BoxRec

SteveO wrote:If Ali was ever going to be knocked out, surely it would have been against Frazier in the final round of their first fight.

Ali actually looked more hurt in the 11th. The way he reacted when he was knocked down in the 15th made it look like a flash knock down. Amazing that anyone can get up like that from such a devastating punch.

Ali (Clay) was very young and inexperienced when he fought Banks. He was down for about a second and was not the least bit hurt. It is a perfect example of a flash knockdown. He has still not reached his prime when he fought Cooper; it was just his 19th pro fight. He was still at the stage where he was improving with every fight. He got careless and got caught.

He was not hurt or knocked down in 10 title fights from 1964-1967.

Ray Leonard fought a great fight vs Haglar in 1987. However, it certainly was not the best fight of his career. Ali fought two fights and 18 rounds between the Folley and Frazier fights. Frazier had 12 fights and 67 rounds. That is a huge difference.

If anyone can name another fighter who was off for 3 and a half years, (or even close) and was better when they came back, please name them.

Honest to god, I think the greatest argument/debate for those like me who GENUINELY like both Frazier and Ali is this.

Was Joe Frazier's left hook that knocked down Ali the story of that round/ these men/ that fight OR

Was it that Ali got up and got back into the fight, was THAT the story of that round/these men/that fight.

The answer to that question has caused more boxing related bar fights than any other.

As Much as I like both men....I think it was Ali's recovery that was the more amazing event.

And so.....all fans of Joe regard me as a traitor to their cause. Even though both these guys are in my top 3 favorite fighters of all time.

Ambling Alp II wrote:Ali (Clay) was very young and inexperienced when he fought Banks. He was down for about a second and was not the least bit hurt. It is a perfect example of a flash knockdown. He has still not reached his prime when he fought Cooper; it was just his 19th pro fight. He was still at the stage where he was improving with every fight. He got careless and got caught.

He was not hurt or knocked down in 10 title fights from 1964-1967.

Ray Leonard fought a great fight vs Haglar in 1987. However, it certainly was not the best fight of his career. Ali fought two fights and 18 rounds between the Folley and Frazier fights. Frazier had 12 fights and 67 rounds. That is a huge difference.

If anyone can name another fighter who was off for 3 and a half years, (or even close) and was better when they came back, please name them.

This should end this debate for reasonable folks lol

Game over

In the most important fight of both Frazier and Ali's careers, at the time when both were nearest their actual peaks and both knowing that this was THE moment, with the whole world stopped and watching the most important fight of the 20th century, Frazier prevailed.

And that's a fact, Jack.

Ambling Alp II wrote: If anyone can name another fighter who was off for 3 and a half years, (or even close) and was better when they came back, please name them.

The argument isn't that Ali was better after the layoff but that he was no worse than if he had been active those three and a half years and that he was still in his prime.
Eder Jofre came back after a 3 year layoff and won a title, he never lost again and he was several years older than Ali when he came back. The fact that very few have been able to come back at the highest level does not mean that it is impossible. Ali was a remarkable fighter and like Leonard and Jofre he did come back to regain his old glory.

Ambling Alp II wrote:Ali (Clay) was very young and inexperienced when he fought Banks. He was down for about a second and was not the least bit hurt. It is a perfect example of a flash knockdown. He has still not reached his prime when he fought Cooper; it was just his 19th pro fight. He was still at the stage where he was improving with every fight. He got careless and got caught.

All other "always tough" fighters were young and inexperienced too, and most didn't go down for larger part of their career, usually down for the first time at a very old age. How this can be cited as an excuse for Ali, I don't know.

If anyone can name another fighter who was off for 3 and a half years, (or even close) and was better when they came back, please name them.

It all comes down to a definition of what can be considered "better". Post-exile Ali was better at short and mid-range fighting, than a younger one who stuck to long-range most of the time. There's no way a younger Cassius Clay would be able to stay at long range vs Joe Frazier for any long period of time, and he'd get battered at short range much worse than post-exile one was.

As for examples... Jersey Joe Walcott.

