Frazier reflects on Thrilla, Ali [Archive]

Bummy Davis

04-12-2009, 11:01 AM

Frazier reflects on 'Thrilla', Ali

Associated Press
NEW YORK - Muhammad Ali described his third and final fight with Joe Frazier as "death, closest thing to dyin' that I know of."
Frazier recalls their brutal matchup outside Manila, the Philippines, as something much less grandiose.
"We just did our job," he said.
The two great heavyweights always have been the yin and yang of boxing. Why should things change nearly 35 years later?
Now 65 and walking with a cane, the slightly stooped Frazier reflected on the iconic fight in Quezon City on Oct. 1, 1975, during a wide-ranging interview. He also talked about the contentious relationship between the starring characters, which is the subject of an HBO documentary, Thrilla in Manila, which was to premiere last night.
"I don't think Manila was my greatest fight," Frazier said forcefully.
He ticked off several others in vivid detail, from the Golden Gloves to his gold medal at the Tokyo Olympics to the "Fight of the Century" - in which he beat Ali at Madison Square Garden in 1971 to retain the world heavyweight title.
"The greatest fight was '71, when we were all undefeated," he said. "There was more money, more people. I don't know why they make this one out to be the biggest fight."
When it comes to his longtime foil, Frazier is sympathetic to the suffering Parkinson's disease has caused Ali. But as a Christian, Frazier said, he isn't surprised by it, either.
"I'm sorry that he is the way he is, but I didn't have too much to do with it. It was the good man above," Frazier said. "Maybe I did have a little to do with it, but God judges, you know what I'm saying? We don't have the power to judge that the man has above."
The animosity that grew over the pair's first two fights reached a climax when, after the Philippines bout was announced, Ali pulled out a black rubber gorilla and famously launched into a poem: "It will be a killa and a chilla and a thrilla when I get the gorilla in Manila."
"He kept saying, 'Joe Frazier, I'm going to whup you,' " Frazier recalled, still pained by the race-baiting attacks. "I said, 'All right, I'm going to wrap your butt up.' People loved him on the basis of his noise."
Ali later tried to make amends, calling the mocking use of a gorilla a promotional ploy, and said that if "God ever calls me to a holy war, I want Joe Frazier fighting beside me."
But the wounds ran deep, and while the two men have alternated apologies with attacks over the years, their relationship is still raw.

Minotauro

04-12-2009, 12:44 PM

Frazier is right the first fight was the greater.

ChrisPontius

04-12-2009, 01:49 PM

"I don't think Manila was my greatest fight," Frazier said forcefully.
He ticked off several others in vivid detail, from the Golden Gloves to his gold medal at the Tokyo Olympics to the "Fight of the Century" - in which he beat Ali at Madison Square Garden in 1971 to retain the world heavyweight title.
"The greatest fight was '71, when we were all undefeated," he said. "There was more money, more people. I don't know why they make this one out to be the biggest fight."
When it comes to his longtime foil, Frazier is sympathetic to the suffering Parkinson's disease has caused Ali. But as a Christian, Frazier said, he isn't surprised by it, either.
"I'm sorry that he is the way he is, but I didn't have too much to do with it. It was the good man above," Frazier said. "Maybe I did have a little to do with it, but God judges, you know what I'm saying? We don't have the power to judge that the man has above."

True words. The only reason the first fight is much rarer shown or discussed is because Frazier won it and Ali took a beating. I think that was the greatest heavyweight fight of all time and it certainly was among the biggest in history, along with Louis vs Schmeling II. Man, i love that fight. The "Thrilla" is excellent, but nowhere near as good as the epic first one.

Bokaj

04-12-2009, 02:08 PM

True words. The only reason the first fight is much rarer shown or discussed is because Frazier won it and Ali took a beating. I think that was the greatest heavyweight fight of all time and it certainly was among the biggest in history, along with Louis vs Schmeling II. Man, i love that fight. The "Thrilla" is excellent, but nowhere near as good as the epic first one.

I think the reason FOTC rarely being shown might have to do with rights issues. NBC seems to be sitting on the rights and maybe they're stingy with them. I feel pretty sure that this is the reason why ESPN Classic never shows it.

ray fredrickson

04-12-2009, 02:28 PM

That First one was the Epic!!:happyBoth undefeated Olympic champs . Ali considered INVINCEABLE by his cult.Both proud Americans winning GOLD for USA!!!For me I was proud just getting back from one year of hell in Viet Nam!!:roll:So proud to see (the simple MAN) win for true boxing fans ,the silent majority!! Not ashamed to be Americans. Reminds me of Louis vs Schmeling 2!!:happy:happy

Bokaj

04-12-2009, 02:32 PM

ray fredrickson

04-12-2009, 02:46 PM

Reply to fellow boxing fan ,GENTLEMEN!! Thank you &God bless you. Viet Nam vets like everyone else ,were all different.Ali was Exceptional.. Case,He was the greatest (maybe ALL-time) true Ali wouldnt have got hazardous duty pay. &he did stand for his religion (BLACK FREEDOM &EQUALITY) .. But for that one shining moment a simple BLACK MAN ,captured a crown Kept from equality of ALL to win that CROWN!!!:admin:happy:happy:happy

Bokaj

04-12-2009, 02:53 PM

ChrisPontius

04-12-2009, 03:45 PM

For me I was proud just getting back from one year of hell in Viet Nam!!:roll:

Welcome back. I have a lot of respect for Vietnam vets.

mrbassie

04-12-2009, 03:57 PM

Was Ali very resented by Vietnam veterans for his stand on the war? How did you view it?

It was Vietnam veterans who were at the very centre of the war protest and it was they who began it. That's something that was airbrushed from history: guy gets off a plane at san francisco airport, hippy girl with beads spits at him and calls him a baby murderer. That's not just a line in Rambo, it was actually a printed comic put out by the government. There's a great documentary called "sir! no sir!" on the subject, it's very enlightening and it just goes to show the power the media has on public perception.

MrMarvel

04-12-2009, 06:42 PM

MrMarvel

04-12-2009, 06:44 PM

Both fights are great. Both are the two greatest heavyweights fights, in my opinion. However, the first one is marred by the fact that Ali played around too much. He clowned in several rounds. He was winning going away and then let it slip away. The second fight was both focused on the matter at hand. It's a slight advantage, but the thrilla in Manilla is the better fight. Not culturally, perhaps, but in terms of effort. Both gave it their all. Of course, it's not Frazier's fault that Ali clowned, but a fight takes two.

