Which Muhammad Ali is superior the 1960s version or the 1970s version?
Which Muhammad Ali is superior the 1960s version or the 1970s version?
This is an interesting in house debate. The young Cassius Clay later Ali was greased lightning and a moving machine. The heavyweight division never seen anything like him before. A big man who could move laterally and throw from all angles. The 1970s was a slowed down(compared to the 1960s anyway) but still quick. However the opposition was superior and the more mature Ali was more ring saavy and experienced by this time. So which version is all around greater?
Re: Which Muhammad Ali is superior the 1960s version or the 1970s version?
He began to decline after the Frazier loss, which was early in the 70s, so he had a longer period of being in prime in the 60s.
His biggest wins were in the 70s, those are Frazier, Foreman and Norton, then there goes Liston from the 60s. Yet Ali won Frazier, when Frazier himself was already declined to some extent. Norton more or less clearly lost to Ali only in the 2nd bout, while the 3rd one was a robbery. Foreman lost because of the strategical failure, Ali wasn't in his best shape then.
So, Ali scored his best wins after being a bit declined, but physically he was better more in the 60s than in the 70s, as his prime went from circa 1962 until Mar 8, 1971.
His biggest wins were in the 70s, those are Frazier, Foreman and Norton, then there goes Liston from the 60s. Yet Ali won Frazier, when Frazier himself was already declined to some extent. Norton more or less clearly lost to Ali only in the 2nd bout, while the 3rd one was a robbery. Foreman lost because of the strategical failure, Ali wasn't in his best shape then.
So, Ali scored his best wins after being a bit declined, but physically he was better more in the 60s than in the 70s, as his prime went from circa 1962 until Mar 8, 1971.
Re: Which Muhammad Ali is superior the 1960s version or the 1970s version?
Best version would have been a combination of both. He got carried away with his rope a dope tactics after Kinshasa and it didn't always work. Against Norton, whenever Ali got up on his toes and circled he dominated. If he wouldn't have leaned against the ropes so much against Norton, he would have won all 3 fights. I had Norton only winning by a pt in the 3rd fight 7-6-2.
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15185
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Which Muhammad Ali is superior the 1960s version or the 1970s version?
He was not at his best during the early 1960s when he was on his way up. By the mid-60s he had got experience and was was at the peak of his physical condition. He was at his absolute best during this time.
Being off the 3 and half years obviously made a huge difference. You just can't take that length of time off in boxing and come back and be the same. He was never as good as he once was. He simply did not have the phenomenal speed, stamina and reflexes any longer.
When he first came back in late 1970, he was very rusty. To some extent he was able to overcome that after several fights. From 1972-1975, with the exception of a couple of off nights, (i.e. 1st Norton fight and most of the Lyle fight) he was still a great fighter; though clearly not as good as he once was. After the 3rd Frazier fight in 1975, with the combination of age and wear tear, he clearly started to decline further. He looked bad in the Young fight (fortunately for him, so did Young.) He looked a bit better against Norton and could have lost in a fight that could have gone either way. By the time he fought Shavers in 1977, he was only showing flashes of what he once was.
Being off the 3 and half years obviously made a huge difference. You just can't take that length of time off in boxing and come back and be the same. He was never as good as he once was. He simply did not have the phenomenal speed, stamina and reflexes any longer.
When he first came back in late 1970, he was very rusty. To some extent he was able to overcome that after several fights. From 1972-1975, with the exception of a couple of off nights, (i.e. 1st Norton fight and most of the Lyle fight) he was still a great fighter; though clearly not as good as he once was. After the 3rd Frazier fight in 1975, with the combination of age and wear tear, he clearly started to decline further. He looked bad in the Young fight (fortunately for him, so did Young.) He looked a bit better against Norton and could have lost in a fight that could have gone either way. By the time he fought Shavers in 1977, he was only showing flashes of what he once was.
Re: Which Muhammad Ali is superior the 1960s version or the 1970s version?
He really declined after Manila and than the debacle with Antonio Inoki in Japan he was even more damaged. He was a shell of himself against Shavers and Spinks and used his vast experience to defeat them.Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑31 Mar 2021, 10:55 He was not at his best during the early 1960s when he was on his way up. By the mid-60s he had got experience and was was at the peak of his physical condition. He was at his absolute best during this time.
Being off the 3 and half years obviously made a huge difference. You just can't take that length of time off in boxing and come back and be the same. He was never as good as he once was. He simply did not have the phenomenal speed, stamina and reflexes any longer.
When he first came back in late 1970, he was very rusty. To some extent he was able to overcome that after several fights. From 1972-1975, with the exception of a couple of off nights, (i.e. 1st Norton fight and most of the Lyle fight) he was still a great fighter; though clearly not as good as he once was. After the 3rd Frazier fight in 1975, with the combination of age and wear tear, he clearly started to decline further. He looked bad in the Young fight (fortunately for him, so did Young.) He looked a bit better against Norton and could have lost in a fight that could have gone either way. By the time he fought Shavers in 1977, he was only showing flashes of what he once was.