BoxRec

I don't so much view it as a bad post, but I don't see that what Robinson is saying about Ali can't apply to any other popular fighter. I would agree with his comments about Frazier.

Robinson wrote:Ali is popular as he is a T-shirt and poster personality these days, kinda like Bruce Lee. Alot of younger people buy memorabilia, and so on because its actually available and maybe a few DVD doco's watch half of them and then become 'experts' on HW boxing and the man himself.

"He could beat anyone..." They say.

"Why " You ask..

"Because ... he is the best" And of course this opinion is based on what they are told...or hear.

Its funny how often people tell me Ali is the greatest, without having never watched a full fight of his nor having seen any other fighter, yet they have such a firm and absolute opinion.

I love Ali, and think he was ONE of the greatest, but just because you get told something over and over again doesn't make it so...I want to watch alot more fights of other legends before I jump on the band waggon. I think Frazier is hurt and rightly so because to a vast majority he is rememberd as one of Ali's opponents and the only fights of his you can get is him vs Ali, and oh yeah...he was KO'd by Foreman in 'When we were kings'.

Personally I can watch most of Frzaier fights over and over, yet I find it hard to sit down and watch Ali's fights more than once....maybe thats me.

It doesn't matter what populace worship has done to accend Ali to whatever levels he shall become revered at, after his illness and some day his death. To those of us who love a hard luck story, a rags to riches tale and any one who loves prize fighting...Frazier is a great champion. Who should be rembered for his unlikely gold medal in 1964, his war with Bonavena, his decimation of Ellis, his trench fight with Quarry, his revenge over Mathis, his dropping of Foster and his battle with Briton Bugner. Not just for his left hook that put Ali on his butt, or his losses to Foreman.

Sorry I am ranting, but I in some way share Frazier's anger over Ali's pop culture this is not so much Ali's fault but those who tend to claim to be boxing fan's yet who go no further than those generic posters, and doco's you find at cheap as cheaps.

Kym

Very good post

npal wrote:George Foreman is more popular than Joe Frazier. I don't get it. Why doesn't Joe hate George?

Because of styles Joe could not really even compete with George....If Joe is capable of hate he's also capable of anxiety and fear. He'd just as soon not continue on a life time argument with someone who disposed of him like a used plastic spoon. But someone he went 40 rounds with and won almost as many as he lost? That's someone he's going to be "smokin" and smolderin over forever.

Robinson wrote:Ali is popular as he is a T-shirt and poster personality these days, kinda like Bruce Lee. Alot of younger people buy memorabilia, and so on because its actually available and maybe a few DVD doco's watch half of them and then become 'experts' on HW boxing and the man himself.

"He could beat anyone..." They say.

"Why " You ask..

"Because ... he is the best" And of course this opinion is based on what they are told...or hear.

Its funny how often people tell me Ali is the greatest, without having never watched a full fight of his nor having seen any other fighter, yet they have such a firm and absolute opinion.

I love Ali, and think he was ONE of the greatest, but just because you get told something over and over again doesn't make it so...I want to watch alot more fights of other legends before I jump on the band waggon. I think Frazier is hurt and rightly so because to a vast majority he is rememberd as one of Ali's opponents and the only fights of his you can get is him vs Ali, and oh yeah...he was KO'd by Foreman in 'When we were kings'.

Personally I can watch most of Frzaier fights over and over, yet I find it hard to sit down and watch Ali's fights more than once....maybe thats me.

It doesn't matter what populace worship has done to accend Ali to whatever levels he shall become revered at, after his illness and some day his death. To those of us who love a hard luck story, a rags to riches tale and any one who loves prize fighting...Frazier is a great champion. Who should be rembered for his unlikely gold medal in 1964, his war with Bonavena, his decimation of Ellis, his trench fight with Quarry, his revenge over Mathis, his dropping of Foster and his battle with Briton Bugner. Not just for his left hook that put Ali on his butt, or his losses to Foreman.

Sorry I am ranting, but I in some way share Frazier's anger over Ali's pop culture this is not so much Ali's fault but those who tend to claim to be boxing fan's yet who go no further than those generic posters, and doco's you find at cheap as cheaps.

Kym

Just like The Beatles, the hype Ali receives is well deserved. Throw everything else out the window, Ali still has Liston, Frazier, Foreman,Quarry,Lyle, Norton among others in his win column...no other heavyweight in history comes close to matching his resume. He was an inspirational civil rights figure to many,black and white, and had more charm and charisma then any athlete, shit maybe even any celebrity, in history.
Add that all together and Frazier has all the pop culture appeal of a wet blanket in comparison.
So those younger people may not have any real basis of they're own for saying Ali is the best, but the bottom line is that they're correct.

theone wrote:

Robinson wrote:Ali is popular as he is a T-shirt and poster personality these days, kinda like Bruce Lee. Alot of younger people buy memorabilia, and so on because its actually available and maybe a few DVD doco's watch half of them and then become 'experts' on HW boxing and the man himself.