OBCboxer

04-12-2009, 06:59 PM

The FOTC was the greater fight because they were both unbeaten and there was more on the line. Ali took a beating Marvel, there's no denying he was beaten pretty soundly.

MrMarvel

04-12-2009, 07:19 PM

The FOTC was the greater fight because they were both unbeaten and there was more on the line. Ali took a beating Marvel, there's no denying he was beaten pretty soundly.

More was on the line for Frazier. More was on the line for Ali in the rematch. I disagree with your characterization of FOTC. The fight was extremely close. Frazier took a worse beating, actually. Ali's jaw swelled up, but Frazier's whole head was a swollen mess. Ali landed more shots than Frazier, and many of them were hard shots. The difference was that Frazier took it to Ali down the stretch. There's no question about that. Ali lost his edge when he started playing. Frazier had a big 11th round and then of course the knockdown. It was a helluva fight. Had Ali spent more time doing what he did in the first half of the fight in the second half of the fight, he would have won. I give Frazier a lot of credit, but Ali blew it.

markedwardscott

04-12-2009, 07:29 PM

I agree the first fight was the best. Action all the way!

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

OBCboxer

04-12-2009, 10:48 PM

More was on the line for Frazier. More was on the line for Ali in the rematch. I disagree with your characterization of FOTC. The fight was extremely close. Frazier took a worse beating, actually. Ali's jaw swelled up, but Frazier's whole head was a swollen mess. Ali landed more shots than Frazier, and many of them were hard shots. The difference was that Frazier took it to Ali down the stretch. There's no question about that. Ali lost his edge when he started playing. Frazier had a big 11th round and then of course the knockdown. It was a helluva fight. Had Ali spent more time doing what he did in the first half of the fight in the second half of the fight, he would have won. I give Frazier a lot of credit, but Ali blew it.

The two were closer to their primes than they were in Manilla puls they were undefeated. Ali always clowned, that was apart of his brash flamboyant style. Ali simply lost that fight, no excuses.

flamengo

04-13-2009, 12:17 AM

In the space of 6 months, Ali had tackled Quarrey, Bonavena and Frazier in FOTC.....This being after the lay off.

In the 12 months prior to FOTC, Frazier had KO'd Bob Foster only.

Ali ceratainly took the hard road back. Joe was young and fresh. Going the distance with Frazier in the FOTC shows the toughness of Ali.

Had Ali been given an extra 6 months to re-adjust physically, he'd have taken Joe to the cleaners.

young griffo

04-13-2009, 10:16 AM

Awesome avatar picture Allahschild.

Ali really looked the shit back then.Even in black and white he glowed.Malcolm X who was quite a presence himself receed's into the background next to Ali.

Bummy Davis

04-13-2009, 10:41 AM

Bummy Davis

04-13-2009, 10:50 AM

The thing I never noticed before was Ali was knocked down 2 times in the first fight and Frazier pointed in out...It was a clean KD earlier in the fight ...Frazier went through hell and the muslims were threatening to kill Frazier's family....funny thing was Joe fought for Ali to fight again, backed him for religious belief's and even gave Ali money...when Ali double crossed him..and started calling him Gorilla and Uncle Tom...the wounds and betrayal hurt Joe and cut deep

groove

04-13-2009, 12:52 PM

65-67 Ali i would pick to beat Frazier in 1971 in a tough 15 round fight. He struggled badly against Bonavena prior to FOTC. Quarry didn't last long enough to test him. Even Ali looked good against Frazier in the first 3 rounds (as he did against Quarry) until lack of conditioning caught up later in the fight. Ali was probably clowning cuz he was extremely tired and couldn't get off the ropes. His legs were gone. 65-67 legs were much better - probably his most important asset as a fighter and why his chin got tested more after exile.

round15

04-13-2009, 01:57 PM

So Frazier believes God is punishing Ali for something. Maybe because Ali is a Muslim? Maybe because God likes Frazier and is getting even for the things Ali said about Frazier?

I admire Frazier, but he's really pushing it with that stuff. Ali has a disease. That disease is causing millions of people around the world to suffer. It's got nothing to do with some supernatural force or balance.

Frazier's comments just knocked him down a notch in my eyes - as a man, not as a boxer.

I don't agree with everything that Frazier says, and his advisors have often told him to keep his mouth shut about certain aspects of both his and Ali's careers, in light of his own public image. What's forgotten is the fact that Ali's use of race at the time of the FOTC and the name calling were cruel and vicious tactics.

I can't put myself in Joe Frazier's shoes, but having your children harrassed and beaten up at school because their daddy was the opponent in the FOTC was wrong. When a nasty, ignorant article like the fool Bryant "Barney" Gumbel wrote about Frazier being a "white man's champion in black skin" becomes more believeable to the public, should Frazier turn the other cheek?

Unfortunately, Ali's mouth often dictated and perpetuated what was wrong before and after he was champion, not realizing the negative effects it had on others, and not just boxers alone. Ali disrespecting Frazier, was a disrespect to all the hard working, darker skinned nationalities who were ridiculed by the majority or supporters of the establishment.

Ali grew up on a white farm in Kentucky. Frazier grew up in Beaufort South Carolina. Who was more poor and black?

As for Manilla, everyone knows that the FOTC rarely gets airplay because the networks have a difficult time showcasing anything about Ali losing. I rarely see the FOTC on TV but have seen the rematch and Manilla, a whole lot more on TV. The same thing goes for the Norton fights. Rarely does the first one that Ali lost, get airplay on sports channels, but of course they have to repeatedly show Norton's tears of robbery in the third fight which. It's almost pathetic how the networks seem to have this unwritten rule that no Ali loss can be shown on regular TV.

mcvey

04-13-2009, 02:06 PM

mcvey

04-13-2009, 02:08 PM

Ali took a beating? Frazier didnt then? :lol: Joe was in hospital for a week after that fight.:patsch

Bokaj

04-13-2009, 04:06 PM

he could never beat that version of Frazier...prime for prime

It truly amazes me that so many good posters (you included) make this claim with such degree of certainity. Because it's not really supported by logic. If a guy comes back after such a long lay-off and still makes a brutally hard fight out of it, there just is no grounds to say that the result couldn't have been different had he been in his prime.

If Ali had won two more rounds he would have won. Surely, it's far from unreasonable to think that Ali of 1966-1967 would have won those two rounds. Ali was still really, really good in FOTC, but there were after all noticeable differences compared to how he looked four years earlier.

natonic

04-13-2009, 04:09 PM

66-68 version of Ali beats any heavyweight ever in my opinion.

