The Thrilla in Manila - 40th anniversary

[Like a Boss]

Regarded by many as one the most brutal heavyweight fights of all time, this Thursday marks the 40th anniversary of the final installment of the Muhammad Ali vs Joe Frazier trilogy: 'The Thrilla In Manila'.

[elmersalsa]

You stole my thunder, but, I am glad that you remember this famous fight. A fight for the ages!

[Like a Boss]

Regarded by many as one the most brutal heavyweight fights of all time, this Thursday marks the 40th anniversary of the final installment of the Muhammad Ali vs Joe Frazier trilogy: 'The Thrilla In Manila'.

Sure was

[Syntax Error]

Two magnificent warriors having on last hurrah.

Both men deserve credit for their respective performances; it's just a shame it took such a toll on both of them in later years.

It's also a shame that Joe Frazier is no longer with us to remember his valiant effort.

RIP Joe.

[Ambling Alp II]

This fight is the yardstick for heavyweight fights.
Despite the intense heat, they put on a phenomenal performance.

[elmersalsa]

Both fights, The Fight of the Century and The Thrilla in Manila are the measuring stick of the future great heavyweight title bouts.

I mean, Ali vs Frazier rivalry was, and still is, the greatest boxing rivalry of all-time. Even when they were washed up, something about them two every time they met in the Ring, brought the best of each other.

Will this fight be rebroadcast tonight for the 40th anniversary?

[Caractacus]

Do you think that the heat and muggyness may have affected Rodney Bobick performance against Larry Holmes in the preliminary?

[Like a Boss]

Both fights, The Fight of the Century and The Thrilla in Manila are the measuring stick of the future great heavyweight title bouts.

I mean, Ali vs Frazier rivalry was, and still is, the greatest boxing rivalry of all-time. Even when they were washed up, something about them two every time they met in the Ring, brought the best of each other.

Will this fight be rebroadcast tonight for the 40th anniversary?

I might dust off the CD and give it a run. Lost count how many times I've watched that fight.

[Like a Boss]

http://www.ibtimes.com/pulse/thrilla-ma ... 40-2123488

[elmersalsa]

I saw it last night. What a fight.

[yancey]

Come on, Manila was a memorable struggle, but in truth both men were well off of their FOTC form.

The FOTC was THE FIGHT. Every objective person knows it deep down. Two undefeated champions, both very near their prime, facing each other and both knowing this was their moment.

The issue here is that the media darling lost THE BIG ONE, therefore it gets downplayed.

The media darling won the Old-Timers affair, therefore it gets magnified into something it really wasn't.

Ever wonder why Manila gets so much airplay and the FOTC gets very little, if any?

[Ambling Alp II]

It's probably because the third fight was so much better. Too bad your guy lost. Boohoo.

[yancey]

"It's probably because the third fight was so much better." AA



Who knows, you may be dumb enough to actually believe this.

[magwitch]

This fight is the yardstick for heavyweight fights.
Despite the intense heat, they put on a phenomenal performance.

the heat amounted to negligence. That's my opinion but I also believe it's a fact. Sure, both fighters went ahead, but I doubt they realised how hot it would be under the lights and I've just read also - tin roof. Over the years I've heard claims it was as high as 45 degrees Celsius. Seems on the high side to me, but I'm not in a position to argue.

I made a thread of this in the British section the other day - forgot to look here - but even so, still worth a share on any platform. I added a couple of newspaper links but I stopped short of going for any single photograph because imo, as brilliant and iconic as the above pictures are, any of them on their its own seems to dismiss the other guy, and this fight - like most great fights, owes its status to both men.

[elmersalsa]

It's probably because the third fight was so much better. Too bad your guy lost. Boohoo.

The third fight was not better than the FOTC, Alp.

[Ambling Alp II]

"It's probably because the third fight was so much better." AA



Who knows, you may be dumb enough to actually believe this.

Yes you are quite the unbiased intellectual. Your guy wins one of three fights, so naturally that one has to be more important.
The fight your guy won is better than the third even though it had less than half the action.

[Ambling Alp II]

This fight is the yardstick for heavyweight fights.
Despite the intense heat, they put on a phenomenal performance.

the heat amounted to negligence. That's my opinion but I also believe it's a fact. Sure, both fighters went ahead, but I doubt they realised how hot it would be under the lights and I've just read also - tin roof. Over the years I've heard claims it was as high as 45 degrees Celsius. Seems on the high side to me, but I'm not in a position to argue.