"He could beat anyone..." They say.

"Why " You ask..

"Because ... he is the best" And of course this opinion is based on what they are told...or hear.

Its funny how often people tell me Ali is the greatest, without having never watched a full fight of his nor having seen any other fighter, yet they have such a firm and absolute opinion.

I love Ali, and think he was ONE of the greatest, but just because you get told something over and over again doesn't make it so...I want to watch alot more fights of other legends before I jump on the band waggon. I think Frazier is hurt and rightly so because to a vast majority he is rememberd as one of Ali's opponents and the only fights of his you can get is him vs Ali, and oh yeah...he was KO'd by Foreman in 'When we were kings'.

Personally I can watch most of Frzaier fights over and over, yet I find it hard to sit down and watch Ali's fights more than once....maybe thats me.

It doesn't matter what populace worship has done to accend Ali to whatever levels he shall become revered at, after his illness and some day his death. To those of us who love a hard luck story, a rags to riches tale and any one who loves prize fighting...Frazier is a great champion. Who should be rembered for his unlikely gold medal in 1964, his war with Bonavena, his decimation of Ellis, his trench fight with Quarry, his revenge over Mathis, his dropping of Foster and his battle with Briton Bugner. Not just for his left hook that put Ali on his butt, or his losses to Foreman.

Sorry I am ranting, but I in some way share Frazier's anger over Ali's pop culture this is not so much Ali's fault but those who tend to claim to be boxing fan's yet who go no further than those generic posters, and doco's you find at cheap as cheaps.

Kym

Just like The Beatles, the hype Ali receives is well deserved. Throw everything else out the window, Ali still has Liston, Frazier, Foreman,Quarry,Lyle, Norton among others in his win column...no other heavyweight in history comes close to matching his resume. He was an inspirational civil rights figure to many,black and white, and had more charm and charisma then any athlete, shit maybe even any celebrity, in history.
Add that all together and Frazier has all the pop culture appeal of a wet blanket in comparison.
So those younger people may not have any real basis of they're own for saying Ali is the best, but the bottom line is that they're correct.

Good point, every now and then in the course of history someone shows up that sort of "has it all". Talent, skill, charisma, a knack for communication and a personality that "resonates" with the times. And in this case his sport of boxing still "resonated" with the people and the times. A bit like Mike Jordan, Pelee, The Beatles, Kennedy etc. (Does not have to be a sports figure).

I'm not saying I buy into each of the before mentioned hysterical cultures but they did transcend their occupations and perhaps maybe even their own abilities and became something more than the sum of their seperate personal components.

Does that make sense?

I'm not saying I buy into each of the before mentioned hysterical cultures but they did transcend their occupations and perhaps maybe even their own abilities and became something more than the sum of their seperate personal components.

Does that make sense?

It took me awhile to decipher; but I think it does!

Yeah. I agree with the one. Can't it be both? Why do people today assume that famous = overrated? People today sort of have this mentality that Ali was too famous, and so he must have gotten too much credit. I don't think one has to do with the other.

For example, look at Babe Ruth. Ruth was a huge baseball icon, he was one of the most famous people of his day, still famous to this day, up there with Ali and Jordan and others in fame. But, that said, he was that good. Lou Gehrig, for example, didn't get enough attention or fame, which was unfair, he was an amazing player and one of the best in baseball history. But, that said, Ruth's numbers were better than Gehrig's. So its not so much that Ruth got too much credit, its just that Gehrig should have gotten more.

Frazier and Holmes and some other fighters do not get enough credit for their careers at times. But, that doesn't mean Ali wasn't better than Holmes and Frazier, it just means that Holmes and Frazier should get a little more credit, and some should be a little more objective when viewing Ali. No?

And I ask again, why does this apply only to Ali? Louis' legacy isn't exaggerated by his large number of fans? Marciano's? Dempsey's? And those guys didn't beat the level of opponents that Ali did, either.

And, lastly, while Ali has a large fanbase, there is also a very large, very vocal group of people who hate Ali, who have always hated Ali, and those people also influence the perceptions about Ali. "Doug Jones beat Ali", "Ali got a five minute break against Cooper", "Sonny Liston threw both fights"... "he was a draft dodging person"... you're telling me these people don't exist? They certainly do.

I Feel Fine wrote:And, lastly, while Ali has a large fanbase, there is also a very large, very vocal group of people who hate Ali, who have always hated Ali, and those people also influence the perceptions about Ali. "Doug Jones beat Ali", "Ali got a five minute break against Cooper", "Sonny Liston threw both fights"... "he was a draft dodging person"... you're telling me these people don't exist? They certainly do.

Worth repeating

Another reason Ali is still so much more beloved than Frazier and most other all time great athletes is that despite everything he's been through, and despite his current physical conditions the man never bitches or moans (at least publicly) and doesn't seem to feel sorry for himself in the slightest.