Bummy Davis

04-13-2009, 06:33 PM

It truly amazes me that so many good posters (you included) make this claim with such degree of certainity. Because it's not really supported by logic. If a guy comes back after such a long lay-off and still makes a brutally hard fight out of it, there just is no grounds to say that the result couldn't have been different had he been in his prime.

If Ali had won two more rounds he would have won. Surely, it's far from unreasonable to think that Ali of 1966-1967 would have won those two rounds. Ali was still really, really good in FOTC, but there were after all noticeable differences compared to how he looked four years earlier.

Ali came back fought Quarry and then went 15 with Bonavena...he had been in training for some time and there is no reason to think he was not in top shape. It was Frazier who had a change of life style and major success after March 8 1971...I think Ali was faster before the comeback and danced more but was not as strong. IMO he would have a hard time with THAT Frazier at anytime of his career...Ali had 2 fights in 1970 and the last was a 15 rd workout, at the age of 29 his body should have been ready....I think the best Ali would lose to that version of Joe Frazier...a good pressure fighter like Louis,Frazier,Marciano would always be trouble for Ali

Bokaj

04-13-2009, 06:55 PM

Ali came back fought Quarry and then went 15 with Bonavena...he had been in training for some time and there is no reason to think he was not in top shape. It was Frazier who had a change of life style and major success after March 8 1971...I think Ali was faster before the comeback and danced more but was not as strong. IMO he would have a hard time with THAT Frazier at anytime of his career...Ali had 2 fights in 1970 and the last was a 15 rd workout, at the age of 29 his body should have been ready....I think the best Ali would lose to that version of Joe Frazier...a good pressure fighter like Louis,Frazier,Marciano would always be trouble for Ali

Ali was in great shape, but he wasn't the same just like Dempsey, Louis, Robinson, Leonard and Tyson weren't quite the same after their lay-offs/inactivities. There also isn't any reason to say that he was stronger or hit harder after a long lay-off and being only 3 lbs heavier than before the lay-off. Add to that that he beat Joe two times out of three while arguably being further past his prime in all three fights.

Stating that "Frazier always would beat Ali prime for prime" just isn't consistent with these facts. It would, of course, always be a very tough fight for Ali.

mcvey

04-13-2009, 07:11 PM

Ali was in great shape, but he wasn't the same just like Dempsey, Louis, Robinson, Leonard and Tyson weren't quite the same after their lay-offs/inactivities. There also isn't any reason to say that he was stronger or hit harder after a long lay-off and being only 3 lbs heavier than before the lay-off. Add to that that he beat Joe two times out of three while arguably being further past his prime in all three fights.

Stating that "Frazier always would beat Ali prime for prime" just isn't consistent with these facts. It would, of course, always be a very tough fight for Ali.

Ali did not have his full stamina ,in FOTC,Jose Torres watched him in training and said laying on the ropes had become a habit for him, he did not have the confidence in his legs.IMO We never saw Ali in is prime, that was robbed from him during his years of exile.Prime Ali beats Frazier ,or any one else for me.The second fight between them ,when Ali had been active taking on good contenders ,and Frazier had had two joke defences, before being bounced silly by Foreman saw their roles reversed some what.Ali with ring rounds under his belt won the second fight clearly.
Those who say Frazier was past it conveniently forget to mention that Ali was older, and that he had been in the other corner in those three wars.

Bokaj

04-13-2009, 08:14 PM

Ali did not have his full stamina ,in FOTC,Jose Torres watched him in training and said laying on the ropes had become a habit for him, he did not have the confidence in his legs.IMO We never saw Ali in is prime, that was robbed from him during his years of exile.Prime Ali beats Frazier ,or any one else for me.The second fight between them ,when Ali had been active taking on good contenders ,and Frazier had had two joke defences, before being bounced silly by Foreman saw their roles reversed some what.Ali with ring rounds under his belt won the second fight clearly.
Those who say Frazier was past it conveniently forget to mention that Ali was older, and that he had been in the other corner in those three wars.

Yeah, I must say I find this a strange notion, saying that one fight of three gives the best picture of how they would have match-uped prime for prime. Frazier was younger with less fights and of course no lay-off on all occassions, yet he was somehow so far past it in the last two that those combined doesn't count as much as the first does alone. Now that's freaky math for you.

It seems to be specific for this rivalry too. If one would ask who wins of Dempsey-Tunney and Tyson-Holyfield prime for prime I think most lean towards Dempsey respectively Tyson, even though they came out as clearly second best in those rivalries.

ChrisPontius

04-13-2009, 08:21 PM

Ali did seem to mature a bit, got stronger and punched a bit harder. His best stoppages, i.e. Bonavena (only man to do so), Lyle and Foreman were all when he was a bit older.

Ali might dance for a round longer during his peak, because speed kills, but pressure kills speed and Frazier applied relentless pressure. Let's not forget Ali vs Chuvalo I.... he spent a lot of times on the ropes, forced, and took a vicious body beating. Frazier would do one better and beat Ali, although he'd always get ruined himself in the process.

Dempsey1238

04-13-2009, 08:25 PM

Yeah, I must say I find this a strange notion, saying that one fight of three gives the best picture of how they would have match-uped prime for prime. Frazier was younger with less fights and of course no lay-off on all occassions, yet he was somehow so far past it in the last two that those combined doesn't count as much as the first does alone. Now that's freaky math for you.

It seems to be specific for this rivalry too. If one would ask who wins of Dempsey-Tunney and Tyson-Holyfield prime for prime I think most lean towards Dempsey respectively Tyson, even though they came out as clearly second best in those rivalries.

Perhaps, but Dempsey Tunney(I and II) and Tyson Holyfiled were not close fights, Hell, I belive Tyson won 1 or 2 rounds of there first fight, and reports (And film of both fights) say Dempsey lost 19 out of 20.(I did give Dempsey round 4 of fight 1)

Ali Frazier was a close fight, back and forth action. There relly was no CLEAR winner so to speak outside of the knockdown, and round 11.
It was Ali, than Fraizer, Than Ali. amazing fight.

The other 2 fights it was just Tunney Holyfiled.
So a better "Prime" Ali I suppose has a better arugment than either Tyson or Dempsey has in regards to there counterparts.

fxdwng

04-13-2009, 10:22 PM

Loved the HBO documentary. Highly recommended for those who haven't seen it yet.

