BoxRec

Iono, I do agree that Ali-Frazier 3 is one of the more hyped up fights, and though it was up there with the 1st in terms of action and all, I dont praise it because Joe wasn't the Frazier of the first two fights and Ali was clearly showing erosion of skills and speed and flat footedness after Chuck Wepner.

Both men were passed their best, Joe was all but blind to begin with anyways. Was it a great fight? Sure, but it was against two guys no longer in their element.

who the hell is oleg platov anyway ?

Ali in terms of speed: the greatest HW mover of all time in his prime

Ali in terms of defense: I give him a rather low ranking

Ali in terms of toughness: on par with Marciano, Frazier, LaMotta, Cobb, Grimm, Chuvalo; possibly the toughest

But I think that's pretty common knowledge.


As far as Ali-Cooper 1 is concerned, this is how the chain of events took place:

Ali was playing to the audience in round four, having previously won the last three rounds in very one sided and easy fashion. Ali then flirts in the direction of actress Elizabeth Taylor, and then Cooper sees the chance of a life time and lands his lefy hook----Ali manages to get up, but is still groggy, but before Cooper can again get an opprotunity to make his assault on Ali, the bell rings...

Ali already had a small tear in his glove, which Dundee noticed, and he furthered the cut along, and brought it to referee Tommy Little's attention. The glove was replaced. Total time inbetween the 4th and 5th rounds? Two minutes. Ali, of course, comes back to win via TKO due to Cooper's excessive bleeding from a cut.

Cooper, later on, would say (about the two minutes in between rounds):

"...for a fit guy, that's a life time."

And inbetween the first and second Cooper fights, alot of Cooper's fans took 'Enry's' gloves and hung them in a local pub with a plaque that read: "These gloves did not tear." That and with Cooper being so enormously popular in Britain and Europe, it made alot of people believe that Cooper was robbed in a sense.

Truth is, Cooper had been boxing over 15 years when he met with Ali the first go around and it was likely that Cooper would have eventually lost, whether Ali had that extra minute or not, due to his ability to get cut. If Gene Tunney could get up off the floor against Dempsey to win, there is not much evidence to say otherwise that Ali couldn't have done the same thing with Cooper.

Alp and Fine have been fielding the Ali criticisms with much success. But how would you guys (Alp, Fine, John L, Homocide, Briss, and the rest) devise a plan to beat Ali and/or which fighters from hsitory would you pick to upset him?

Joe Louis would have the best shot....

Ezzard wrote:Alp and Fine have been fielding the Ali criticisms with much success. But how would you guys (Alp, Fine, John L, Homocide, Briss, and the rest) devise a plan to beat Ali and/or which fighters from hsitory would you pick to upset him?

I think Foreman at any time from about 72 to 77 could 'maybe' have beaten Ali with a better fight plan than in The Rumble In The Jungle. Foreman really screwed up that night, a night were he could have became one of the elite greats of Boxing.

He should have used his jab a lot more, Foreman has a real beast of a jab but neglected it that night as he was filled up with his KO hype after his crushings of Norton and Frazier. He should have cut off the ring, used his jab, then when Ali went to the ropes, shoot out a hard two, three punch combination, then STEP BACK out of range. Which may have forced Ali off the ropes more.

Easier said than done, but that's my thoughts on the subject.

Though Ali did face the best of the best of the 1960's and 1970's, I think had he had a more hectic schedule [let's say facing Frazier, Norton, Foreman, Shavers, Quarry, Bugner, Lyle, Young, Holmes] one after the other, rather than having easy fights inbetween the tough ones, I think he would have been burnt out like any other man and lose more than he did.

As far as any one opponent giving Ali trouble enough to beat him, as much as I like Joe Louis, I don't think he could have done it---imagine Billy Conn speed mixed with Walcott's skill, that would have been Ali, Joe Louis wouldn't have been able to get to him.

Foreman, had he been smart enough to pace himself and tried to fight Ali off the ropes (least the 1970's Ali) he would have eventually gotten to Ali and either dropped him or knocked him out, winning a decision or kayo late. He's pretty much the only man I can see doing it---being a favorite in a fight with Ali.