Others in his situation, especially anyone with half the ego he had, would have locked themselves away like a shut in and never showed their face in public again. Not Ali, who still has a regal bearing about him even in his current condition.Thats why people still idolize the man today.

Like Wyclef Jean wrote,"To hell with Frazier yappin' about that negative sh*t!"

i'm tired of hearing about the whole feud with frazier and ali.

i dont blame frazier, but i'm just tired of hearing about it.

so Ali is Omnipotent ?:)

npal wrote:I've said this before but I don't blame Joe one stinkin' bit. Ali was a selfish individual who deliberately stomped Joe Frazier's name into the ground to sell himself. I recall reading Joe Frazier's book about how his kids took a harsh beating from all of Ali's insults as well from other schoolchildren. Ali literally turned Joe Frazier into the anti-black man. For what? Because Joe wasn't as outspoken as Ali. How many people are? The most disturbing part in the end of all of this is that Ali will go down as this great ambassador for the African-American man but underneath it all was a hateful and selfish individual who only cared about himself. How do you, as an ambassador for the African-American people, deliberately tear down another black man merely for being a quiet man? Some will say it's boxing. I say that's a part of it but I also say Ali had an agenda. Ali's name will go down as an ambassador. Joe Frazier's name will always have a scuff mark on it from the comments that came from boxings "Greatest." He did it to other fighters but Joe Frazier happened to be the one man who time after time was always mentioned in the same sentence as Ali and Ali hated it. These men truly hated each other. Only Frazier had true reason to hate Ali. Ali had no reason to hate Frazier.

agreed 100%. Ali used the issue of race whenever it suited him.

Terrific fighter, if not quite as good as Frazier, head to head, prime for prime. The first fight is the closest and most accurate indicator we have.

As a man and human being, Ali was despicable.

I Feel Fine wrote:Yeah. I agree with the one. Can't it be both? Why do people today assume that famous = overrated? People today sort of have this mentality that Ali was too famous, and so he must have gotten too much credit. I don't think one has to do with the other.

For example, look at Babe Ruth. Ruth was a huge baseball icon, he was one of the most famous people of his day, still famous to this day, up there with Ali and Jordan and others in fame. But, that said, he was that good. Lou Gehrig, for example, didn't get enough attention or fame, which was unfair, he was an amazing player and one of the best in baseball history. But, that said, Ruth's numbers were better than Gehrig's. So its not so much that Ruth got too much credit, its just that Gehrig should have gotten more.

Frazier and Holmes and some other fighters do not get enough credit for their careers at times. But, that doesn't mean Ali wasn't better than Holmes and Frazier, it just means that Holmes and Frazier should get a little more credit, and some should be a little more objective when viewing Ali. No?

And I ask again, why does this apply only to Ali? Louis' legacy isn't exaggerated by his large number of fans? Marciano's? Dempsey's? And those guys didn't beat the level of opponents that Ali did, either.

And, lastly, while Ali has a large fanbase, there is also a very large, very vocal group of people who hate Ali, who have always hated Ali, and those people also influence the perceptions about Ali. "Doug Jones beat Ali", "Ali got a five minute break against Cooper", "Sonny Liston threw both fights"... "he was a draft dodging person"... you're telling me these people don't exist? They certainly do.

Joe Louis's large number of fans?? Louis's fanbase is from a generation which is rabidly dying off. Dempsey??? Who besides die-hard boxing fans could be said to be "Jack Dempsey" fans??

Ali was great. One of the best . . .but his transcending across sports into pop culture was largely due to his charisma/personality, and partly to his political stance at a time of massive political change. The anti-Ali people are MASSIVELY outnumbered by the Ali fans and worshippers. THe likes of Granberry are few and far between.

I'm not either. I enjoy Ali's tongue in cheek humor and he gave us a ton of brilliant performances in the ring. I also actually agree with his stance on the war and believe he had every right to refuse enlistment. But he was a VERY imperfect and flawed man (just like Jordan, Ruth, Mantle), had some flaws as a fighter, was a constant adulteror and womanizer etc. and I don't like any man getting "saintly" status above what the truth really was.

Syntax Error wrote:

Robinson wrote:Ali is popular as he is a T-shirt and poster personality these days, kinda like Bruce Lee. Alot of younger people buy memorabilia, and so on because its actually available and maybe a few DVD doco's watch half of them and then become 'experts' on HW boxing and the man himself.

"He could beat anyone..." They say.

"Why " You ask..

"Because ... he is the best" And of course this opinion is based on what they are told...or hear.

Its funny how often people tell me Ali is the greatest, without having never watched a full fight of his nor having seen any other fighter, yet they have such a firm and absolute opinion.

