Frazier's pain and anger still remains...

[abosworth]

What's with the fvcked up third page in this thread? I couldn't even stand reading half of the posts on that page because I kept having to scroll my page way to the right.

Fvcking annoying as hell

[dempseyfire]

I'm so tired of these stupid comments. Who gives a shit about ESPN Classic? What does that have to do with Ali? They show his fights a lot... okay? That means what?

You're complaining about Manila being shown too many times, I'm thinking you might wanna watch it again, perhaps you'll stop making excuses for Frazier. And the idea that Frazier doesn't get credit for his win is a joke, he gets quite a bit of it, despite the circumstances.

Your comments about Duran are so incredibly stupid. Duran got as much attention as a Lightweight champion can expect to get. Heavyweights always get the spotlight, that did not begin or end with Ali. Duran would not have gotten any more attention if Louis or Marciano or Dempsey or Tyson had been champion. Frazier and Foreman also got more attention than the guys in the lower weight classes. How about some historical perspective, rather than singling out Ali. Ali was the Heavyweight champion, so he was far more important to the people of his time than Duran and Monzon and Napoles, and it was the same for most of the Heavyweight champions before and after him in regards to the champions in the lower weight classes.

I love the idea that you're trying to present it like the media was protecting and glorifying Ali. You could just list the number of times the media got all over Ali for every little thing. Whether it was his act, whether it was his breaking the cardinal rules, whether it was his conversion, whether it was his name, whether it was Vietnam, whether it was the Patterson and Terrell fights, whether it was Ring Magazine not giving him the FOTY award in 1966, or his going easy on Buster Mathis, his not being in shape for Mathis, his fighting Leon Spinks... Ali hardly got free passes.

Ali in the 70's may have gotten more love, fine, but its also true that Ali in the 60's was the most hated and disrespected Heavyweight champion in boxing history, next to Jack Johnson, and Ali's haters are very quick to forget that in their effort to paint him as some sort of protected media darling. The media in the 60's f-cking hated Ali, most Americans did. Again, how about some perspective and a little less revisionist history. Ali was not Oscar De La Hoya.

Lecturing you?? Whatever man. You're the one writing mini-novels b/c you feel like you have to defend Ali so much. I simply have opinions. You have seemingly such passionate feelings for a sports figure that you are going bonkers if people speak against Ali. You do it in every thread in which Ali comes up.

Sure Ali was hated on the 60s. And pretty much since Zaire (over 30 years), he has turned into a loved figure into a SPORTS ICON. Thus, as with any iconic figure, he gets hero worshippers and acolades that may not be completely warranted. You don't seem to get it when you talk about people "singling out" Ali . . . he's BY FAR the most famous boxer of the 20th century, and thus he receives the most attention regarding both his positives and negatives. Most people below 40 year olds don't even know who Joe Louis was. And most people don't even know Frazier beat Ali b/c they NEVER show that fight on TV.

You aren't just speaking against the clearly overzealous opponents (like the few who call Doug Jones a robbery, which I've stated many times is a BS stance), but whenever anyone states Ali got some questionable and/or clearly gift decisions (Norton III, Young, Frazier II) you go beserk. You can disagree without getting so damn emotional.

[I Feel Fine]

Well don't worry dempsey because this will be a much shorter post. You haven't given me much to contemplate with your reply.

A) The post you quote is addressed almost entirely to elmer, not to you. The post prior to that is largely addressed to you, perhaps you should check that one out.
B) I have never criticized anyone for saying that Ali-Young and Ali-Norton III were gift decisions, if you had read any of my posts you would see that I personally had Young and Norton winning those fights. Even elmer can't dispute that I've said this. I have said that its ridiculous to call Ali-Frazier II a gift decision, and I think most would agree with me on that.
C) And yes, you have lectured me quite a few times about how I somehow think that Ali was perfect or how I somehow think that Ali didn't have flaws. I've never even implied that. What I have said is that many over analyze Ali's career, while paying almost no scrutiny to fighters like Louis who didn't fight the opposition that Ali did. The idea that you would try to lecture me about my views about Ali is ridiculous, when I've never seen you say anything negative about Louis, while I have agreed with much of the criticism of Ali. My only point is that while Ali had flaws, all fighters do.

