Would Foreman have won a rematch against Ali?

Heartbreak_Kid79 · Post by **Heartbreak_Kid79** » 09 Jan 2007, 04:55

This time George knows to pace himself and not run out of steam, as Ali could not have used his rope a dope tactics a second time.
Would George bomb Ali like he did Frazier and Noron? or would Ali find another cunning way to find victory?

walshb · Post by **walshb** » 09 Jan 2007, 05:29

Just my opinion, Foreman always loses to an Ali/Clay.
Too fast and mobile, too tough and clever and too much heart and
tenacity for George

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 09 Jan 2007, 07:25

George wouldn't have beaten Ali in a thousand years after what happened in the first fight. It took years for George to finally admit that the ropes weren't loosened

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 09 Jan 2007, 08:05

Yes, George would have won a rematch. The Ali post Frazier III would have been overwhelmed and beaten. It's less to to with George and more to do with Ali's decline.

walshb · Post by **walshb** » 09 Jan 2007, 08:07

Ezzard, I think the point is whether he would have won an instant rematch. Many fighters would have beat him POST Frazier and in decline, as you pointed out. But the peak Foreman and early 70's Foreman always loses to the peak Ali and early 70's Ali

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 09 Jan 2007, 11:35

He lost to Young...and Young and Ali were at least on a par by that time. I'm thinking even in real time Ali would have psyched himself up again and probably psyched Foreman out.

For reasons not totaly in line with their skills at that time I would pick Ali again. Foreman was more mentaly fragile than physically during that period.

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 09 Jan 2007, 11:39

Quite possible.

revporl · Post by **revporl** » 09 Jan 2007, 16:00

He was lining up for a rematch in '77 when Jimmy Young beat him. If ali could beat Shavers at that time, he could have beaten Foreman, who lacked stamina and was psychologically wobbly after Zaire.

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 09 Jan 2007, 16:39

After the Foreman fight, it was clear to everyone at that time he was becoming a heavy footed fighter (Ali). He still had hand speed, but with his speed all the more diminishing his lack of defense/infighting was becoming all the more apparent.

The Thrilla in Manila was his last great fight, in my opinion, and it was so dangerously close, I think Frazier would have knocked him out had Frazier not retired on his stool---cus Ali himself collapsed after being named the winner.

I don't think Ali could have took another Foreman fight or even an Ali-Frazier 4. George was getting a few good wins in, with knockout over Frazier, LeDoux and then came the Young loss. People dismiss George on this, but Young was in his prime and this was the same Young who was cheated out of a win against Ali, who was on the downside.

The Shavers-Norton fights showed that Ali was ripe for the taking, if there was someone out there with enough determination and power to take Ali out of there. Foreman I think would have been more determined and probably would have prepared better---though I think a fourth Frazier fight would have been a far more deadlier match up for Ali.

I say its not just plausible, i think it is almost a certainty.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 09 Jan 2007, 17:30

I agree that "The Thrilla in Manilla" did accerelate Ali's decline. However, there is no way that Frazier would have knocked Ali out in the 15th round. Ali only collapsed after he found out the fight was over. He defintely could have fought another round. Ali completely dominated the 13th and 14th rounds. Frazier could barely see at all. If there would have been a knockout in the 15th, it would have been Ali knocking out Frazier.

Ali-Foreman in 1975 couldn't happen since Foreman didn't fight at all. If they fought again it would have have had to have been in 1976 or 1977. Both had declined by then although Ali probably a bit more so. Foreman did look bad against Young. In part some credit must go to Young, but Foreman deserves some blame for a sub-par performance as well. If Foreman fought like that against Ali he would have lost to Ali as well in 1977.

Ali-Foreman II wouldn't have been nearly exciting as the first one.
It certainly isn't a certainty that Foreman would have beat Ali in a rematch. Foreman hit Ali with everything he had in the first fight and couldn't come close to knocking him out. Doubtful that he would be able to do it in a rematch. Also doubtful that Foreman could win a decison over even a 34/35 year old Ali over 15 rounds.
The most likely result is Ali winning a 15 round decision in a fight that would seem anti-climatic compared to their first fight.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 09 Jan 2007, 19:05

Rufus you write some good stuff...but on this one your all wet. Frazier was toasted and though he will never forgive his corner he was given the greatest favor of his life when his cornerman called it.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 09 Jan 2007, 20:05

Decagon...you need to do a little more research on this one and a little less speculating. I know there has been much discussed, written and doucmented and rumoured on this. I suppose I need to ask your source on this one.