I love Ali, and think he was ONE of the greatest, but just because you get told something over and over again doesn't make it so...I want to watch alot more fights of other legends before I jump on the band waggon. I think Frazier is hurt and rightly so because to a vast majority he is rememberd as one of Ali's opponents and the only fights of his you can get is him vs Ali, and oh yeah...he was KO'd by Foreman in 'When we were kings'.

Personally I can watch most of Frzaier fights over and over, yet I find it hard to sit down and watch Ali's fights more than once....maybe thats me.

It doesn't matter what populace worship has done to accend Ali to whatever levels he shall become revered at, after his illness and some day his death. To those of us who love a hard luck story, a rags to riches tale and any one who loves prize fighting...Frazier is a great champion. Who should be rembered for his unlikely gold medal in 1964, his war with Bonavena, his decimation of Ellis, his trench fight with Quarry, his revenge over Mathis, his dropping of Foster and his battle with Briton Bugner. Not just for his left hook that put Ali on his butt, or his losses to Foreman.

Sorry I am ranting, but I in some way share Frazier's anger over Ali's pop culture this is not so much Ali's fault but those who tend to claim to be boxing fan's yet who go no further than those generic posters, and doco's you find at cheap as cheaps.

Kym

Stunning stuff.

One of the best posts I've read.

Stunning post...I could not said it better.

theone wrote:

Robinson wrote:Ali is popular as he is a T-shirt and poster personality these days, kinda like Bruce Lee. Alot of younger people buy memorabilia, and so on because its actually available and maybe a few DVD doco's watch half of them and then become 'experts' on HW boxing and the man himself.

"He could beat anyone..." They say.

"Why " You ask..

"Because ... he is the best" And of course this opinion is based on what they are told...or hear.

Its funny how often people tell me Ali is the greatest, without having never watched a full fight of his nor having seen any other fighter, yet they have such a firm and absolute opinion.

I love Ali, and think he was ONE of the greatest, but just because you get told something over and over again doesn't make it so...I want to watch alot more fights of other legends before I jump on the band waggon. I think Frazier is hurt and rightly so because to a vast majority he is rememberd as one of Ali's opponents and the only fights of his you can get is him vs Ali, and oh yeah...he was KO'd by Foreman in 'When we were kings'.

Personally I can watch most of Frzaier fights over and over, yet I find it hard to sit down and watch Ali's fights more than once....maybe thats me.

It doesn't matter what populace worship has done to accend Ali to whatever levels he shall become revered at, after his illness and some day his death. To those of us who love a hard luck story, a rags to riches tale and any one who loves prize fighting...Frazier is a great champion. Who should be rembered for his unlikely gold medal in 1964, his war with Bonavena, his decimation of Ellis, his trench fight with Quarry, his revenge over Mathis, his dropping of Foster and his battle with Briton Bugner. Not just for his left hook that put Ali on his butt, or his losses to Foreman.

Sorry I am ranting, but I in some way share Frazier's anger over Ali's pop culture this is not so much Ali's fault but those who tend to claim to be boxing fan's yet who go no further than those generic posters, and doco's you find at cheap as cheaps.

Kym

Just like The Beatles, the hype Ali receives is well deserved. Throw everything else out the window, Ali still has Liston, Frazier, Foreman,Quarry,Lyle, Norton among others in his win column...no other heavyweight in history comes close to matching his resume. He was an inspirational civil rights figure to many,black and white, and had more charm and charisma then any athlete, shit maybe even any celebrity, in history.
Add that all together and Frazier has all the pop culture appeal of a wet blanket in comparison.
So those younger people may not have any real basis of they're own for saying Ali is the best, but the bottom line is that they're correct.

Correct about what???

All I got to say is that if a man is hurt and wants to shed his memory to the public, he got the right to do so. Joe Frazier was a great champion, one of the greatest heavys ever and a top 50 all-time great and he will always be remembered because he was the CLEAR WINNER OF THE FIGHT OF THE CENTURY.

I think is also that Joe cannot envision someone that ridiculized him so much be perceived as an icon or a sentimental favorite of the people. And I can also see his frustration. It is almost like mines.

If we see old fights, it is always MOST OF THE TIME: ALI
If we see old documentaries, it is always MOST OF THE TIME: ALI
If we ask 80% of the people around the world, who is the greatest fighter pound per pound, the majority that has never seen a boxing match or never cared about boxing IMMEDIATELY would say: ALI

For cripes sake, the majority of the people in the world does not know his first name Cassius Clay.

There were exceedingly great fighters in the 60s and 70s, but the media made too much of Muhammad Ali, great fighter without a doubt, but we made too much of him...Guys like Eder Jofre, Jose "Mantequilla" Napoles, Joe Frazier, Ruben Olivares, Roberto Duran, Carlos Ortiz, Emile Griffith and Carlos Monzon NEVER HAD THE RECOGNITION THAT THEY DESERVED because Ali took their spotlight. Even the fans made too much out of him. If we say that Marvin Hagler or Eder Jofre or Roberto Duran or Wilfredo Gomez were more COMPLETE FIGHTERS THAN ALI, people would look at you like if you are crazy.