I agree with the premise that people should look at both sides of their favorite fighters, the good and the bad. And I do see both sides of Ali. What I don't see is some of you doing the same. Some of you like Frazier, so you don't want to admit that he legitimately lost the trilogy. The Louis supporters are usually adamant that Ali fans need to acknowledge Ali's faults, and yet Louis supporters rarely acknowledge Louis'. To me, it should work both ways.

When Louis gets the same scrutiny Ali does, then I'll be perfectly happy listening to every and any criticism you have about Ali.

[dempseyfire]

Well don't worry dempsey because this will be a much shorter post. You haven't given me much to contemplate with your reply.

A) The post you quote is addressed almost entirely to elmer, not to you. The post prior to that is largely addressed to you, perhaps you should check that one out.
B) I have never criticized anyone for saying that Ali-Young and Ali-Norton III were gift decisions, if you had read any of my posts you would see that I personally had Young and Norton winning those fights. Even elmer can't dispute that I've said this. I have said that its ridiculous to call Ali-Frazier II a gift decision, and I think most would agree with me on that.
C) And yes, you have lectured me quite a few times about how I somehow think that Ali was perfect or how I somehow think that Ali didn't have flaws. I've never even implied that. What I have said is that many over analyze Ali's career, while paying almost no scrutiny to fighters like Louis who didn't fight the opposition that Ali did. The idea that you would try to lecture me about my views about Ali is ridiculous, when I've never seen you say anything negative about Louis, while I have agreed with much of the criticism of Ali. My only point is that while Ali had flaws, all fighters do.

I agree with the premise that people should look at both sides of their favorite fighters, the good and the bad. And I do see both sides of Ali. What I don't see is some of you doing the same. Some of you like Frazier, so you don't want to admit that he legitimately lost the trilogy. The Louis supporters are usually adamant that Ali fans need to acknowledge Ali's faults, and yet Louis supporters rarely acknowledge Louis'. To me, it should work both ways.

When Louis gets the same scrutiny Ali does, then I'll be perfectly happy listening to every and any criticism you have about Ali.

That's b/c most of the threads have been Ali-centered. Ali also had a lot more controversial fights than Louis, which leads to solid debates on boxing forums. The one fight one could make a rational argument that Louis won that he should have lost was Walcott I, and everyone and their mother agrees that was a bad decision.

[Goodnight, Irene]

People forget that the Louis-Walcott I fight was scored on a round-basis, so knockdowns only give you a one-point edge, not two. Besides, how many people here can honestly say they've seen the entire fight? I've heard it no longer exists, though I can't confirm that. Either way, I'll wager most people, across all forums, have never seen it in full but are only too happy to pass judgement on it regardless.

Louis never fought competition on a par with Ali. & Ali never dreamed of the kind of sustained dominance Louis made an unprecedented reality. The prime Ali was lazy at times in the ring, fundamentally unsound & had more bad habits than Louis did. The prime Louis had only an average chin, pourous defense (outside of his ability to slip the jab) & struggled with good technical boxers.

Fair enough of both men?

[BoxBuzz]

let's not leave the original topic behind...that of Joe's anger and angst.

[KO Artist]

let's not leave the original topic behind...that of Joe's anger and angst.

Joe still has the anger, thats for sure.

You look at Ali's career and the courage he showed in fights, the tremendous heart skill atletiscism and bravery, he demonstrated.

Then you step out of the ring and you see the way he spoke to opponents, to Frazier, Liston, Foreman, Patterson. Even Wepner came in for abuse.

Then you weigh it up with how Floyd Patterson, with real warmth in his heart, after being KO'd twice by Liston, took Sonny aside the Leotis Martin defeat and gave him support.

You then look at Sonny's initial reponse of a scowl and Patterson walks away.

Then just as he gets to the door, Sonny puts his arm around Floyd, looks in his eye and says "Thanks".

Its then that you realise what a conniving, self serving, poisonous person Ali really was.

[BoxBuzz]

let's not leave the original topic behind...that of Joe's anger and angst.

Joe still has the anger, thats for sure.

You look at Ali's career and the courage he showed in fights, the tremendous heart skill atletiscism and bravery, he demonstrated.

Then you step out of the ring and you see the way he spoke to opponents, to Frazier, Liston, Foreman, Patterson. Even Wepner came in for abuse.

Then you weigh it up with how Floyd Patterson, with real warmth in his heart, after being KO'd twice by Liston, took Sonny aside the Leotis Martin defeat and gave him support.

You then look at Sonny's initial reponse of a scowl and Patterson walks away.