Ali speaks of it in his book and from recorded statements from a humble viewpoint but everyone in his corner goes on the record as saying another round was not too much for him at all. This both shortly after the fight and in the soft glow of history.

Ali did not collapse as in the literal defeated terms but in thankfullness that it was over. He was weary for sure but perfectly able to deliver another 3 minutes of tormenting on a blind and a very likely to to TRULY collapse Frazier. His corner KNEW it and did the right thing. Frazier's corner wanted him to win...but knew it was over. These are the facts.

walshb · Post by **walshb** » 10 Jan 2007, 09:17

Decagon, you are stating facts as if they are TRUE. How the hell do you know if Ali could or could not have went one more round?. It's impossible to determine. The fact is he beat Joe, as Frazier was forced to quit. I'm sure Ali would have found the last drop of strength to do 3 more mins, as would Joe had he not been stopped, rightly stopped I believe

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 10 Jan 2007, 12:12

Decagon wrote:Read the medical records, dumbass. 8)

I have...and have apparently come to different conclusions than you. There is certainly nothing there you can use as an assumption to your stated "fact".

Do your crediblity a favor and consider a retraction.

Oh...and I don't think you're a dumbass....I just don't think you have used your noggin in a "state of the art" fashion. I'll even add that two different people can look at the same information and come up with different conclusions. But in this case you and others who are drawn to this conclusion are certainly harnessing more imagination than would be reasonable based on the data.

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 10 Jan 2007, 12:22

walshb wrote:Just my opinion, Foreman always loses to an Ali/Clay.
Too fast and mobile, too tough and clever and too much heart and
tenacity for George

The 1960s Ali was probably too fast and mobile for Foreman, but not necessarily the 1974 version. And this particular fight Ali did NOT win because of speed and mobility anyway -- a few insignificant flurries notwithstanding he did nothing until round 7, while Foreman punched himself out in one of the dumbest fights ever fought. Had Foreman paced himfself better he may not have lost that fight, he could even have won it on the scorecards.

After the rumble in the jungle both Ali and Foreman deteriorated. It's a legit question whether this fight took so much out of Foreman (especially conviction in his own invincibility) that he would have fought sub-par also in a refight, but it's an open question.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 10 Jan 2007, 12:27

pundit wrote:Ali ... A few insignificant flurries notwithstanding he did nothing until round 7

Really? I seem to recall George taking quite a few counters in that fight...

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 10 Jan 2007, 12:56

The Great John L wrote:
pundit wrote:Ali ... A few insignificant flurries notwithstanding he did nothing until round 7
Really? I seem to recall George taking quite a few counters in that fight...

A few good ones in the first round as I recall.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 10 Jan 2007, 13:08

BoxBuzz wrote:
The Great John L wrote:
pundit wrote:Ali ... A few insignificant flurries notwithstanding he did nothing until round 7
Really? I seem to recall George taking quite a few counters in that fight...
A few good ones in the first round as I recall.

I think, just maybe Ali was ahead on the cards when George took the count...

walshb · Post by **walshb** » 11 Jan 2007, 03:14

Pundit, the Clay version was too fast and the Ali version was too, but the 70's version was stronger, tougher and mentally more devestating. That's why I added in tenacity and heart to the equation

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 12 Jan 2007, 09:32

walsh's language is fairly correct since he says "forced to quit" one could assume it might have been "forced" from his corner Sort of Like Kostya Tszyu except Kostya didnt get angry with his cornerman in public.

I'm still waiting for your info Decagon..I'm not doubting you at this point just waiting for supporting info that I can review with an open mind that might change my mind.

I know you are pretty well read on this....so I assume the info may be compelling. But nothing I have read has drawn me to the same conclusion to which you have been drawn. Regarding Ali's inability to finish this fight. Dundee is clear that he certainly could have finished. Ali has made statements to both ends and of course the med stuff...but that really does not speak to the moment or the capacity of another 3 minutes with any certainty. I watched the fight again last night and could see nothing that said that Ali was finished...just that he was pretty worn. Not as worn as Frazier of course.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 12 Jan 2007, 09:51

Can anyone confirm that Frazier started the fight with impaired vision in one eye?

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 12 Jan 2007, 12:43

It's sort of a given...but the question that really has never been answered is just how affecting the eye deficit was. We may never know for sure. It may be an excuse blown up or it may be that he worked miracles with limited eyesight.