Bummy Davis

04-14-2009, 01:25 AM

Loved the HBO documentary. Highly recommended for those who haven't seen it yet.

yea it brought back the memories.....It was the biggest fight ever at the time

Bokaj

04-14-2009, 05:01 AM

Perhaps, but Dempsey Tunney(I and II) and Tyson Holyfiled were not close fights, Hell, I belive Tyson won 1 or 2 rounds of there first fight, and reports (And film of both fights) say Dempsey lost 19 out of 20.(I did give Dempsey round 4 of fight 1)

Ali Frazier was a close fight, back and forth action. There relly was no CLEAR winner so to speak outside of the knockdown, and round 11.
It was Ali, than Fraizer, Than Ali. amazing fight.

The other 2 fights it was just Tunney Holyfiled.
So a better "Prime" Ali I suppose has a better arugment than either Tyson or Dempsey has in regards to there counterparts.

That was my point.

Bokaj

04-14-2009, 05:11 AM

Ali did seem to mature a bit, got stronger and punched a bit harder. His best stoppages, i.e. Bonavena (only man to do so), Lyle and Foreman were all when he was a bit older.

I've never seen him punch harder than he did against Williams. He also hit Folley with some devastating blows.

Against Lyle he was certainly a bit stronger, perhaps punched somewhat harder to, but he was 226 lbs for that fight. Against Bonavena and Frazier he was still around 212-215 lbs. I don't see any way you get more out of the same body mass after a long lay-off. Doesn't happen.

Ali might dance for a round longer during his peak, because speed kills, but pressure kills speed and Frazier applied relentless pressure. Let's not forget Ali vs Chuvalo I.... he spent a lot of times on the ropes, forced, and took a vicious body beating. Frazier would do one better and beat Ali, although he'd always get ruined himself in the process.

Frazier's pressure would always be tough to handle, but Ali would have the stamina to dance for several rounds more. Hell, he did in the rematch.

Chuvalo gives a hint of how the fight would have turned out, but lets' not forget that Ai's preparation was poor due to him having to turn up at hearings and what not concerning his stand on the draft. Still he went 15 rds at a high pace, took a beating to the body and had enough left in the tank to really turn it on in the last round.

Chuvalo himself said that Ali was noticeably slower with less stamina when they met one year after FOTC. He said he kept a lower pace even though it was a 12 rounder the second time. Patterson also said Ali was better the first time they fought.

Seeing that Ali only needed to win two more rounds to win FOTC I think the degree of decline that for example Chuvalo and Patterson noted made the difference.

cuchulain

04-14-2009, 05:14 AM

We'll never know for sure.

Ali left the scene at his peak in 1967.

A three and a half year layoff with just two tune-ups, combined with the decline from 25 to 29, combined further with the fact that the fight was close (8-7, 8-6-1, at most 9-6) tells me that if Ali had not been exiled and this fight had taken place three years earlier, IMO he would have beaten Frazier.

GPater11093

04-14-2009, 06:09 AM

Loved the HBO documentary. Highly recommended for those who haven't seen it yet.

was that the one that was on channel 4 in UK

JohnThomas1

04-14-2009, 07:15 AM

flamengo

04-14-2009, 07:26 AM

Sister Sledge

04-14-2009, 07:52 AM

flamengo

04-14-2009, 07:59 AM

Totally disagree. Sometimes styles make fights. Frazier may always be the Yin to Ali's Yang.

Especially in the 2 losses.

:patsch

Bokaj

04-14-2009, 08:01 AM

Totally disagree. Sometimes styles make fights. Frazier may always be the Yin to Ali's Yang.

But he wasn't (at least not enough) two times out of three. Such a sure statement on such a weak basis...

ChrisPontius

04-14-2009, 08:35 AM

But he wasn't (at least not enough) two times out of three. Such a sure statement on such a weak basis...

He said "MAY" always be, not exactly the "sure" statement you're referring to. And i see no reason why Frazier would not be Ali's kryptonite. Watch the Chuvalo fight.

Bokaj

04-14-2009, 08:53 AM

He said "MAY" always be, not exactly the "sure" statement you're referring to.

Well, he started with saying that he "totally disagreed" with Cuchulains statement, so that made it seem like a pretty strong statement. But puting "may" in there is somewhat moderating it to be fair.

And i see no reason why Frazier would not be Ali's kryptonite. Watch the Chuvalo fight.

As far as I know everyone agree that Frazier always would pose Ali with great difficulties, partly because of styles but mostly because he was a great fighter. So would Marciano IMO.

And yes, Chuvalo's perfomance strengthens this view. But let's not get ahead of ourselves when using the Chuvalo fight as an example. He gave Ali one of his toughest fights pre exile, but Ali still won almost every round without having to "go to the well" really and without being very well prepared. Frazier would have to do MUCH, MUCH better to actually beat a fully prepared Ali on the very top of his game.

And the bottom line is that Ali beat Frazier two times out of three while arguably being further past his prime on all occasions. One have to wriggle a lot to get out of this simple fact. If Tyson had avenged the initial loss to Holyfield two times would there have been any question as to who was the better man? Or if Dempsey had done the same to Tunney?

Hell, not many would pick Walcott over Louis in a prime for prime match-up, and he could be argued being 1-1 with Louis.

I'm kind of bemused why the Ali-Frazier veers so much from the normal assesment in this regard.

Bummy Davis

04-14-2009, 12:43 PM

I've never seen him punch harder than he did against Williams. He also hit Folley with some devastating blows.

Against Lyle he was certainly a bit stronger, perhaps punched somewhat harder to, but he was 226 lbs for that fight. Against Bonavena and Frazier he was still around 212-215 lbs. I don't see any way you get more out of the same body mass after a long lay-off. Doesn't happen.

Frazier's pressure would always be tough to handle, but Ali would have the stamina to dance for several rounds more. Hell, he did in the rematch.

Chuvalo gives a hint of how the fight would have turned out, but lets' not forget that Ai's preparation was poor due to him having to turn up at hearings and what not concerning his stand on the draft. Still he went 15 rds at a high pace, took a beating to the body and had enough left in the tank to really turn it on in the last round.

Chuvalo himself said that Ali was noticeably slower with less stamina when they met one year after FOTC. He said he kept a lower pace even though it was a 12 rounder the second time. Patterson also said Ali was better the first time they fought.

Seeing that Ali only needed to win two more rounds to win FOTC I think the degree of decline that for example Chuvalo and Patterson noted made the difference.