Then just as he gets to the door, Sonny puts his arm around Floyd, looks in his eye and says "Thanks".

Its then that you realise what a conniving, self serving, poisonous person Ali really was.

Way I see it as that Ali actually had a sense of humor and did not take himself as seriously as some of us seem to suspect. In fact it's clear to me that many have taken him far more seriously than he ever took himself.

And it appears that has proven very confusing for some.

[dempseyfire]

People forget that the Louis-Walcott I fight was scored on a round-basis, so knockdowns only give you a one-point edge, not two. Besides, how many people here can honestly say they've seen the entire fight? I've heard it no longer exists, though I can't confirm that. Either way, I'll wager most people, across all forums, have never seen it in full but are only too happy to pass judgement on it regardless.

Louis never fought competition on a par with Ali. & Ali never dreamed of the kind of sustained dominance Louis made an unprecedented reality. The prime Ali was lazy at times in the ring, fundamentally unsound & had more bad habits than Louis did. The prime Louis had only an average chin, pourous defense (outside of his ability to slip the jab) & struggled with good technical boxers.

Fair enough of both men?

Average chins don't get up from the shots Louis got up from. Louis had an excellent chin, he got knocked down due to the fact he squared up a lot as was his offense-orientated style.

But Ali's chin was better.

Both guys were all time greats, there shouldn't need to be a competition.

[Goodnight, Irene]

He was almost floored & had to hang on hard after tasting a left hook from 175lb Billy Conn, who was also a boxer first, puncher second.

It's a good heart that gets a fighter off the canvas. Louis had plenty of that. A good chin keeps the fighter from being hurt enough to fall in the first place.

But I agree with the rest of what you said.

[dagosd2000]

Ali knew how to promote himself. You either loved him or hated him. But it's gotten out of hand. Football,Baseball,Basketball,you name the sport,too many jocks shoot their mouths off. Ali was at least sometimes funny(sometimes). Today it's ugly and it's filtered down to kids' sports. Not only sports,but out in the public:road rage,disrespecting the elderly,women,teachers,police,and parents. Ali can't be blamed for all this,but he certainly was a groundbreaker.

[I Feel Fine]

They both had bad endings to their careers, Ali's was much worse, but prior to that point they were pretty close in consistency. By his 34th birthday Ali had two losses, both avenged, Louis had one loss, avenged, and the Walcott fight which he would avenge about a month later. But Ali had fought far better opponents. Liston, Patterson, Frazier, Norton, Foreman vs. Carnera, Baer, Sharkey, Braddock, Schmeling and Walcott. That's a pretty big difference. Louis would not have the same consistency he did if he had to fight against Ali's opponents. Ali was 8-2 against them to that point, and I don't see Louis doing that well, especially if he fights under the same circumstances Ali did. I would bet on Liston to beat a 22 year old Louis, Louis was that age when he lost to Schmeling. If Louis had to fight Frazier under the same circumstances, coming off a long layoff, he could very well lose that fight. Foreman can very arguably beat Louis. Louis probably would do better against Norton, and he stops Patterson sooner, but that's about it. Ali, on the other hand, does no worse against Louis' opponents than Louis did. Realistically there were guys who Ali fought who never won belts who were as good, if not better, than Braddock or Baer or Carnera.

After that cut off point of about age 34 their career's went downhill. Louis had Charles and Marciano, and Ali had the three losses and the three controversial fights. Ali also had health issues in his last years, you wonder if he didn't already have some kind of Parkinsons by the time he fought Holmes. Ali was making 10 million a fight and that among other reasons made it difficult for him to retire. 10 million in one fight was pretty amazing at the time, Louis didn't make that much money in his entire career. Louis also had to return for financial reasons, because of his unfair tax situation. But, anyway, I don't think you can say Louis is better than Ali on the basis of their declining years. Its like Archie Moore and Ezzard Charles. Moore had a better ending to his career and showed longevity into his 40's, while Ezzard Charles had a lot of losses at the end of his career and was finished in his mid 30's. I tend to take it for granted that a fighter is going to have a bad ending to his career, and I think whats more important is that Charles had a better resume than Moore and achieved more. Louis' last 2-3 years may have been better than Ali's last five, I would agree. But Louis wasn't exactly Archie Moore in those years, either, and Ali didn't have as many losses as Charles did in his declining years. Louis also fought much less in those declining years than Ali did.