All it has to do with the beginning of marketing. Who is selling Fubu jeans now? Ali...That is very irritating to a lot of fighters and fans alike.

It occurs to me reading through this thread that the real problem isn't so much what Ali said about Frazier. As I said earlier, other fighters have done much worse. The real problem is that people have a lot of anger towards Ali, as a person and as a public figure, and I think this Frazier thing is how people vent that anger. It didn't take long for this thread to become less about Frazier and more about all the problems people have with Ali as a person and public figure.

Anyway, this is going to be a long post, I'm going to split it up into sections:

Ali-Frazier peak for peak: I am truly sick of listening to people say that Ali was just fine and dandy going into the first Frazier fight, that the layoff had no impact on him. I am tired of hearing about how we can't make "excuses" for Ali in the first fight, while Frazier supporters make so many excuses for Frazier in the rematches. Cut the bull; you can't have it both ways. Ali is the winner of the trilogy, Frazier did not show himself capable of beating an active Ali who was not coming off a 43 month layoff, and Frazier was in a much better position in the second fight than Ali was in the first. At the end of the day, Frazier beat Ali once, Ali beat Frazier twice. Frazier knocked Ali down, Ali stopped Frazier. End of discussion. Many of you are being motivated by your anger over Ali's comments about Frazier, and if the situation was reversed and Ali beat Frazier with Frazier coming off a three and a half year layoff you would not be so ready to say that both men were at their peak for the first fight.

Louis/Dempsey popularity: Louis for decades has been an enormously popular fighter, and still is today among boxing fans. If people put Louis to the same scrutiny they put to Ali, Louis wouldn't be put #1 at Heavyweight by half the people who put him there. I consider myself a Louis fan, I enjoy Louis' fights, I rank him as a top 10 P4P fighter and #2 at Heavyweight all time. But you want to talk about hero worship and lack of objectivity, look at how people talk about Louis as opposed to how they talk about Ali. You'd think Louis was the one to have beaten Liston, Frazier and Foreman.

People talk about how Ali was admired because of his personality and his act and his political beliefs and that this influences how people rank him as a fighter. I think that is such nonsense. People equally loved Louis for his personality and his public image and his service in WWII, and that just as well could have influenced how people ranked him as a boxer. It works both ways.

Of course Dempsey's image was influenced by his popularity. I think Dempsey is a great fighter, I think his title reign was better than Jack Johnson's. But for decades he was held to a much higher level, people like Bert Sugar ranked him near the highest place because of his popularity (and yes, Sugar is an idiot, but it wasn't only him), and only recently have people started to really downgrade him and view him with a critical eye.

Ali as a private person: I have no problem with anything anyone feels about who Ali was as a private person. I don't even know how I feel about Ali's position on Vietnam. But I hate when people let their opinions of Ali as a private person influence their views of him as a boxer. That stuff should have nothing to do with his legacy as a boxer.

This is the last time I am going to say it, dempseyfire; quit lecturing me about how Ali was imperfect. This isn't the first time you've felt the need to tell me this, and I quite resent it. Anyone who thinks that they have to lecture me about Ali not being perfect, as a boxer or as a person, is talking to the wrong guy. I think my knowledge of Ali is quite capable, I've seen almost all of his fights, and I don't need anyone to tell me what his good and bad qualities were as a fighter. I also don't need anyone to tell me what some of his faults were as a person, I'm aware of what they were, but all I am interested in is boxing, and his position on Vietnam, his religion, his four wives and who knows how many kids have no bearing on his abilities as a boxer. His abilities as a boxer should be the only thing that people discuss about him on a boxing forum.

That said, I find it interesting that people seem to feel that fighters who rape and murder are less evil and less worthy of contempt than fighters who talk too much..

Attention given to Ali: I think elmer's comments are the ones that fully expose what I'm talking about. I keep saying it, but it needs repeating, that Ali's career is over analyzed and Ali is held to an amazing amount of scrutiny that few if any other fighters are held to. Elmer is now criticizing Ali because Ali got more attention than the champions of the lower weight classes of his day. FFS, with few exceptions all the champions in the lower weight classes in the past were always overshadowed by Heavyweight champions, this is a f*cking fact of boxing history up until this era. And yet we're going to criticize Ali for that? If Ali's career isn't over analyzed, if Ali's career isn't given too much scrutiny; why is Ali being criticized for something that was given to Heavyweight champions in almost every era of boxing history?