I made a thread of this in the British section the other day - forgot to look here - but even so, still worth a share on any platform. I added a couple of newspaper links but I stopped short of going for any single photograph because imo, as brilliant and iconic as the above pictures are, any of them on their its own seems to dismiss the other guy, and this fight - like most great fights, owes its status to both men.

I don't know if they knew going in that it was going to be so hot.
However, it was certainly extremely hot. Have you ever seen fighters gloves (from their sweat) look like that?

The intensity round after round was unbelievable.

[evrenb]

In terms of historical significance and both fighters nearer their peak then the FOTC is by far the bigger match. It was an incredible night and probably unsurpassed before and after. It had everything ; the build up, the drama and then the meeting itself was phenomenal. Culminating in that incredible knockdown in round 15. Joe Frazier won the biggest fight that there ever was. That can never ever be taken away.
However, for me, the Thrilla in Manila is the greater fight. That opinion is not based on who the winner was.

[yancey]

In terms of historical significance and both fighters nearer their peak then the FOTC is by far the bigger match. It was an incredible night and probably unsurpassed before and after. It had everything ; the build up, the drama and then the meeting itself was phenomenal. Culminating in that incredible knockdown in round 15. Joe Frazier won the biggest fight that there ever was. That can never ever be taken away.
However, for me, the Thrilla in Manila is the greater fight. That opinion is not based on who the winner was.

Can you provide us some basis for your reasoning on why Manila was the better fight?

Were the contestants more skillful than 4 and 1/2 years earlier? More action, harder punching, faster moves, etc?

p.s. Glad we are in agreement that the FOTC was the "biggest fight that there ever was."

[Ambling Alp II]

Love the excuse of "my guy lost the series but he won the one that counted"

If someone is a big Graziano fan they can say so what if he won only one of three from Zale. Just say that the fight Graziano won was "the one that counted". Then expect a Zale fan to say "oh darn, you got me there".

Same with Griffith-Benvenuti. If you are a Griffith fan, it doesn't matter than your guy only won one of three. Just say the fight that Griffith won was "more important". Then surely a Benvenuti fan would have to concede " you got me there"

Same with McLarnin-Ross. If you a McLarnin fan, just claim the only fight he won in their fights was a bigger fight. Than you can fully expect a Ross fan to respond" gee whiz, you right".

Really makes a lot of sense.

[yancey]

Love the excuse of "my guy lost the series but he won the one that counted"

If someone is a big Graziano fan they can say so what if he won only one of three from Zale. Just say that the fight Graziano won was "the one that counted". Then expect a Zale fan to say "oh darn, you got me there".

Same with Griffith-Benvenuti. If you are a Griffith fan, it doesn't matter than your guy only won one of three. Just say the fight that Griffith won was "more important". Then surely a Benvenuti fan would have to concede " you got me there"

Same with McLarnin-Ross. If you a McLarnin fan, just claim the only fight he won in their fights was a bigger fight. Than you can fully expect a Ross fan to respond" gee whiz, you right".

Really makes a lot of sense.

If you gave me two choices.....

1. Frazier wins the FOTC and then loses the next two Ali fights.

2. Frazier loses the FOTC and then wins the next two Ali fights.

I take option 1 EVERY time. Without a doubt.

The FOTC was everything. It was the moment. Astute Ali fans know this deep down and it pisses them off that Frazier prevailed. Thus the bogus excuses.

Like a knowledgeable poster here said.....

"Frazier was King when it mattered."

[Rexob]

Love the excuse of "my guy lost the series but he won the one that counted"

If someone is a big Graziano fan they can say so what if he won only one of three from Zale. Just say that the fight Graziano won was "the one that counted". Then expect a Zale fan to say "oh darn, you got me there".

Same with Griffith-Benvenuti. If you are a Griffith fan, it doesn't matter than your guy only won one of three. Just say the fight that Griffith won was "more important". Then surely a Benvenuti fan would have to concede " you got me there"

Same with McLarnin-Ross. If you a McLarnin fan, just claim the only fight he won in their fights was a bigger fight. Than you can fully expect a Ross fan to respond" gee whiz, you right".

Really makes a lot of sense.

If you gave me two choices.....

1. Frazier wins the FOTC and then loses the next two Ali fights.

2. Frazier loses the FOTC and then wins the next two Ali fights.

I take option 1 EVERY time. Without a doubt.