I think the difference in who they beat is more important than the fact that Louis had a few less losses and didn't have quite as disastrous an ending to his career. And I think people today sometimes pay too much attention to losses. The idea that you have to protect the 0 on your record. Louis did fight everybody, but the fact that he has less losses than Ali is more a product of who he fought than of anything else. Ali fought men who arguably could have beaten Louis at his best.

[elmersalsa]

I'm so tired of these stupid comments. Who gives a shit about ESPN Classic? What does that have to do with Ali? They show his fights a lot... okay? That means what?

You're complaining about Manila being shown too many times, I'm thinking you might wanna watch it again, perhaps you'll stop making excuses for Frazier. And the idea that Frazier doesn't get credit for his win is a joke, he gets quite a bit of it, despite the circumstances.

Your comments about Duran are so incredibly stupid. Duran got as much attention as a Lightweight champion can expect to get. Heavyweights always get the spotlight, that did not begin or end with Ali. Duran would not have gotten any more attention if Louis or Marciano or Dempsey or Tyson had been champion. Frazier and Foreman also got more attention than the guys in the lower weight classes. How about some historical perspective, rather than singling out Ali. Ali was the Heavyweight champion, so he was far more important to the people of his time than Duran and Monzon and Napoles, and it was the same for most of the Heavyweight champions before and after him in regards to the champions in the lower weight classes.

I love the idea that you're trying to present it like the media was protecting and glorifying Ali. You could just list the number of times the media got all over Ali for every little thing. Whether it was his act, whether it was his breaking the cardinal rules, whether it was his conversion, whether it was his name, whether it was Vietnam, whether it was the Patterson and Terrell fights, whether it was Ring Magazine not giving him the FOTY award in 1966, or his going easy on Buster Mathis, his not being in shape for Mathis, his fighting Leon Spinks... Ali hardly got free passes.

Ali in the 70's may have gotten more love, fine, but its also true that Ali in the 60's was the most hated and disrespected Heavyweight champion in boxing history, next to Jack Johnson, and Ali's haters are very quick to forget that in their effort to paint him as some sort of protected media darling. The media in the 60's f-cking hated Ali, most Americans did. Again, how about some perspective and a little less revisionist history. Ali was not Oscar De La Hoya.

Why my comments gotta be stupid...Do not get emotional like a bitch...All I am saying is that the sport of boxing had too many legendary champions than to be focused in only one guy. How many times have you seen the Fight of the Century on tv? 2? 4? maybe 5 times? You can count that fight with your own fingers. The "Thrilla in Manila"? About 3000 times?
Come on, man. This is the reality we are living

I want to see Ruben Olivares in action. I want to see Bob Foster, Wilfredo Gomez, Wilfred Benitez, Dick Tiger, Bennie Briscoe, Florentino Fernandez, Ricardo Moreno, Vicente Saldivar, Eder Jofre for a change. Why the public cannot see that...Because one man is blocking the whole concept of boxing: Muhammad Ali and the Ali industry.

If you do not like what I am saying, fine...But it is not stupid. I know Joe Frazier AGREES with me. I know a lot of guys in this forum AGREE with me.

MANY BELIEVE THAT Joe Frazier did not win the first fight with Ali because Ali just came out of the exile. Ask Ferdie Pacheco. Too many Ali cronies on tv that is a JOKE. Even his trainer, Angelo Dundee, got more exposure on tv than Gil Clancy and Emmanuel Steward, thanks to Ali.

I guess Joe was never really accepted and that is why he is probably hurt about that.

[I Feel Fine]

Granberry, is that you?

It is amusing how angry people get about ESPN Classic.

[Goodnight, Irene]

They both had bad endings to their careers, Ali's was much worse, but prior to that point they were pretty close in consistency. By his 34th birthday Ali had two losses, both avenged, Louis had one loss, avenged, and the Walcott fight which he would avenge about a month later. But Ali had fought far better opponents. Liston, Patterson, Frazier, Norton, Foreman vs. Carnera, Baer, Sharkey, Braddock, Schmeling and Walcott. That's a pretty big difference. Louis would not have the same consistency he did if he had to fight against Ali's opponents. Ali was 8-2 against them to that point, and I don't see Louis doing that well, especially if he fights under the same circumstances Ali did. I would bet on Liston to beat a 22 year old Louis, Louis was that age when he lost to Schmeling. If Louis had to fight Frazier under the same circumstances, coming off a long layoff, he could very well lose that fight. Foreman can very arguably beat Louis. Louis probably would do better against Norton, and he stops Patterson sooner, but that's about it. Ali, on the other hand, does no worse against Louis' opponents than Louis did. Realistically there were guys who Ali fought who never won belts who were as good, if not better, than Braddock or Baer or Carnera.