Big Cat Williams was completely shot against Ali, that is like saying Ali showed great power vs Richard Dunn....these guys were cannon fodder

groove

04-14-2009, 12:58 PM

and joe louis picked williams to win :lol: regarding chuvalo fight - ali was at his heaviest weight ever and jim brown commentating said ali had been slack in his training leading up to the fight. ali at points was letting chuvalo hit him to the body - foolish but ali liked to play those mindgames in his fights. how many rounds did chuvalo win?

Bokaj

04-14-2009, 12:59 PM

Big Cat Williams was completely shot against Ali, that is like saying Ali showed great power vs Richard Dunn....these guys were cannon fodder

No matter Williams's state it was clear that those punches were powerful.

cuchulain

04-14-2009, 02:50 PM

Well, he started with saying that he "totally disagreed" with Cuchulains statement, so that made it seem like a pretty strong statement. But puting "may" in there is somewhat moderating it to be fair.

As far as I know everyone agree that Frazier always would pose Ali with great difficulties, partly because of styles but mostly because he was a great fighter. So would Marciano IMO.

And yes, Chuvalo's perfomance strengthens this view. But let's not get ahead of ourselves when using the Chuvalo fight as an example. He gave Ali one of his toughest fights pre exile, but Ali still won almost every round without having to "go to the well" really and without being very well prepared. Frazier would have to do MUCH, MUCH better to actually beat a fully prepared Ali on the very top of his game.

And the bottom line is that Ali beat Frazier two times out of three while arguably being further past his prime on all occasions. One have to wriggle a lot to get out of this simple fact. If Tyson had avenged the initial loss to Holyfield two times would there have been any question as to who was the better man? Or if Dempsey had done the same to Tunney?

Hell, not many would pick Walcott over Louis in a prime for prime match-up, and he could be argued being 1-1 with Louis.

I'm kind of bemused why the Ali-Frazier veers so much from the normal assesment in this regard.

:deal

ChrisPontius

04-14-2009, 05:11 PM

And yes, Chuvalo's perfomance strengthens this view. But let's not get ahead of ourselves when using the Chuvalo fight as an example. He gave Ali one of his toughest fights pre exile, but Ali still won almost every round without having to "go to the well" really and without being very well prepared. Frazier would have to do MUCH, MUCH better to actually beat a fully prepared Ali on the very top of his game.

Well, Frazier was much, much better than Chuvalo.

And the bottom line is that Ali beat Frazier two times out of three while arguably being further past his prime on all occasions. One have to wriggle a lot to get out of this simple fact. If Tyson had avenged the initial loss to Holyfield two times would there have been any question as to who was the better man? Or if Dempsey had done the same to Tunney?

No, he wasn't "arguably" further past his prime on all occasions. During the first fight both were closest to their respective peaks, though Frazier was closer. During the rematch [which incidentally could've gone both ways], Frazier was further past his best than Ali, dito for their 3rd fight. Bottomline is that Ali was in better condition during 2 out of their 3 fights.

Bokaj

04-14-2009, 05:44 PM

Well, Frazier was much, much better than Chuvalo.

But not "MUCH, MUCH" better. :smooch

Anyhow, trying to speculate just how much better Frazier would perform than Chuvalo is hard. It's more clear-cut to speculate how much Ali of 1966-1967 would improve on the perfomance he gave in FOTC. Since both Chuvalo and Patterson said he was better pre-exile it's pretty safe to say he would improve, and he didn't have to improve that much to win. Just win two more rounds.

No, he wasn't "arguably" further past his prime on all occasions. During the first fight both were closest to their respective peaks, though Frazier was closer. During the rematch [which incidentally could've gone both ways], Frazier was further past his best than Ali, dito for their 3rd fight. Bottomline is that Ali was in better condition during 2 out of their 3 fights.

This is a popular claim, but there just isn't much basis for it.

1. Ali was older on all occasions.

2. He had had more fights on all occassions.

3. His career had been disrupted by a long lay-off.

4. Frazier had his probably most impressive win next to FOTC in 1974 when he demolished Quarry who came off his best year. It was a more decisive win than the first one in 1969.

Yes, Frazier's sight detoriated gradually, but Ali had a lot of trouble with his right hand. Yes, Frazier was destroyed by Foreman, but Ali had his very tough fights with Norton.

I just don't see much reason to say that Frazier was further past his prime for any of the fights. There are however plenty of reasons to believe that Ali was further past his prime for all three.

MRBILL

04-14-2009, 06:14 PM

Was Ali very resented by Vietnam veterans for his stand on the war? How did you view it?

I was born during the war in 'Nam, and so I was too young to fight in it. However, America was foolish to get involved.. Sure, we hate Communism, nor do we want it to spread, but Ali was right to tell Uncle Sam to blow-it out his ass back in 1967...... 'Nam was a friggin' civil war betwen a remote Asian country that has never been worth jack shit to the USA.......... 55,000 to 60,000 U.S. Soilders were wasted in that damn farce.... Them bastards "Kennedy & Johnson" were guilty as sin for them deaths......
:deal
'Nam was NOT a world war, so I cannot blame Ali for telling the Gov't to go to hell...... Ali, like many Americans, never had any beef with the Vietnamese people...... Stripping Ali of his title was bullshit.........:hat

I saw the "Thrilla" doc. on HBO............ CHRIST! Both Joe Frazier and Dr. Ferdie Pacheco look and sounded somewhat senile / lost...... However, Ferdie did a have a stroke a few yrs ago.....:|

Butch Lewis was prolly the most candid from the past.....

Eddie Futch did the right thing by stopping the fight.... Frazier was being battered to death by a seriously fatigued Ali.... Nuff said........:D

MR.BILL:bbb

Bummy Davis

04-15-2009, 12:25 AM

No matter Williams's state it was clear that those punches were powerful.

Sorry Williams was shot up and shot as a fighter when he got into the ring with Ali and remember Bob Satterfield KO'd him in 3 when Williams was 31-1 and at his best....