As far as the swarmers are concerned, I believe Dempsey, Marciano, as well as Frazier and Jefferies, all would have had success with Ali, at least in trilogies, winning at least one out of three with him---Dempsey probably would have had more success with Ali in his own era and state of rules [there was no neutral corner rule so if a man got up he could be exposed to a clean shot and put him down again]---Jefferies probably would have had more success in his own era as well, as his conditioning to go 20 rounds or more, probably would have carried Ali into the later rounds and Jefferies, as tough and as strong as he is, would have eventually caught up with Ali and knock him out [if the fight was scheduled 20 rounds or more].

Under a 15 round format, Foreman of the 1970's and the comebacking Foreman, would have had more success against Ali than any other man.

HomicideHenry wrote: Total time inbetween the 4th and 5th rounds? Two minutes

I heard it was more like 1 minutes 8 seconds.

I am quoting a book entitled:

MUHAMMAD ALI, THE UNSEEN ARCHIVES
written by William Strathmore
published in 2001

under the chapter "I'm The Greatest", page 14-38

HomicideHenry wrote:I am quoting a book entitled:

MUHAMMAD ALI, THE UNSEEN ARCHIVES
written by William Strathmore
published in 2001

under the chapter "I'm The Greatest", page 14-38

About 10 years ago Boxing News did a feature on 'The Torn Glove' fight, they got hold of the original BBC tape of the fight and timed the gap between the 4th & 5th at about 68 seconds.

Ezzard-that's a fair and interesting question about what plan to devise and who would have the best chance to beat Ali.

I don't think Foreman would ever have a really good chance. He was never going to knock him out and it's unlikely that he could have won a 15 round decision.

I maintain that the Ali of 1964-1967 (the time period that his detractors try to downplay) was far superior to anyone else.
What would be interesting would be the 1970-1975 Ali fighting the all time greats. After that, the aging Ali (whom his detractors usually spend most of their time talking about) would lose to most of the other all time greats.

What game plan would have the best chance of succeding?
In boxing (and in many other sports), when going up against someone better than yourself, the best idea is to be unpredictable and vary your attack.

It would be a good idea to alternate boxing a little, and brawling a little, then back to boxing, then back to brawling in the same round.

Body punching alone isn't going to beat Ali. He is going to expect it and knows how to handle it. However, it should be used at times.
Keep the judges in mind. Some judges over emphasize the last part of a round. It's important to finish strong at the end of every round.

It would be smart to start the round strong, pace yourself, open up in the middle of the round, and then again at the end of the round. In between these 3 periods, be content to jab, and always be ready for the occasional openings. An accurrate puncher with fast hands is a must here.

Ultimately, the goal is to throw Ali off rythym. A couple of other tactics that would be worth trying:
When he is circling, stay on the ropes. Make him come straight toward you.
Occasionally, get on your feet yourself.

None of these things by itself will win the fight. He will make the adjustment. however, do something different once, then try something else different once and only come back to something every once in a while.
However, if all of these things are used the right amount of time and effectively, the right fighter would have some success.

Who are the most likely to able to do these things well?
The first guy that most people think is Joe Louis. He is after all, the next best heavyweight. He had the intelligence and ability to make it interesting. Ali would still be able to beat him but Louis would make it interesting.

Jack Johnson would be able to nuetralize some of the things Ali likes to do. However, Ali should be able to land enough combinations to win this, but wouldn't be easy.

One guy who has many of the necessary tools is Holyfield. One thing that Holyfield did well was mix boxing and slugging well. He also had good foot speed that he could use occasionally. He had the hand speed and the accurracy to land better than most other fighters.

His big downfall would be that Ali would be able to exploit was his defense. He wasn't that hard to hit and Ali was a very accurrate puncher. Still, he would be difficult opponent.

None of these guys would beat the 1970-1975 Ali half the time, but could win 1 of 3.

HomicideHenry wrote:Ali in terms of speed: the greatest HW mover of all time in his prime

Ali in terms of defense: I give him a rather low ranking

Ali in terms of toughness: on par with Marciano, Frazier, LaMotta, Cobb, Grimm, Chuvalo; possibly the toughest

But I think that's pretty common knowledge.