Shite 'examples'

Walcott fought on the inside some as well. And he while he was very good, he wasn't as good as a prime Ali at moving and fighting from the outside. And he almost made it against Marciano and he was not coming off a layoff. Disagree that Ali was better at mid range and inside fighting after his comeback. He just didn't need to do that as often in his prime.
Ali's stamina was not nearly as good when he first came back. He was gassed by the mid rounds. After he had been back a while, that improved some. He was clearly better in the mid-1960s than the 1970s; and most of his fights in the 1970s he was better than he had been vs Bonavena and the first Frazier fight.

Early in his career, Joe Frazier himself got decked by the legendary Mike Bruce. Larry Holmes got knocked down by Kevin Isaac. Like Ali (Clay) they were still learning. It happens sometimes.

Ali was never hurt or knocked or knocked down in 10 title fights from 1964-1967. People can nitpick all you want about the competition, that is pretty impressive.

Ambling Alp II wrote:Walcott fought on the inside some as well. And he while he was very good, he wasn't as good as a prime Ali at moving and fighting from the outside. And he almost made it against Marciano and he was not coming off a layoff. Disagree that Ali was better at mid range and inside fighting after his comeback. He just didn't need to do that as often in his prime.
Ali's stamina was not nearly as good when he first came back. He was gassed by the mid rounds. After he had been back a while, that improved some. He was clearly better in the mid-1960s than the 1970s; and most of his fights in the 1970s he was better than he had been vs Bonavena and the first Frazier fight.

Early in his career, Joe Frazier himself got decked by the legendary Mike Bruce. Larry Holmes got knocked down by Kevin Isaac. Like Ali (Clay) they were still learning. It happens sometimes.

Ali was never hurt or knocked or knocked down in 10 title fights from 1964-1967. People can nitpick all you want about the competition, that is pretty impressive.

When one is FORCED to fight for three minutes EVERY round they have a tendency to get "gassed".

If anyone thinks '66 Ali dances and runs like a gazelle for 15 rounds against what Frazier brought on 3/8/71, then they are a freaking idiot and beyond hopeless.

3/8/71 Ali was a great fighter who gave one of the best efforts of his career. That fighter brought a toughness to the table that pre-exile Ali never showed or had to have.

But he got beat in his biggest moment on the biggest stage.

And that's a fact, Jack.

Well.....the BIGGEST stage may well have been Zaire.

But your point is made. One I don't tend to argue with..... But when Foreman zonked both Frazier and Norton like they were smart ass teenagers, this led up to a fight that, like it or not, ended up to be just as big a deal...if not bigger. And Foreman's later successes makes the legend more compelling.

BoxBuzz wrote:Well.....the BIGGEST stage may well have been Zaire.

But your point is made. One I don't tend to argue with..... But when Foreman zonked both Frazier and Norton like they were smart ass teenagers, this led up to a fight that, like it or not, ended up to be just as big a deal...if not bigger. And Foreman's later successes makes the legend more compelling.

Wow, I don't see Zaire really being in the same category.

What would put it in the stratosphere is that the mainstream media got the "right" winner.

I don't get ESPN Classics, but my guess is Zaire and Manila get shown a gazillion times.

The FOTC......not so much. DD

Darn Joe had to go and spoil that script. DD

Giancarlo wrote:Shite 'examples'

Shite examples for a shite poster, I reckon.



Jesus bless

yancey wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:Well.....the BIGGEST stage may well have been Zaire.

But your point is made. One I don't tend to argue with..... But when Foreman zonked both Frazier and Norton like they were smart ass teenagers, this led up to a fight that, like it or not, ended up to be just as big a deal...if not bigger. And Foreman's later successes makes the legend more compelling.

Wow, I don't see Zaire really being in the same category.