After that cut off point of about age 34 their career's went downhill. Louis had Charles and Marciano, and Ali had the three losses and the three controversial fights. Ali also had health issues in his last years, you wonder if he didn't already have some kind of Parkinsons by the time he fought Holmes. Ali was making 10 million a fight and that among other reasons made it difficult for him to retire. 10 million in one fight was pretty amazing at the time, Louis didn't make that much money in his entire career. Louis also had to return for financial reasons, because of his unfair tax situation. But, anyway, I don't think you can say Louis is better than Ali on the basis of their declining years. Its like Archie Moore and Ezzard Charles. Moore had a better ending to his career and showed longevity into his 40's, while Ezzard Charles had a lot of losses at the end of his career and was finished in his mid 30's. I tend to take it for granted that a fighter is going to have a bad ending to his career, and I think whats more important is that Charles had a better resume than Moore and achieved more. Louis' last 2-3 years may have been better than Ali's last five, I would agree. But Louis wasn't exactly Archie Moore in those years, either, and Ali didn't have as many losses as Charles did in his declining years. Louis also fought much less in those declining years than Ali did.

I think the difference in who they beat is more important than the fact that Louis had a few less losses and didn't have quite as disastrous an ending to his career. And I think people today sometimes pay too much attention to losses. The idea that you have to protect the 0 on your record. Louis did fight everybody, but the fact that he has less losses than Ali is more a product of who he fought than of anything else. Ali fought men who arguably could have beaten Louis at his best.

Yes, Louis lacked Ali's competition, but lets be fair here & acknowledge both sides of the fence. Louis' reign is sorely misunderstood. 12 years & 25 title defenses without a hiccup? Ali barely even made it 25 wins in a row to commence his career, much less 25 title defenses. & he clowned too much & came in underdone on one too many occasions to match Louis' longevity. He wasn't the puncher Louis was either, & this also would have made it difficult for him to last as long. Anyone fancy the Ali of 76 or 77 to KO, or even defeat, a prime Joe Walcott? He's markedly superior to Jimmy Young.

An ageing Louis would have been knocked out by Foreman, I'll go along with that. Around the same time, he still would have been fairing infinitely better against Norton & Frazier than Ali ever did. It's less a case of who the better fighter was, but, in truth, how different stylistically they are. Ali beating a young Foreman when he was relatively old is more than Louis could have managed at a parallel point in his career. But as we both said Louis does much better against Norton, & for mine Frazier as well.

Ali never got close to Louis' dominance. & Louis, while his competition is undersold IMO, can't match name-dropping with Ali. I just wish more of the boxing public would acknowledge both sides of the fence more often than they do.

For the record, I fancy Louis (just) to beat Ali in a straight fight. Conversely, I place Ali's achievements (just) ahead of Louis'. But one of these fighters does get far more credit than he deserves (as does Ray Robinson, when you consider non-fight fans have never heard of Roberto Duran, Willie Pep, Carlos Ortiz, Eder Jofre, Henry Armstrong, Ezzard Charles etc.)

[I Feel Fine]

Well, again, if Louis had more dominance and longevity in his era I would attribute that more to who he fought. The 60's wasn't particularly deep, but it was decent with a great champion, and the 70's was maybe the deepest era in the history of the division. Louis' era wasn't particularly deep, certainly not in comparison to the 70's. And, again, I would stress that up until their respective declines Ali only had one more loss than Louis, so I don't really buy the argument that Louis was more dominant than Ali. You just have to put it into perspective.

I would say Louis at 34 starts to pull away from Ali at 34, Louis at 36 is better than Ali at 36. I would even say that Louis at 20 and 21 was better than Ali at 20 and 21. Inbetween, I would have to go with Ali.