Why don't some of you take a deep breath and start holding some other fighters to the same scrutiny you hold Ali to, rather than criticizing all the minutiae of his career. You'll find that Ali's grabbing behind the head wasn't as dirty as a Duran low blow or a Greb headbutt. You'll find that Ali's title challengers like Folley and Bugner were a bit more qualified than Galento and Paycheck. You'll find that the end of Ali's career was not as bad as the end of Robinson's or Charles'. You'll find that Ali's comments about Joe Frazier were not as horrible as what Monzon did to his wife. You'll discover that Ali was not the only fighter to get a controversial decision, that Larry Holmes got as many as Ali did. You'll see that Ali wasn't the only fighter to have a difficult time coming off a long layoff. You'll even find that Ali was not the only womanizing Heavyweight champion.

Tantum wrote:[img]http://img144. .us/img144/1873/horzooxlnd0.jpg[/img]

You don't say.

I Feel Fine wrote:It occurs to me reading through this thread that the real problem isn't so much what Ali said about Frazier. As I said earlier, other fighters have done much worse. The real problem is that people have a lot of anger towards Ali, as a person and as a public figure, and I think this Frazier thing is how people vent that anger. It didn't take long for this thread to become less about Frazier and more about all the problems people have with Ali as a person and public figure.

Anyway, this is going to be a long post, I'm going to split it up into sections:

Ali-Frazier peak for peak: I am truly sick of listening to people say that Ali was just fine and dandy going into the first Frazier fight, that the layoff had no impact on him. I am tired of hearing about how we can't make "excuses" for Ali in the first fight, while Frazier supporters make so many excuses for Frazier in the rematches. Cut the bull; you can't have it both ways. Ali is the winner of the trilogy, Frazier did not show himself capable of beating an active Ali who was not coming off a 43 month layoff, and Frazier was in a much better position in the second fight than Ali was in the first. At the end of the day, Frazier beat Ali once, Ali beat Frazier twice. Frazier knocked Ali down, Ali stopped Frazier. End of discussion. Many of you are being motivated by your anger over Ali's comments about Frazier, and if the situation was reversed and Ali beat Frazier with Frazier coming off a three and a half year layoff you would not be so ready to say that both men were at their peak for the first fight.

Louis/Dempsey popularity: Louis for decades has been an enormously popular fighter, and still is today among boxing fans. If people put Louis to the same scrutiny they put to Ali, Louis wouldn't be put #1 at Heavyweight by half the people who put him there. I consider myself a Louis fan, I enjoy Louis' fights, I rank him as a top 10 P4P fighter and #2 at Heavyweight all time. But you want to talk about hero worship and lack of objectivity, look at how people talk about Louis as opposed to how they talk about Ali. You'd think Louis was the one to have beaten Liston, Frazier and Foreman.

People talk about how Ali was admired because of his personality and his act and his political beliefs and that this influences how people rank him as a fighter. I think that is such nonsense. People equally loved Louis for his personality and his public image and his service in WWII, and that just as well could have influenced how people ranked him as a boxer. It works both ways.

Of course Dempsey's image was influenced by his popularity. I think Dempsey is a great fighter, I think his title reign was better than Jack Johnson's. But for decades he was held to a much higher level, people like Bert Sugar ranked him near the highest place because of his popularity (and yes, Sugar is an idiot, but it wasn't only him), and only recently have people started to really downgrade him and view him with a critical eye.

Ali as a private person: I have no problem with anything anyone feels about who Ali was as a private person. I don't even know how I feel about Ali's position on Vietnam. But I hate when people let their opinions of Ali as a private person influence their views of him as a boxer. That stuff should have nothing to do with his legacy as a boxer.

This is the last time I am going to say it, dempseyfire; quit lecturing me about how Ali was imperfect. This isn't the first time you've felt the need to tell me this, and I quite resent it. Anyone who thinks that they have to lecture me about Ali not being perfect, as a boxer or as a person, is talking to the wrong guy. I think my knowledge of Ali is quite capable, I've seen almost all of his fights, and I don't need anyone to tell me what his good and bad qualities were as a fighter. I also don't need anyone to tell me what some of his faults were as a person, I'm aware of what they were, but all I am interested in is boxing, and his position on Vietnam, his religion, his four wives and who knows how many kids have no bearing on his abilities as a boxer. His abilities as a boxer should be the only thing that people discuss about him on a boxing forum.

That said, I find it interesting that people seem to feel that fighters who rape and murder are less evil and less worthy of contempt than fighters who talk too much..

Attention given to Ali: I think elmer's comments are the ones that fully expose what I'm talking about. I keep saying it, but it needs repeating, that Ali's career is over analyzed and Ali is held to an amazing amount of scrutiny that few if any other fighters are held to. Elmer is now criticizing Ali because Ali got more attention than the champions of the lower weight classes of his day. FFS, with few exceptions all the champions in the lower weight classes in the past were always overshadowed by Heavyweight champions, this is a f*cking fact of boxing history up until this era. And yet we're going to criticize Ali for that? If Ali's career isn't over analyzed, if Ali's career isn't given too much scrutiny; why is Ali being criticized for something that was given to Heavyweight champions in almost every era of boxing history?