MRBILL

04-15-2009, 01:37 AM

Big Cat Williams was completely shot against Ali, that is like saying Ali showed great power vs Richard Dunn....these guys were cannon fodder

Williams still had some ability during his comeback in boxing in 1966..... Christ, Williams was shot in 1964 by a badge happy pig and almost died... However, though he managed to live, he also dropped down to 140 pounds at his lowest point in 1965.... JESUS! That is freaky for Cleveland Williams....... BUT! Upon his fight with Ali, Williams got himself pumped up again to the area of 212 pounds..... Williams' skills always were under par, but his power was TNT!! Point being: Ali was peaked and tagged Williams with some wicked ass punches in 1966....... Nothing pussy about Ali's punches in that particular fight in Texas......:D

MR.BILL

groove

04-15-2009, 03:10 AM

so bummy says ali didn't throw powerful punches v williams. you are the best :lol: back to the men that fought ali in the 60s and 70s - chuvalo & patterson both stated that 60s Ali was superior. maybe they know something about boxing :hey

MRBILL

04-15-2009, 04:11 AM

I have "Clay-Moore" from '62 on tape...... Clay was only 20 yrs old and hitting an old man of age 46 like a rag doll..... On tape it doesn't appear that Clay was landing heavy shots that were wickedly solid, however, Moore still was dropped several times and stopped in four...... Clay / Ali had power..........

MR.BILL

Rock0052

04-15-2009, 04:31 AM

I was born during the war in 'Nam, and so I was too young to fight in it. However, America was foolish to get involved.. Sure, we hate Communism, nor do we want it to spread, but Ali was right to tell Uncle Sam to blow-it out his ass back in 1967...... 'Nam was a friggin' civil war betwen a remote Asian country that has never been worth jack shit to the USA.......... 55,000 to 60,000 U.S. Soilders were wasted in that damn farce.... Them bastards "Kennedy & Johnson" were guilty as sin for them deaths......
:deal
'Nam was NOT a world war, so I cannot blame Ali for telling the Gov't to go to hell...... Ali, like many Americans, never had any beef with the Vietnamese people...... Stripping Ali of his title was bullshit.........:hat

I saw the "Thrilla" doc. on HBO............ CHRIST! Both Joe Frazier and Dr. Ferdie Pacheco look and sounded somewhat senile / lost...... However, Ferdie did a have a stroke a few yrs ago.....:|

Butch Lewis was prolly the most candid from the past.....

Eddie Futch did the right thing by stopping the fight.... Frazier was being battered to death by a seriously fatigued Ali.... Nuff said........:D

MR.BILL:bbb

To take it a step further, my dad was a Vietnam vet, and going from the stories, many of those he was with didn't blame Ali for his views because a good number of the guys over there knew it was a foolish war that was costing good soldiers their lives. That knowledge, combined with getting spit on and treated by protesters and virtually no effective debriefing to prepare the vets for civilian life, were the primary drivers behind the jadedness and other issues that many Vietnam vets dealt with, and in some cases, still are.

From my experiences, many of the people who got on Ali for draft dodging were either chicken hawks with no actual family ties to the rank and file soldiers going over there, or family members of men who had been drafted and who couldn't get out of it.

As an example of history repeating itself, remember that Dempsey had clouds over him for "ducking" World War I, another war that the US really didn't need to have any involvement in. Jack wound up alleviating that by training the Coast Guard and teaching them some hand to hand combat skills once he was retired.

Bokaj

04-15-2009, 04:39 AM

Sorry Williams was shot up and shot as a fighter when he got into the ring with Ali and remember Bob Satterfield KO'd him in 3 when Williams was 31-1 and at his best....

But the blows are easy to see that they land with power. You see it in the leverage and the speed and authority in the deliverance.

Sister Sledge

04-15-2009, 05:54 AM

Especially in the 2 losses.

:patsch

Yes, he lost to Ali twice, but just look at the shape he was in when he lost those two fights. He was clearly past it and wasn't training like a beast like he did before. Ali clearly had more longevity and wasn't slipping the way Frazier did. Little guys who take boatloads of punishment don't last long in boxing. Had they met earlier, you never know who could win. Frazier might have won two out of three. I doubt it, though.

Bokaj

04-15-2009, 06:00 AM

Yes, he lost to Ali twice, but just look at the shape he was in when he lost those two fights. He was clearly past it and wasn't training like a beast like he did before. Ali clearly had more longevity and wasn't slipping the way Frazier did. Little guys who take boatloads of punishment don't last long in boxing. Had they met earlier, you never know who could win. Frazier might have won two out of three.

As noted before this is a cliché with very little substance to it. But it seems it just have to be repeated enough times to be accepted as true.

TheGreatA

04-15-2009, 06:00 AM

Sorry Williams was shot up and shot as a fighter when he got into the ring with Ali and remember Bob Satterfield KO'd him in 3 when Williams was 31-1 and at his best....

Williams was nowhere near his best against Satterfield.

But Ali himself said when reviewing the fight with Cosell that people should not judge him based on this performance because Williams was over the hill. He said it did not prove anything.

Lets not forget that Williams had starved to under 160 pounds after being shot in the stomach by a police officer. He trained hard and gained back all that weight but he was never quite the same afterwards.

Sister Sledge

04-15-2009, 06:15 AM

As noted before this is a cliché with very little substance to it. But it seems it just have to be repeated enough times to be accepted as true.

It is what it is. Of course I am biased because I was never an Ali fan, so I naturally would want Frazier to beat him. Of course, Ali was the greater fighter, and I think If they met three times, even in their prime, Frazier would always lose 2 out of 3

Bokaj

04-15-2009, 06:21 AM

It is what it is. Of course I am biased because I was never an Ali fan, so I naturally would want Frazier to beat him. Of course, Ali was the greater fighter, and I think If they met three times, even in their prime, Frazier would always lose 2 out of 3

Fair enough. We all carry a bit bias towards one fighter or another. I suppose it doesn't require a rocket scientist to figure out which guy I favour. :hat

GPater11093

04-15-2009, 07:59 AM

Big Cat Williams was completely shot against Ali, that is like saying Ali showed great power vs Richard Dunn....these guys were cannon fodder

my trainer worked off shore with richard and richard told him stories as he found out he was a boxer and Ali said coming out for the 5th round

'Richard you have put up a good fight but im going to end it this round'

just thought i would share that with yous

mcvey

04-15-2009, 08:47 AM

my trainer worked off shore with richard and richard told him stories as he found out he was a boxer and Ali said coming out for the 5th round

'Richard you have put up a good fight but im going to end it this round'

just thought i would share that with yous

Ali had his gloves taken off and given to Mickey Duff in the ring,Duff said Ali tapped him on the shoulder and said" look inside the gloves".Inside was a scrap of paper with the words 'Ali wins,round five'.