Ali on paper also had 19 defenses, non-consecutive. If you want to say Young and Norton should have ended his second reign, its still 15 which is a lot more than most Heavyweight champions, only Holmes and Louis had more. That's pretty consistent, and when you take into account the difference in opposition I think that's hardly behind Louis in dominance. Liston, Patterson, Chuvalo, Terrell, Folley, Lyle, Frazier etc. vs. Farr, Schmeling, Conn, Galento, Pastor, Simon, Lewis, Nova, Baer, Godoy, Walcott etc... are Ali's 19 (or 15) unconsecutive defenses really that far behind Louis' 25, when taking into account quality along with quantity? And that's forgetting the champions they had to beat to get those titles in the first place, prior to the defenses. Numbers don't always tell the full story, Marciano was undefeated, but contrary to what many seem to think, I don't think he's even in the discussion when it comes to Ali and Louis.

As to Louis vs. Frazier, I'm sure Louis would win a trilogy like Ali did, but I don't think he beats Frazier coming off a layoff in the first fight. Does Louis do better in the rematches than Ali did? Maybe, if he can get to Frazier early, like Foreman did. If not then I would favor him to win tough decisions in those rematches. But I do see him losing the first fight. I certainly think Louis would have a much easier time with Norton, though I figure Ali wouldn't have quite as tough a time against Conn, for example. I wouldn't even disagree that Ali at 33 might struggle with Walcott, he might even have to beat him in a rematch like Louis did. But I think the clear difference is having to fight Liston at 22 and Foreman at 32. There's not many Louis achievements that I can't see Ali equaling, but I think Louis would have difficulty matching Ali in beating those two.

Either way, I'm not underselling Louis, by any means. As I said earlier, to me he's #2 at Heavyweight and top 10 P4P, certainly not too shabby. I wouldn't say he's not close to Ali. I disagree about Louis beating Ali, at least in a series of fights. But I think that's something else.

[theone]

Why my comments gotta be stupid...Do not get emotional like a bitch...All I am saying is that the sport of boxing had too many legendary champions than to be focused in only one guy. How many times have you seen the Fight of the Century on tv? 2? 4? maybe 5 times? You can count that fight with your own fingers. The "Thrilla in Manila"? About 3000 times?
Come on, man. This is the reality we are living

I want to see Ruben Olivares in action. I want to see Bob Foster, Wilfredo Gomez, Wilfred Benitez, Dick Tiger, Bennie Briscoe, Florentino Fernandez, Ricardo Moreno, Vicente Saldivar, Eder Jofre for a change. Why the public cannot see that...Because one man is blocking the whole concept of boxing: Muhammad Ali and the Ali industry.

I hear what you're saying Elmer; I want to see more of the fighters you mentioned as well. However, its not the Media's fault or the so called Ali industry. It's the general public you have a gripe with.
Contary to popular opinion, the media doesn't create phenomenons, they latch on to them and exploit them. They latch on to anything thats going to sell more papers or get higher ratings for them. We hardcore boxing fans, or any hardcore fans regardless of genre can not sustain the "product" alone. The money is not with us, its with the moderate fans and general public who grossly outnumber us.
A while back, I was reading the fan letters section of Wizard, possibly the best selling magazine about comics video games, cartoons, etc. Someone asked why is Spiderman on the cover nearly every other issue and why not have more lesser known, but critically acclaimed characters like Animal man or Preacher on the cover?
The editor replied that it would probably cost him his job if he did that. He explained that a Spiderman or Batman cover sells up to five times more than a lesser known character. Hardcore fans who would pick up the magizine regardless of who was on the cover are far outnumbered by the casual fan who only knows Spiderman, or Batman. These characters have stood the test of time and its fully understandable why they are so beloved. No reason to begrudge "them" for their popularity right?
People simply like what they like, it makes no sense getting all elitist about it. The media simply cashes in on what the majority wants. No one is to blame. If i owned a tv station and knew that Ali was going to get me 5 times the ratings of a Wille Pep fight, then it's no contest.

[TheOneIsHere2008]

It's time for them to bury the hatchet...I saw a photo of the two of them together at a basketball game...I wonder if it was before or after these comments...My best friend loves Frazier and I love Ali...He met Frazier at an autograph show and my mom met Muhammad Ali at the Federal Court House in Orlando in 1987 when he was a character witness for his friend... He sat down in the cafetaria and signed autographs during a break until everybody who wanted one got one... My mom said he was the most handsome and gracious man she had ever met and she met Harry Belafonte at the Copa...I have autographs of Shaquille O'Neal and Bill Clinton but it is the Ali one I treasure...

Back to my friend...He sheepishly told me how he told Frazier at the autograph session that he "got the last laugh" alluding to Ali's Parkinson's Disease... To Frazier's credit he told my friend not to go there...