As far as Ali-Cooper 1 is concerned, this is how the chain of events took place:

Ali was playing to the audience in round four, having previously won the last three rounds in very one sided and easy fashion. Ali then flirts in the direction of actress Elizabeth Taylor, and then Cooper sees the chance of a life time and lands his lefy hook----Ali manages to get up, but is still groggy, but before Cooper can again get an opprotunity to make his assault on Ali, the bell rings...

Ali already had a small tear in his glove, which Dundee noticed, and he furthered the cut along, and brought it to referee Tommy Little's attention. The glove was replaced. Total time inbetween the 4th and 5th rounds? Two minutes. Ali, of course, comes back to win via TKO due to Cooper's excessive bleeding from a cut.

Cooper, later on, would say (about the two minutes in between rounds):

"...for a fit guy, that's a life time."

And inbetween the first and second Cooper fights, alot of Cooper's fans took 'Enry's' gloves and hung them in a local pub with a plaque that read: "These gloves did not tear." That and with Cooper being so enormously popular in Britain and Europe, it made alot of people believe that Cooper was robbed in a sense.

Truth is, Cooper had been boxing over 15 years when he met with Ali the first go around and it was likely that Cooper would have eventually lost, whether Ali had that extra minute or not, due to his ability to get cut. If Gene Tunney could get up off the floor against Dempsey to win, there is not much evidence to say otherwise that Ali couldn't have done the same thing with Cooper.

Now that's not true. That's the Cooper myth. The idea that Ali received minutes in time between the two rounds. The British crowd would have rioted if that had been the case.

Ali received less than a few seconds inbetween rounds. Dundee called the ref over and it would have taken too long to get new gloves, so they went with the ones that they had. According to the myth, they went to go find new gloves and it took 2-5 extra minutes, which is untrue. You can see it on film. Ali got basically a few seconds. Cooper himself has perpetuated the notion that it was minutes of time, but it wasn't. You can probably find film of the fight on youtube, to confirm. I have the fight on tape, uncut, Ali got 10 seconds at best.

As I said before, was quoting from the book I listed previously^^^

But as far as film is concerned...I dont really follow it, alot of fights have been jimmy rigged in the past such as Siki vs McTigue where it looked like McTigue won the fight, though all ringsiders said Siki won 18 of the 20 rounds. Or the rumor that in Argentina there is film that shows Firpo knocking Dempsey down longer than 10 seconds, so that Firpo should have been champion.

Not to say that it really was 1 minute and 8 seconds or 10 seconds, or even 2 minutes in between rounds---but the process of editing surely does work wonders. It had to have been some sort of ordeal, else we all wouldn't be arguing about the whole scenario today. -shrugs-

HomicideHenry wrote:Though Ali did face the best of the best of the 1960's and 1970's, I think had he had a more hectic schedule [let's say facing Frazier, Norton, Foreman, Shavers, Quarry, Bugner, Lyle, Young, Holmes] one after the other, rather than having easy fights inbetween the tough ones, I think he would have been burnt out like any other man and lose more than he did.

As far as any one opponent giving Ali trouble enough to beat him, as much as I like Joe Louis, I don't think he could have done it---imagine Billy Conn speed mixed with Walcott's skill, that would have been Ali, Joe Louis wouldn't have been able to get to him.

Foreman, had he been smart enough to pace himself and tried to fight Ali off the ropes (least the 1970's Ali) he would have eventually gotten to Ali and either dropped him or knocked him out, winning a decision or kayo late. He's pretty much the only man I can see doing it---being a favorite in a fight with Ali.

As far as the swarmers are concerned, I believe Dempsey, Marciano, as well as Frazier and Jefferies, all would have had success with Ali, at least in trilogies, winning at least one out of three with him---Dempsey probably would have had more success with Ali in his own era and state of rules [there was no neutral corner rule so if a man got up he could be exposed to a clean shot and put him down again]---Jefferies probably would have had more success in his own era as well, as his conditioning to go 20 rounds or more, probably would have carried Ali into the later rounds and Jefferies, as tough and as strong as he is, would have eventually caught up with Ali and knock him out [if the fight was scheduled 20 rounds or more].