GPater11093

04-15-2009, 08:48 AM

Ali had his gloves taken off and given to Mickey Duff in the ring,Duff said Ali tapped him on the shoulder and said" look inside the gloves".Inside was a scrap of paper with the words 'Ali wins,round five'.

i have heard that story didnt know it was the dunne fight, at least Dunne tried unlike another certain British fighter

mcvey

04-15-2009, 09:10 AM

i have heard that story didnt know it was the dunne fight, at least Dunne tried unlike another certain British fighter

Richard Dunn went in to as we say in the UK "have a go", he took the fight to Ali and though knocked down multiple times ,never stopped trying . Dunn was in there to win , contrast him with a much more talented fighter from Hungary who twice met Ali and was content to survive.Dunn was very brave and did his best ,he has my full respect.

MRBILL

04-15-2009, 10:46 AM

i have heard that story didnt know it was the dunne fight, at least Dunne tried unlike another certain British fighter

Britain made a career outta peddling sorry-ass heavyweight pretenders..... "London & Dunne" come to mind... Henry Cooper was the goods, but soundly out-classed by Ali... The next decent bloke was Franklin Bruno, but Bruno had a glass-jaw...... Lennox Lewis finally broke the damn curse...... However, people still are in debate as to where the fuck Lewis really comes from.........:-(:blood:barf

MR.BILL:deal

ChrisPontius

04-15-2009, 11:04 AM

This is a popular claim, but there just isn't much basis for it.

1. Ali was older on all occasions.

You know that this point is meaningless. Lewis was older than Tyson when they fought, does that mean Tyson was in better condition?

2. He had had more fights on all occassions.

Yes, but during most of Ali's fights, he barely got hit; especially during his first career. Frazier always went in face-first and took a few hits to land one of his own.

3. His career had been disrupted by a long lay-off.

Yes, great it isn't it? His body basically got a 3-year rest while Frazier was having wars with Quarry and Bonavena.

Tell me what's better for your body: 3 years of doing public speaking with the odd exhibition, or boxing for 3 years against the best challengers in the world?

4. Frazier had his probably most impressive win next to FOTC in 1974 when he demolished Quarry who came off his best year. It was a more decisive win than the first one in 1969.

Are you kidding? :lol: Quarry was close to shot when Frazier beat him for the second time. Good performance for Frazier, but Ali's win over a peak Foreman that same year is much more impressive.

Yes, Frazier's sight detoriated gradually, but Ali had a lot of trouble with his right hand. Yes, Frazier was destroyed by Foreman, but Ali had his very tough fights with Norton.

Tough fights with Norton are not nearly comparable to the wars that Frazier had been in. And like you said, he had serious eye problems (cataract), blood pressure problems and other stuff which didn't allow him to train as hard as he could. There's a reason he was 10-15 lbs overweight. Ali's hand trouble is a no-factor by comparison, and he never held back on it during their fights as anyone can see. Pain killers and all that. Frazier couldn't get his eyesight back or blood pressure down with pain killers.

I just don't see much reason to say that Frazier was further past his prime for any of the fights. There are however plenty of reasons to believe that Ali was further past his prime for all three.

Are you purposefully ignoring the reasons that refute your arguments? Because i thought you would've been able to think of them by yourself; particularly the one of "Ali was older" is not something i'd expect from you.

mcvey

04-15-2009, 11:14 AM

You know that this point is meaningless. Lewis was older than Tyson when they fought, does that mean Tyson was in better condition?

Yes, but during most of Ali's fights, he barely got hit; especially during his first career. Frazier always went in face-first and took a few hits to land one of his own.

Yes, great it isn't it? His body basically got a 3-year rest while Frazier was having wars with Quarry and Bonavena.

Tell me what's better for your body: 3 years of doing public speaking with the odd exhibition, or boxing for 3 years against the best challengers in the world?

Are you kidding? :lol: Quarry was close to shot when Frazier beat him for the second time. Good performance for Frazier, but Ali's win over a peak Foreman that same year is much more impressive.

Tough fights with Norton are not nearly comparable to the wars that Frazier had been in. And like you said, he had serious eye problems (cataract), blood pressure problems and other stuff which didn't allow him to train as hard as he could. There's a reason he was 10-15 lbs overweight. Ali's hand trouble is a no-factor by comparison, and he never held back on it during their fights as anyone can see. Pain killers and all that. Frazier couldn't get his eyesight back or blood pressure down with pain killers.

Are you purposefully ignoring the reasons that refute your arguments? Because i thought you would've been able to think of them by yourself; particularly the one of "Ali was older" is not something i'd expect from you.

If you think being inactive for three years is better for your body than fighting regular .I presume you havent seen the Dempsey Tunney fights.
That argument is tosh.

flamengo

04-15-2009, 11:16 AM

"To rest is to rust"

MRBILL

04-15-2009, 11:37 AM

:hat:bbbIf you think being inactive for three years is better for your body than fighting regular .I presume you havent seen the Dempsey Tunney fights.
That argument is tosh.

It depends on what you do and who you fight......... Dempsey was pussy-whipped and not really interested in boxing by 1926...... He took on Tunney for the money and a chance to hang onto a ONCE hot career in the ring..... Dempsey also had a style best suited for fighters aged 22 to 27 yrs....... By age 30, Dempsey was rusty and faded......

However, look at more modern dudes like Ray Leonard or Vitali Klit....... These guys come back after long layoffs and win world title from "Hagler & Peter." It's freaky but it happens........:bbb

MR.BILL:admin

MRBILL

04-15-2009, 11:42 AM

NOW! Larry Holmes came back in 1991 to beat up Latin punching bag Eddie Gonzalez on the USA network..... This was Holmes' first fight back since being KO'd by Tyson in 1988..... Yes, Larry Holmes was now going on 42 yrs of age in 1991, but Holmes stated that he felt better and stronger in the ring then he did earlier in '88....... Sometime a layoff or rest period can replenish a body.......... Peace...

MR.BILL

Bokaj

04-15-2009, 11:56 AM

You know that this point is meaningless. Lewis was older than Tyson when they fought, does that mean Tyson was in better condition?.

But in far and away most cases age does matter. Fighters are in most cases better at 30 than 32, 31 than 33 etc. Two years doesn't make a lot of difference, but it can make some, and once you get over 30 those years certainly don't work in favour of the older guy.

Lewis, like Holmes, was a bit special since he started out late.

Yes, but during most of Ali's fights, he barely got hit; especially during his first career. Frazier always went in face-first and took a few hits to land one of his own.