Why don't some of you take a deep breath and start holding some other fighters to the same scrutiny you hold Ali to, rather than criticizing all the minutiae of his career. You'll find that Ali's grabbing behind the head wasn't as dirty as a Duran low blow or a Greb headbutt. You'll find that Ali's title challengers like Folley and Bugner were a bit more qualified than Galento and Paycheck. You'll find that the end of Ali's career was not as bad as the end of Robinson's or Charles'. You'll find that Ali's comments about Joe Frazier were not as horrible as what Monzon did to his wife. You'll discover that Ali was not the only fighter to get a controversial decision, that Larry Holmes got as many as Ali did. You'll see that Ali wasn't the only fighter to have a difficult time coming off a long layoff. You'll even find that Ali was not the only womanizing Heavyweight champion.

A rather wide post 8) but I agree with just about every word!.... anyone who claims that Ali didnt suffer due to his inactivity must be blind, its a fact that Frazier never fought a peak Ali and he should be thankful that he didnt!....

BoxBuzz wrote:

Tantum wrote:[img]http://img144. .us/img144/1873/horzooxlnd0.jpg[/img]

You don't say.

He didnt say much at all!....

npal wrote:

Matt W wrote:I think I Feel Fine makes a lot of good points, and I think there is more to this than the comments Ali made. I think Joe is, perhaps rightly, bitter about what he perceives to be a lack of recognition for his achievements and digs at Ali is how he vents it.

That's possible. But the way Joe tells it in his book, Ali made those years for him and his family unbearable (years that you can't get back) with the torture not only from Ali himself but Ali supporters. If it's as bad as Joe would tell it, I'd probably hold a grudge too.

Jesus wept! Without Muhammed Ali Joe Frazier would never have made the sort of money he made from boxing. Regardless of what you may think of Ali, he pushed the prize money in boxing up to levels previously not dreamed of. Ali had something to say about everybody he fought. Like he once said, "They may come because they like me, they may come because they hate me. For whatever reason they come, they gotta pay to get in."

As for me? I think Muhammed Ali and Joe Frazier were both boxing legends. It is a shame we do not have two heavyweights like them around now.

I Feel Fine wrote:It occurs to me reading through this thread that the real problem isn't so much what Ali said about Frazier. As I said earlier, other fighters have done much worse. The real problem is that people have a lot of anger towards Ali, as a person and as a public figure, and I think this Frazier thing is how people vent that anger. It didn't take long for this thread to become less about Frazier and more about all the problems people have with Ali as a person and public figure.

Anyway, this is going to be a long post, I'm going to split it up into sections:

Ali-Frazier peak for peak: I am truly sick of listening to people say that Ali was just fine and dandy going into the first Frazier fight, that the layoff had no impact on him. I am tired of hearing about how we can't make "excuses" for Ali in the first fight, while Frazier supporters make so many excuses for Frazier in the rematches. Cut the bull; you can't have it both ways. Ali is the winner of the trilogy, Frazier did not show himself capable of beating an active Ali who was not coming off a 43 month layoff, and Frazier was in a much better position in the second fight than Ali was in the first. At the end of the day, Frazier beat Ali once, Ali beat Frazier twice. Frazier knocked Ali down, Ali stopped Frazier. End of discussion. Many of you are being motivated by your anger over Ali's comments about Frazier, and if the situation was reversed and Ali beat Frazier with Frazier coming off a three and a half year layoff you would not be so ready to say that both men were at their peak for the first fight.

Louis/Dempsey popularity: Louis for decades has been an enormously popular fighter, and still is today among boxing fans. If people put Louis to the same scrutiny they put to Ali, Louis wouldn't be put #1 at Heavyweight by half the people who put him there. I consider myself a Louis fan, I enjoy Louis' fights, I rank him as a top 10 P4P fighter and #2 at Heavyweight all time. But you want to talk about hero worship and lack of objectivity, look at how people talk about Louis as opposed to how they talk about Ali. You'd think Louis was the one to have beaten Liston, Frazier and Foreman.

People talk about how Ali was admired because of his personality and his act and his political beliefs and that this influences how people rank him as a fighter. I think that is such nonsense. People equally loved Louis for his personality and his public image and his service in WWII, and that just as well could have influenced how people ranked him as a boxer. It works both ways.

Of course Dempsey's image was influenced by his popularity. I think Dempsey is a great fighter, I think his title reign was better than Jack Johnson's. But for decades he was held to a much higher level, people like Bert Sugar ranked him near the highest place because of his popularity (and yes, Sugar is an idiot, but it wasn't only him), and only recently have people started to really downgrade him and view him with a critical eye.

Ali as a private person: I have no problem with anything anyone feels about who Ali was as a private person. I don't even know how I feel about Ali's position on Vietnam. But I hate when people let their opinions of Ali as a private person influence their views of him as a boxer. That stuff should have nothing to do with his legacy as a boxer.

