When were these boxer’s in their prime?

[OH_RickNMorty]

Hi there, I hope some of you can help me out with a few of my questions. This is for research purposes and for a professional presentation.

When were the following boxer’s in their prime —

• Floyd Patterson • Muhammad Ali • Joe Frazier • Mike Tyson • Shannon Briggs • David Haye • Tony Bellew • Luis Ortiz • George Foreman.

Many thanks.

[HomicideHenry]

Hi there, I hope some of you can help me out with a few of my questions. This is for research purposes and for a professional presentation.

When were the following boxer’s in their prime —

• Floyd Patterson • Muhammad Ali • Joe Frazier • Mike Tyson • Shannon Briggs • David Haye • Tony Bellew • Luis Ortiz • George Foreman.

Many thanks.

Patterson was better (imho) following his championship reign because he defeated far better contenders after the fact than he did as champ.

Ali was certainly physically superior in the 60s than he was in the 70s, but, he proved just how great he actually was by adapting his style to accommodate his diminishing speed & reflexes defeating superior opponents (in comparison to his 60s opponents).

Frazier's prime was dramatically short as the losses started piling up from '72 onwards--- albeit against great opposition--- but from '69-'72 he was prime as can be. 1970 being his best year defeating Ali in the FOTC.

Tyson's prime... '86-'89 essentially... Men of the swarming style burn up faster than stylists... From '90 to roughly '96 he was still dangerous to anyone in the division but he was noticeably different... '97 onwards (imho) he was living off his name beating journeymen and fringe contenders.

Briggs... Good question... He was so inconsistent (hot & cold) that it's difficult to really nail down... He was gifted the lineal title over George Foreman, and then would get bombed out by Lennox Lewis... He was probably "not ready" for the world-class competition at that time, being rushed into that position... So I'd say maybe '97-'00 was prime, but I'm not confident about that.

Haye? Ehhhh... From Mormeck to Klitschko... After that the injuries started piling up and he was becoming easier to hit.

Bellew? Ehhhh... I'll save that for someone else... But certainly after his loss to Adonis Stevenson at light heavyweight.

Ortiz? Difficult to imagine when that'd of been as he started late in the pros and his only big match has been against Wilder (imho). Let someone else decide that one.

Foreman was certainly physically superior in the 60s and 70s to his later incarnation in the 80s and 90s, though he was a better tactician and more mentally focused in old age. I suppose it's a matter of taste on this one--- I was more impressed with him when he was older than when he was younger, but then again how can you argue with the 70s when he blew away Frazier twice and Norton and 40 others?

[Onetimeonly]

Frazier wasn't prime in 71 & 72.

[HomicideHenry]

Frazier wasn't prime in 71 & 72.

He was champion until '72 so.... Kinda hard to say that he wasn't in his prime. He did not lose til '72.

[Onetimeonly]

His eyesight was already failing and he broke his ankle.

[HomicideHenry]

His eyesight was already failing and he broke his ankle.

Alot of athletes have injuries prime or not. Hell most of the guys in the NFL doing superhuman feats have the bones of senior citizens. You can't really judge it that way.

[Onetimeonly]

You can't judge an athletes prime based on optimum condition?

[Onetimeonly]

As for football players. Dan Marino's prime ended when he ruptured his Achilles. Injuries play a major role in ending primes, probably as much, or more so, than age. Frazier was obviously still great, but not peak.

[HomicideHenry]

You can't judge an athletes prime based on optimum condition?

All athlete's fight through injuries. Period. Just the name of the game. IDK if such a thing as "optimum condition" even exists considering all the physical trauma athletes go through all the time.

In the case of boxers one can argue the moment they are first hit--- is the moment the decline begins. The skull, the brain, etc was never meant to take physical trauma. In the case of Joe Frazier, his eyes paid the price for all those jabs and uppercuts he took.

Now, a destroyed tendon, spinal injury, etc (something serious) will end anyone's career or accelerate the inevitable retirement--- just like it did for Dan Marino of the Miami Dolphins.

Bobby Orr played with absolutely no cartilage in his knees the last few seasons of his career and it showed. He was one who should have retired alot earlier. But there's a big difference in team sports and a solitary sport like boxing--- far more damage is done one on one than with mass participation, especially when it comes to fighters in the mold of Joe Frazier.

They have to train harder and fight harder than the stylists just to make it, so the wear and tear is rapid. I'm surprised Frazier was even able to fight on into 1980 considering by 1975 he was more than physically wrecked.

[Onetimeonly]

[Ambling Alp II]

It gets a little tricky with some guys because boxers fight so infrequently. Also, occasionally a guy will have a great fight when otherwise he would be considered past it.

For Patterson- I guess I would go with 1956-1960. He did have the Johannson debacle. However three of his best fights, (Moore, 2nd Jackson fights, and 2nd Johansson fight) were in this time period. He did have a great performance against Machen in 1964. He did surprisingly well against Bonavena as late as 1972.

Ali- 1964-1967. No question about this. Would have been longer if it was not for the Vietnam War.

Frazier - Guess 1968-1973. He did have a outstanding performance in the 3rd Ali fight in 1975.

Foreman- I guess just 1973-1974. He may have reached it earlier but it's hard to tell because the competition was not strong. He didn't fight at all in 1975. Seemed a bit rusty in 1976.