback. (Bugner did have some surprisingly good results after that.)
Broad and Bugner were a lot bigger but Frazier didn't have too much trouble; especially against Bugner.

Yeah he did beat Bonecrusher Smith as well as James Tillis, though I don't think I saw those fights.
I remember the Holmes fight; it was on NBC in primetime. It was rare for Holmes to stop someone early.

He probably was better than he is remembered.
I remembered an amateur bout that where Marvis outpointed James Broard. Not sure if my memory serves me well as the song says. If he beat Broard and Tubbs in the amateurs and Bugner and Tillis in the pros he wasn't terrible. Even though Marvis was top 20 in the mid 80s as a HW, people laugh at "a prime Marvis." We boxing fans are a tough breed.
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re:

Post by Kalan »

enrique wrote:Well, let's see, a manager's job is to (1) Negotiate purses for his fighter, preferably as much money as possible for the least physical damage possible (2) To procure a title shot for his fighter (3) To retire his fighter in good health.

So in 21 fights, Marvis made a couple of million bucks, fought for an alphabet crown, only lost two fights in which he was polished off swiftly and was not pounded on for long rounds, and he retired with good health. Not bad management is it?

He was a good fighter, not great like his old man, but a good boxer with light power and an average chin....
Nonsense!!! One of the ways a manager insures "the least physical damage possible" is by matching his boxer appropriately... When he's 10-0 you don't match him up with an ATG Heavyweight Champion who's 44-0... That makes no sense for anyone but Holmes. An easy night for Holmes so why not???

For another thing, nobody gave Marvis a chance. So the fight didn't generate the revenue it would have if Marvis were 25-0 and beat top contenders.. Marvis needed to develop his skills and his unique style, which he absolutely was doing if you watch the Bugner fight.. Mike Tyson was 27-0 and 20-years-old when he went for the title -- but Mike was managed and matched brilliantly to that point. He was more than ready for a less than ATG like Trevor Berbick.

And you also don't dictate a boxer's style or encourage him to brawl, push, put a head on people -- or load left hooks one after another.. You let Eddie Futch and the other trainers work that out with Marvis. You don't interfere with it... Marvis was introverted. He was a headier boxer than his father. He had quicker hands and faster feet. He didn't have a great chin or dynamite punching power. You use the gifts God gave you.

If you're a slick boxer who finesses opponents rather than Mack Trucking them, you need MORE fights to develop not less. If you can't bomb people out you have to outsmart them. You can't do that without a deep bag of tricks. Top skills don't take forever, but they take more time to develop. The way Marvis beat James Tillis and James Smith was the style he eventually was going to develop and fill out. He actually fought those 2 guys too early as well. He took unnecessary punches like he did with Holmes.. He only beat those 2 because he was a resourceful kid who could make adjustments on the fly.
Grant
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1690
Joined: 23 Jan 2004, 21:41

Re: I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Post by Grant »

How is Marvis now. ???
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Post by Kalan »

Marvis is doing well. He's an ambassador for Jesus Christ, spreading words of faith, hope, and love. You have to wonder how Joe Frazier would have done if he faced Ali when he had 10 fights or a man like George Foreman when he had 17 fights. And I don't think he would have done any better with Holmes and Tyson as opponents when he had that experience. Thankfully he was matched more appropriately.

Once Marvis filled out as a Heavyweight he was actually bigger, taller, with a longer reach than his father who weighed 205 for his Ali victory -- not an impressive size for an 1980's Heavyweight when his son fought. Smokin' Joe made his name largely by running over the Dave Zyglewicz's, Terry Daniel's, Jerry Quarry's, Jimmy Ellis's, Oscar Bonavena's, Manuel Ramos's, and Bob Foster's of the world. He got to pad his record up a bit with a lot of cruiserweightish guys of his day.
Tony1244
Cruiserweight
Posts: 24624
Joined: 03 Jun 2010, 21:31

Re: I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Post by Tony1244 »

Kalan wrote:Marvis is doing well. He's an ambassador for Jesus Christ, spreading words of faith, hope, and love. You have to wonder how Joe Frazier would have done if he faced Ali when he had 10 fights or a man like George Foreman when he had 17 fights. And I don't think he would have done any better with Holmes and Tyson as opponents when he had that experience. Thankfully he was matched more appropriately.