This is the last time I am going to say it, dempseyfire; quit lecturing me about how Ali was imperfect. This isn't the first time you've felt the need to tell me this, and I quite resent it. Anyone who thinks that they have to lecture me about Ali not being perfect, as a boxer or as a person, is talking to the wrong guy. I think my knowledge of Ali is quite capable, I've seen almost all of his fights, and I don't need anyone to tell me what his good and bad qualities were as a fighter. I also don't need anyone to tell me what some of his faults were as a person, I'm aware of what they were, but all I am interested in is boxing, and his position on Vietnam, his religion, his four wives and who knows how many kids have no bearing on his abilities as a boxer. His abilities as a boxer should be the only thing that people discuss about him on a boxing forum.

That said, I find it interesting that people seem to feel that fighters who rape and murder are less evil and less worthy of contempt than fighters who talk too much..

Attention given to Ali: I think elmer's comments are the ones that fully expose what I'm talking about. I keep saying it, but it needs repeating, that Ali's career is over analyzed and Ali is held to an amazing amount of scrutiny that few if any other fighters are held to. Elmer is now criticizing Ali because Ali got more attention than the champions of the lower weight classes of his day. FFS, with few exceptions all the champions in the lower weight classes in the past were always overshadowed by Heavyweight champions, this is a f*cking fact of boxing history up until this era. And yet we're going to criticize Ali for that? If Ali's career isn't over analyzed, if Ali's career isn't given too much scrutiny; why is Ali being criticized for something that was given to Heavyweight champions in almost every era of boxing history?

Why don't some of you take a deep breath and start holding some other fighters to the same scrutiny you hold Ali to, rather than criticizing all the minutiae of his career. You'll find that Ali's grabbing behind the head wasn't as dirty as a Duran low blow or a Greb headbutt. You'll find that Ali's title challengers like Folley and Bugner were a bit more qualified than Galento and Paycheck. You'll find that the end of Ali's career was not as bad as the end of Robinson's or Charles'. You'll find that Ali's comments about Joe Frazier were not as horrible as what Monzon did to his wife. You'll discover that Ali was not the only fighter to get a controversial decision, that Larry Holmes got as many as Ali did. You'll see that Ali wasn't the only fighter to have a difficult time coming off a long layoff. You'll even find that Ali was not the only womanizing Heavyweight champion.

I do not doubt of Ali's legacy...Do I think he is the greatest heavyweight of all time? Yes. Do I think he was overrated? In a way? yes
Do I think that he's one of the top 10 fighters pound per pound? By looking at the opposition he faced, and beat clearly the majority of them, (even though his record is a bit deceiving, because to me, he lost at least 8 or 9 fights)...Yes.

The problem I got with Ali is that in the history of boxing there were too many fighters that made this sport what it is today...Too many LEGENDARY CHAMPIONS make the mark in this sport for one man to just to be recognized in every where you turn the channel on your tv set. I think that is not fair at all. Thousands of fighters shed sweat, tears and blood and sacrificed their bodies for this brutal sport to be the best. Not to mention that they put their lives on the line in every bout...To Joe Frazier is IRONIC that how a man like him, that was so great, is not mentioned often. His first fight with Ali is SELDOM shown on tv. And when he beat Ali in the "Fight of the Century", the naysayers gotta say things like"

"Ali understimated Frazier"
"Ali had a 3 year layoff"
"Ali did not train properly"
"Ali got robbed"
"Ali is the people's champion"

Frazier beats Mathis..."Oh no, he is not the real champ...The real champ is Ali"

Frazier beat Ellis for the undisputed crown..."Oh, he was not Ali"

now Frazier beats Ali..."Oh, Ali was playing with him"

For cripes sake, what Frazier gotta do? Fight and beat Superman or King Kong?

To add some more...

I do not hate Ali. He was one of my favorite fighters when I was a kid. That comes to tell me that back in the 70s, all I cared was Roberto Duran and Muhammad Ali. And I think it was a combination of fault of the media likes like Howard Cossell, Ferdie Pacheco and The Ring Magazine that made too much of Ali. Like if the other fighters does not exist. Even today, they show more fights of Ali than any other fighter in history.

For cripes sake, how many times are we gonna see the "Thrilla in Manila" on ESPNClassic? For the 3000th time?

"The Rumble in the Jungle"? for the 5000th time?
Ali vs Liston I? for the rest of our lives?

I want to see Carlos Ortiz in action for a change. Some Ken Buchanan fights... Some Ruben Olivares slugsfests of Arena Coliseum and Inglewood Forum fights for a change. If we ask a kid today about Muhammad Ali, he knows him, even though he NEVER SAW HIM FIGHT. You ask him about Evander Holyfield or Julio Cesar Chavez, all-time greats that deserve more tv wave play and the answer is "I do not know them" or "Who are those?"

Can I see some Jose "Mantequilla" Napoles in action or Sugar Ray Leonard?

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.