DD

Of course you don't.....Joe wasn't there. I don't feel it was in the same class.....but the same category? Biggest fight hoopla of all time? Yeah....I think it's in that category.

yancey wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote:Walcott fought on the inside some as well. And he while he was very good, he wasn't as good as a prime Ali at moving and fighting from the outside. And he almost made it against Marciano and he was not coming off a layoff. Disagree that Ali was better at mid range and inside fighting after his comeback. He just didn't need to do that as often in his prime.
Ali's stamina was not nearly as good when he first came back. He was gassed by the mid rounds. After he had been back a while, that improved some. He was clearly better in the mid-1960s than the 1970s; and most of his fights in the 1970s he was better than he had been vs Bonavena and the first Frazier fight.

Early in his career, Joe Frazier himself got decked by the legendary Mike Bruce. Larry Holmes got knocked down by Kevin Isaac. Like Ali (Clay) they were still learning. It happens sometimes.

Ali was never hurt or knocked or knocked down in 10 title fights from 1964-1967. People can nitpick all you want about the competition, that is pretty impressive.

When one is FORCED to fight for three minutes EVERY round they have a tendency to get "gassed".

If anyone thinks '66 Ali dances and runs like a gazelle for 15 rounds against what Frazier brought on 3/8/71, then they are a freaking idiot and beyond hopeless.

3/8/71 Ali was a great fighter who gave one of the best efforts of his career. That fighter brought a toughness to the table that pre-exile Ali never showed or had to have.

But he got beat in his biggest moment on the biggest stage.

And that's a fact, Jack.

If its factual that Ali was never pushed to the limit in the 60s how do a know he wasn't already tough? Maybe the hassle of worries about doing serious jail time made him less ?

yancey wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:Well.....the BIGGEST stage may well have been Zaire.

But your point is made. One I don't tend to argue with..... But when Foreman zonked both Frazier and Norton like they were smart ass teenagers, this led up to a fight that, like it or not, ended up to be just as big a deal...if not bigger. And Foreman's later successes makes the legend more compelling.

Wow, I don't see Zaire really being in the same category.

What would put it in the stratosphere is that the mainstream media got the "right" winner.

I don't get ESPN Classics, but my guess is Zaire and Manila get shown a gazillion times.

The FOTC......not so much. DD

Darn Joe had to go and spoil that script. DD

Well maybe the rest of the world doesn't arbitrarily think the first Frazier fights "more important" just because it's the only one that your guy won. Maybe it's because those two fights were better fights.
"The biggest stage" total BS.

1-4 vs Foreman and Ali, and yet by coincidence the only one that you think counts is the only one of the 5 that Frazier won.

Old Maid Nancy wrote: Shite examples for a shite poster, I reckon.

Here's a photo of two nice guys having fun together.

Not the usual man on man fun you like to view but you'll probably knock one out over Joe.

Ambling Alp II wrote: 1-4 vs Foreman and Ali, and yet by coincidence the only one that you think counts is the only one of the 5 that Frazier won.

Of course the other fights count but FOTC was still the biggest fight of Ali's career, it's arguably the biggest fight in hw history. I don't see how that's even debatable, two undefeated atg's for the biggest price in boxing. How could it be any bigger?

hhaehre wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote: 1-4 vs Foreman and Ali, and yet by coincidence the only one that you think counts is the only one of the 5 that Frazier won.

Of course the other fights count but FOTC was still the biggest fight of Ali's career, it's arguably the biggest fight in hw history. I don't see how that's even debatable, two undefeated atg's for the biggest price in boxing. How could it be any bigger?

Of course this is all unquestionably true, but they will try to rationalize it all away. It's in their DNA.

DD

Two great fighters and men sharing a cuddle

Peace on earth.

FOTC was a great event....and Americans were taken with the drama. But I honestly think Zaire and Manilla may have been bigger deals world wide. Being an American I'm quite comfortable with the ego-centric american myopia. I sort of like our neck of the woods. I'm a libertarian America first patriot lol.

But these other two fights seemed to stir the rest of the world as much as it did us.

Giancarlo....stop with stirrin' the primal passion, and going for the psyche spin. It's unbecoming.

How it really was (the kayfabe was just for simpletons like Benito and Nancey)

Rumble in the Jungle was the biggest fight of the career of Ali

Numerous books , movies ,songs made about Rumble in the Jungle which was the sporting event of the century.