The FOTC was everything. It was the moment. Astute Ali fans know this deep down and it pisses them off that Frazier prevailed. Thus the bogus excuses.

Like a knowledgeable poster here said.....

"Frazier was King when it mattered."

It mattered when he fought Foreman as well but we won't go into that

[magwitch]

In terms of historical significance and both fighters nearer their peak then the FOTC is by far the bigger match. It was an incredible night and probably unsurpassed before and after. It had everything ; the build up, the drama and then the meeting itself was phenomenal. Culminating in that incredible knockdown in round 15. Joe Frazier won the biggest fight that there ever was. That can never ever be taken away.
However, for me, the Thrilla in Manila is the greater fight. That opinion is not based on who the winner was.

Can you provide us some basis for your reasoning on why Manila was the better fight?

Were the contestants more skillful than 4 and 1/2 years earlier? More action, harder punching, faster moves, etc?

p.s. Glad we are in agreement that the FOTC was the "biggest fight that there ever was."

I don't know which one was the biggest or the best, as I wasn't alive for either and I can only go off what I've read and seen and what snippets I've managed to remember - and not what I've forgotten. I know the big fight after Ali got his licence back was a massive affair - but there is something extremely visceral, primitive - and frankly not all that nice - about the Thrilla In Manilla. One newspaper headline I read earlier this week was a quote (attributed to Ali, I believe), which said something like "The closest thing to death he'd ever experienced". Not light words.
I also think that the comments about being like a gorilla and the way in which they stung Joe, who was genuinely at a loss to understand how or why he was being talked about like this also highlight a really peevish, quite pathetic streak in Ali - which these days is all too easily brushed under the carpet of this "Greatest of All Time great old man".... Whether he actually meant these words to cause pain, or whether he was just running his mouth on auto-pilot, which the press expected and adored him for, is another question.
Anyway, I get distracted, whichever was the bigger or better fight I like the way in which evrenb makes his point, thoughtfully and politely, which is the right way, no matter if people agree or not

[evrenb]

In terms of historical significance and both fighters nearer their peak then the FOTC is by far the bigger match. It was an incredible night and probably unsurpassed before and after. It had everything ; the build up, the drama and then the meeting itself was phenomenal. Culminating in that incredible knockdown in round 15. Joe Frazier won the biggest fight that there ever was. That can never ever be taken away.
However, for me, the Thrilla in Manila is the greater fight. That opinion is not based on who the winner was.

Can you provide us some basis for your reasoning on why Manila was the better fight?

Were the contestants more skillful than 4 and 1/2 years earlier? More action, harder punching, faster moves, etc?

p.s. Glad we are in agreement that the FOTC was the "biggest fight that there ever was."

Why was Manila better??? 'Cos Ali won !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Ambling Alp II]

Love the excuse of "my guy lost the series but he won the one that counted"

If someone is a big Graziano fan they can say so what if he won only one of three from Zale. Just say that the fight Graziano won was "the one that counted". Then expect a Zale fan to say "oh darn, you got me there".

Same with Griffith-Benvenuti. If you are a Griffith fan, it doesn't matter than your guy only won one of three. Just say the fight that Griffith won was "more important". Then surely a Benvenuti fan would have to concede " you got me there"

Same with McLarnin-Ross. If you a McLarnin fan, just claim the only fight he won in their fights was a bigger fight. Than you can fully expect a Ross fan to respond" gee whiz, you right".

Really makes a lot of sense.

If you gave me two choices.....

1. Frazier wins the FOTC and then loses the next two Ali fights.

2. Frazier loses the FOTC and then wins the next two Ali fights.

I take option 1 EVERY time. Without a doubt.

The FOTC was everything. It was the moment. Astute Ali fans know this deep down and it pisses them off that Frazier prevailed. Thus the bogus excuses.

Like a knowledgeable poster here said.....

"Frazier was King when it mattered."

Good for you. The first fight was special to you because your guy won. The first fight was no more important to me than the third. It wasn't any more of a special moment for me. The second fight was not a title fight, but still was huge. Ali loses that and the whole history of boxing changes.

I would always take 2-1 over 1-2. If Frazier lost the first and won the second two, he would be rated higher than Ali and arguably could even be #1 All-Time. Of course it would be better for him to have been able to do that then what actually happened.

If Ali would have won the first and lost the next two, he would not be the best of All-time. So, I am glad it turned out the way it did rather than the reverse.

2-1 is better than 1-2. Pretty simple.