Joe Frazier didn't ask to be but he was the favorite of the white establishment and how you felt about Ali and Frazier was a litmus test on where you fell on the political spectrum... There's a great line in American Gangster where they are discussing the upcoming Ali-Frazier fight and Russell Crowe's character says " this isn't boxing, this is politics" just as when Joe Louis avenged his defeat against the German Max Schmeling at the height of the NAZI era in Germany...

Did Ali go over the line? Probably, but he has apologized ad nauseum and ad infinitum...It's time to bury the hatchet...

They brought out the best and worst of each other....

PEACE

[Jaybee From The Castle]

I dont' know why the hell Joe is bitching, he isn't the one with severe Parkinsons...

[TheOneIsHere2008]

I dont' know why the hell Joe is bitching, he isn't the one with severe Parkinsons...

He thinks he gave Ali the Parkinson's Disease... An impartial observer would say it was cumulative....

[Jaybee From The Castle]

I dont' know why the hell Joe is bitching, he isn't the one with severe Parkinsons...

He thinks he gave Ali the Parkinson's Disease... An impartial observer would say it was cumulative....

Interesting. I think the jury's still out though, as to whether the blows to the head caused or accelerated the condition. Either way Joe ought to be singing loudest in Church that he CAN sing at all.

[TheOneIsHere2008]

I dont' know why the hell Joe is bitching, he isn't the one with severe Parkinsons...

He thinks he gave Ali the Parkinson's Disease... An impartial observer would say it was cumulative....

Interesting. I think the jury's still out though, as to whether the blows to the head caused or accelerated the condition. Either way Joe ought to be singing loudest in Church that he CAN sing at all.

I think it's pretty well established to the extent that it can be established to a medical certainty that the blows Ali received caused the Parkinson Disease like syndrome... I am not a doctor but I believe there is a difference between Parkinson's Disease and Parkinson's Syndrome...Muhammas Ali has the latter...

If I could have beat Frazier, Foreman, Liston, and Norton, become the heavyweight champion of the world, meet world leaders from Brezhnev to Anwar Sadat and every American president since Ford I would have done it....

The man has led an incredible life...

[Jaybee From The Castle]

Some life, getting beatings from guys, shaking another man's hand for a couple of seconds, then living the last 20+ years as weak as you were once fearsome.

I'll take Frazier's, thanks.

[TheOneIsHere2008]

Some life, getting beatings from guys, shaking another man's hand for a couple of seconds, then living the last 20+ years as weak as you were once fearsome.

I'll take Frazier's, thanks.

Frazier's life isn't all sunshine and roses...He lost a toe to diabetes...Anybody familar with the progression of the disease knows once it has progressed that far the whole limb is in danger...

As for Ali it's not just shaking people's hands...Ali , nearly thirty years after his last fight is one of the most recognized men on Earth...He's an icon , up there with Babe Ruth, Michael Jordan, and Tiger Woods...

His "image" was so valuable that he was able to sell the rights for it for $50,000,000.00:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4901662.stm

Most men lead lives of quiet desperation... "I would rather have fifteen minutes of something wonderful than a lifetime of nothing special."

[yiddo14]

Some life, getting beatings from guys, shaking another man's hand for a couple of seconds, then living the last 20+ years as weak as you were once fearsome.

I'll take Frazier's, thanks.

Frazier's life isn't all sunshine and roses...He lost a toe to diabetes...Anybody familar with the progression of the disease knows once it has progressed that far the whole limb is in danger...

As for Ali it's not just shaking people's hands...Ali , nearly thirty years after his last fight is one of the most recognized men on Earth...He's an icon , up there with Babe Ruth, Michael Jordan, and Tiger Woods...

His "image" was so valuable that he was able to sell the rights for it for $50,000,000.00:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4901662.stm

Most men lead lives of quiet desperation... "I would rather have fifteen minutes of something wonderful than a lifetime of nothing special."

Babe Ruth should NOT be on that list!

You are talking as if Frazier is a nobody who gets barely recognised.

Frazier was a Boxer. Boxing fans will always remember him just as much as Ali.

Forget the "love" of the general public who care little for what Ali did in the ring(what he did best)
90% of the adulation he receives from Joe Bloggs is fake shit based on "Ali's" quips and Addidas adverts.

To me both guys are legends for what they showed in the ring, not because they have managed to get their face on a t-shirt worn by some fashion conscious numpty that would not know "The Rumble In The Jungle" from a fumble with himself.