Under a 15 round format, Foreman of the 1970's and the comebacking Foreman, would have had more success against Ali than any other man.

I agree Ali gives Louis a lot of problems, but a Walcott comparison is not accurate: Ali and Walcott were both slippery and inventive, but in terms of styles and the skills they employed they were completely different fighters.

only main difference, in my opinion, with Ali and Walcott (outside of speed) is that Walcott fought at a lot closer range with his opponents, when Ali fought at long range---considering Ali's lack of defense, I don't think he could have been as successful as Walcott, had he fought at the close range that Walcott done.

HomicideHenry wrote:only main difference, in my opinion, with Ali and Walcott (outside of speed) is that Walcott fought at a lot closer range with his opponents, when Ali fought at long range---considering Ali's lack of defense, I don't think he could have been as successful as Walcott, had he fought at the close range that Walcott done.

Lack of defense? Sort of pushing it....I know it wasn't the standard defense and he held his arms too low, but part of that was bluster and show in the early going, just to illustrate that he could move his body almost as fast as people could throw their punches. His defense at times was subtle in the fact that he could move just enough with the punch to lessen it's effect. I'm not sure that's weak defense, just unique defense. Definatley not textbook. Hamed tried some of the same things but couldnt quite make it work as well, or at least was not able to sustain it over the years. But if your speaking textbook defense I know what your saying.

Ali was so fast in his prime, he never really quite took to learning 'textbook' defense. WHo's to really blame him? If anyone could hit with such speed and not get hit back (due to his great lateral movement) I am sure nobody would want to pick up the basics either.

But had he chose to fight in close, I don't think it would have worked for him. He carried his hands too low, he backed away from his punches, whenever he threw an uppercut he could be caught flush with a left hook, he never slipped his opponents punches, and he could be hit to the body quite a few times---yes he had a highly unorthodox style that worked for him---but had he fought close range entirely, he wouldn't have been successful, he would have been hit too often.

And while that is true, that his movement was usually faster than someone could throw their punches---a swarming fighter, constantly moving forward, would give him trouble. And let's face it, had Ali fought in close range with a swarmer, he would have to face the consequences of him not learning the basics of text book defense.

Take away the speed, if you will, for a moment and try to imagine Ali fighting in close...it's not a pretty sight.

HomicideHenry wrote:As I said before, was quoting from the book I listed previously^^^

But as far as film is concerned...I dont really follow it, alot of fights have been jimmy rigged in the past such as Siki vs McTigue where it looked like McTigue won the fight, though all ringsiders said Siki won 18 of the 20 rounds. Or the rumor that in Argentina there is film that shows Firpo knocking Dempsey down longer than 10 seconds, so that Firpo should have been champion.

Not to say that it really was 1 minute and 8 seconds or 10 seconds, or even 2 minutes in between rounds---but the process of editing surely does work wonders. It had to have been some sort of ordeal, else we all wouldn't be arguing about the whole scenario today. -shrugs-

I doubt it was edited, but I dunno, whose to say. Dundee has also said that no new gloves were put on and that they continued with the torn glove... and he admits to having made the tear worse... but I guess Dundee isn't the most credible witness in this whole thing.

Some other people here mentioned the BBC tape, so I doubt that their tape could be called into question, and they agreed with what I said, between 5-10 seconds. As for the book, you can't always trust books either.

I'm not sure who the most obvious opponent to beat Ali is. Probably someone who can frustrate his style but who can also battle with him, and isn't going to let up or get tired going 15. Ali was strong all the way to the 15th, and won a lot of his fights just by out lasting his opponents. You can't let up in that way. Maybe someone who is technically more skilled than Ali, who isn't slow, has a good left hook, maybe a size advantage. I don't think there's one fighter I could point to, but to beat Ali at his best, 100%; in shape, no rust, no injuries, still in his prime or at least not far past it.... as opposed to his losses to Frazier or Norton or Spinks which were the result of some of those things... you would need an opponent with very specific qualities. It's not going to be just a gameplan that will beat Ali, you need a special kind of fighter. It doesn't have to be a perfect fighter, but someone very specialized to deal with Ali and his different array of qualities. Few opponents could out skill Ali, few could out will him, so you need someone who can do both, which isn't easy to find.