Once Marvis filled out as a Heavyweight he was actually bigger, taller, with a longer reach than his father who weighed 205 for his Ali victory -- not an impressive size for an 1980's Heavyweight when his son fought. Smokin' Joe made his name largely by running over the Dave Zyglewicz's, Terry Daniel's, Jerry Quarry's, Jimmy Ellis's, Oscar Bonavena's, Manuel Ramos's, and Bob Foster's of the world. He got to pad his record up a bit with a lot of cruiserweightish guys of his day.

That's who they had in those days. And the big guys like Buster Mathis weren't any better than the top smaller HWs. Frazier did have a lot of problems w/ Oscar though.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15097
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Post by Ambling Alp II »

So strange that Joe Frazier would have had trouble with Bonavena who didn't push the needle on the scale that much. Yet he beat Mathis who was much heavier. It's almost like ability is a lot more important than what the scale says.
Safe to say that Marvis would have breezed through against Ellis, Quarry, Bonavena and Mathis. I mean who couldn't make their name against those guys?
winifred8
Super Lightweight
Posts: 5
Joined: 06 Aug 2016, 19:55

Re: I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Post by winifred8 »

Marvis was a great amateur. 1978 Philadelphia Golden Gloves hvywt. Champ; 1978 Pennsylvania GG hvywt. Champ......................
1979 Philadelphia GG hvywt, champ (beating Tim Witherspoon, Jimmy Clark, Bonecrusher Smith to win the title); 1979 Pennsylvania GG hvywt. champ; 1979 National Golden Gloves hvywt. Champ; ............1980 National AAU Super Hvywt. Champ.... Its too bad that he was rushed into matches with Holmes + Tyson when he was only a cruiser. But Marvis doesn't deserve the derision of the topic title...c.h.
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Post by Kalan »

Ambling Alp II wrote:So strange that Joe Frazier would have had trouble with Bonavena who didn't push the needle on the scale that much. Yet he beat Mathis who was much heavier. It's almost like ability is a lot more important than what the scale says. Safe to say Marvis would have breezed through against Ellis, Quarry, Bonavena and Mathis. I mean who couldn't make their name against those guys?
Maybe Dave Zyglewitcwz couldn't...or Terry Daniels... Or maybe Ron Stander, Manuel Ramos, and Marion Connor couldn't beat those little dudes.

Like I said.. Lil' Smokin Joey wasn't pushed against guys like Larry Holmes when he was 10-0... He was managed better and given a chance to develop.

Buster Mathis was a small Heavyweight beneath all the fat... He weighed 280 for one fight and 220 for another...proof he could get down to 200.

Ambling Alp.. If you ate like as swine you could weigh 300 like Buster Mathis... Would that make you a formidable Heavyweight or a Fat Slob???
Nile4000
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7098
Joined: 17 Sep 2005, 15:21

Re: I'm prime Marvis Frazier, bitches!

Post by Nile4000 »

winifred8 wrote:Marvis was a great amateur. 1978 Philadelphia Golden Gloves hvywt. Champ; 1978 Pennsylvania GG hvywt. Champ......................
1979 Philadelphia GG hvywt, champ (beating Tim Witherspoon, Jimmy Clark, Bonecrusher Smith to win the title); 1979 Pennsylvania GG hvywt. champ; 1979 National Golden Gloves hvywt. Champ; ............1980 National AAU Super Hvywt. Champ.... Its too bad that he was rushed into matches with Holmes + Tyson when he was only a cruiser. But Marvis doesn't deserve the derision of the topic title...c.h.
He was a great amateur, but I doubt he could have beaten Stevenson.
Post Reply