I Feel Fine wrote:I'm not sure who the most obvious opponent to beat Ali is. Probably someone who can frustrate his style but who can also battle with him, and isn't going to let up or get tired going 15. Ali was strong all the way to the 15th, and won a lot of his fights just by out lasting his opponents. You can't let up in that way. Maybe someone who is technically more skilled than Ali, who isn't slow, has a good left hook, maybe a size advantage. I don't think there's one fighter I could point to, but to beat Ali at his best, 100%; in shape, no rust, no injuries, still in his prime or at least not far past it.... as opposed to his losses to Frazier or Norton or Spinks which were the result of some of those things... you would need an opponent with very specific qualities. It's not going to be just a gameplan that will beat Ali, you need a special kind of fighter. It doesn't have to be a perfect fighter, but someone very specialized to deal with Ali and his different array of qualities. Few opponents could out skill Ali, few could out will him, so you need someone who can do both, which isn't easy to find.

Hmm a guy who perseverates on one opponents style, grooming himself for years to be able to give this one opponent the fight of his life.....OK...it would be Antonio Tarver.

After reading Alp and Fine's answers I'm surprised that Holmes didn't feature as he could vary his game plan, was highly skilled and gritty.

Johnson has a great chance too. Tunney has the ability but is probably too small.

Charles would have a great chance but again is possibly too small.

Holyfield is a good pick.

Of the swarmers I like Frazier and Dempsey.

Ezzard wrote:After reading Alp and Fine's answers I'm surprised that Holmes didn't feature as he could vary his game plan, was highly skilled and gritty.

Johnson has a great chance too. Tunney has the ability but is probably too small.

Charles would have a great chance but again is possibly too small.

Holyfield is a good pick.

Of the swarmers I like Frazier and Dempsey.

You could argue that Holmes was a product of Ali so his advantages would be numerous since he knew his every move. Liston had a protege that capitalized on such knowledge. Leotis.....so insider knowledge gets you places....just like Martha Stewart.

BoxBuzz wrote:

Ezzard wrote:After reading Alp and Fine's answers I'm surprised that Holmes didn't feature as he could vary his game plan, was highly skilled and gritty.

Johnson has a great chance too. Tunney has the ability but is probably too small.

Charles would have a great chance but again is possibly too small.

Holyfield is a good pick.

Of the swarmers I like Frazier and Dempsey.

You could argue that Holmes was a product of Ali so his advantages would be numerous since he knew his every move. Liston had a protege that capitalized on such knowledge. Leotis.....so insider knowledge gets you places....just like Martha Stewart.

Good point.

What weight class would Martha be anyway?

As for some of the fighters mentioned;
I don't like Charles chances at all. I think this would be an easy fight for Ali.
Tunney could give him some trouble for a while, but it's hard to imagine Tunney winning.
Dempsey, I'm not sure about. Dempsey seemed to be much more effective against bigger and slower opponents than against boxers.

Holmes would be a good pick. He was actually similar in many ways to the Ali of the early 1970's. He had the necessary skills,brains and heart to be very competitive.

Ambling Alp wrote:What weight class would Martha be anyway?

As for some of the fighters mentioned;
I don't like Charles chances at all. I think this would be an easy fight for Ali.
Tunney could give him some trouble for a while, but it's hard to imagine Tunney winning.
Dempsey, I'm not sure about. Dempsey seemed to be much more effective against bigger and slower opponents than against boxers.

Holmes would be a good pick. He was actually similar in many ways to the Ali of the early 1970's. He had the necessary skills,brains and heart to be very competitive.

Holmes without Ali's influence and experience would not be in the running IMHO. But he is the most interesting case study to get the job done because of his personal knowledge and experience working with Ali. So in a prime vs prime hypothetical it has some complexities you have to ponder. THe Leotis Martin/Sonny Liston equation sort of factors in. No one supposes that Leotis was on Sonny's Level and yet look what happened due to his personal knowledge of just how and where the Bear Hibernated.