But they weren't really that punishing. The Bonavena fights were tough, as were the ones against Foreman and Ali. Otherwise he never took a real beating, and he didn't have that many fights. Chuvalo generally took much more punishment and he continued on long after 50 fights. Frazier didn't take exceptional amounts of punishment except against Ali and Foreman, so there is no reason to think he would decline badly after only some 30 fights.

Yes, great it isn't it? His body basically got a 3-year rest while Frazier was having wars with Quarry and Bonavena.

Tell me what's better for your body: 3 years of doing public speaking with the odd exhibition, or boxing for 3 years against the best challengers in the world?

Ali didn't have the "odd exhibition", he only did a couple of exhibitions in the lead up to the Quarry fight. That was after more than three years of inactivity already.

And boxing regularly is better for your body, of course. A long inactivity dimishes your stamina, explosiveness, reflexes, timing etc, etc. Or do you think Dempsey was in the best shape of his life when he took on Tunney? It's clear that his inactivity cost him, just as it cost Ali.

Once again: Two opponents (Chuvalo and Patterson) that both met Ali before and after the exile said he was noticeably better before the exile.

Whay more do you want? Do you also feel that Dempsey, Tyson and Leonard benifitted from their lay-offs?

Are you kidding? :lol: Quarry was close to shot when Frazier beat him for the second time. Good performance for Frazier, but Ali's win over a peak Foreman that same year is much more impressive.

He was a top contender coming off his perhaps two best wins and you call him shot? That is, actually, quite crazy.

Tough fights with Norton are not nearly comparable to the wars that Frazier had been in. And like you said, he had serious eye problems (cataract), blood pressure problems and other stuff which didn't allow him to train as hard as he could. There's a reason he was 10-15 lbs overweight. Ali's hand trouble is a no-factor by comparison, and he never held back on it during their fights as anyone can see. Pain killers and all that. Frazier couldn't get his eyesight back or blood pressure down with pain killers.

This part is actually the only thing you said that really makes sense. Yes, Frazier had medical problems and they were probably responsible for at least some degree of detoriation.

But about him being 10-15 lbs heavier... Ali was coming in over 220 lbs for a lot of fights post-exile. Before the exile he had never been heavier than 212,5. Against Mathis in 1971 I think he was 227.

Now let's look at their weights in the different fights compared to their pime weights (205 for Frazier and 212 for Ali).

FOTC: Frazier 205 (prime weight), Ali 215 (prime weight + 3 lbs).

Rematch: Frazier 209 (prime weight + 4 lbs), Ali 212 (prime weight)

Manilla: Frazier 215 (prime weight + 10 lbs), Ali 225 (prime weight + 13 lbs)

Frazier obviously didn't have more problems keeping his weight than Ali. Rather the opposite (even if it doesn't really differ much).

Are you purposefully ignoring the reasons that refute your arguments? Because i thought you would've been able to think of them by yourself; particularly the one of "Ali was older" is not something i'd expect from you.

Except from quoting the medical reasons your "refuting reasons" are frankly not that good, like "older doesn't matter one bit" and "the lay-off benifitted Ali".

Personally, I think Frazier was at his very best in FOTC and then a bit more diminished for each of the other two fights. But Ali was diminshed for all the fights.

Yes, Frazier was a bit slower in Manilla than FOTC, but look at Ali in Manilla and compare his speed to the Ali of 1966-1967. There's quite a difference. In fact all the versions of Ali that met Frazier were slower and had less stamina than the Ali of 1966-1967. There just ain't no way around this.

groove

04-15-2009, 02:41 PM

a 3 year rest is good for a fighter :lol: i suppose a 3 year lay-off for any top athlete who needs to be in top physical condition is good for them. some haven't got a clue :patsch

GPater11093

04-15-2009, 02:41 PM

Richard Dunn went in to as we say in the UK "have a go", he took the fight to Ali and though knocked down multiple times ,never stopped trying . Dunn was in there to win , contrast him with a much more talented fighter from Hungary who twice met Ali and was content to survive.Dunn was very brave and did his best ,he has my full respect.

yeh Dunne deserves respect fighting the best heavyweight eve IMO and trying to win

Britain made a career outta peddling sorry-ass heavyweight pretenders..... "London & Dunne" come to mind... Henry Cooper was the goods, but soundly out-classed by Ali... The next decent bloke was Franklin Bruno, but Bruno had a glass-jaw...... Lennox Lewis finally broke the damn curse...... However, people still are in debate as to where the fuck Lewis really comes from.........:-(:blood:barf

MR.BILL:deal

yeh London, Dunne were nowhere near Alis level but they gave it a shot same with Cooper

Bruno had a glass chin so cant really do much about that but he operated at a good level won a title

Lennox says hes british so hes british and he is arguably the best heavy since Ali

Bummy Davis

04-15-2009, 04:37 PM

GPater11093

04-15-2009, 04:45 PM

good story

cheers

would call it a story more a sentance

mcvey

04-15-2009, 05:03 PM

:hat:bbb

It depends on what you do and who you fight......... Dempsey was pussy-whipped and not really interested in boxing by 1926...... He took on Tunney for the money and a chance to hang onto a ONCE hot career in the ring..... Dempsey also had a style best suited for fighters aged 22 to 27 yrs....... By age 30, Dempsey was rusty and faded......

However, look at more modern dudes like Ray Leonard or Vitali Klit....... These guys come back after long layoffs and win world title from "Hagler & Peter." It's freaky but it happens........:bbb

MR.BILL:admin
Tunney said Dempsey was in much better shape for their second fight,because he had the advantage of that fight with Sharkey.Dempsey was not old ,he had just grown soft through high living and INACTIVITY.
Ali lost his prime years during his exile.He was never as fast as he was prior to his exile.

My dinner with Conteh

04-16-2009, 08:55 AM

Wow! Ali actually predicted the round he could beat Richard Dunn in and got it right. Amazing. :lol:

My dinner with Conteh

04-16-2009, 08:58 AM

yeh Dunne deserves respect fighting the best heavyweight eve IMO and trying to win

Yes, he does. He did compete to win but he was comfortably one of the least deserving challengers of all-time. Bugner wiped him out with ease and it tells volumes about Dunn's ability that Bugner even thought he could destory him that quickly.

GPater11093

04-16-2009, 09:03 AM

Yes, he does. He did compete to win but he was comfortably one of the least deserving challengers of all-time. Bugner wiped him out with ease and it tells volumes about Dunn's ability that Bugner even thought he could destory him that quickly.

yeh but he made the most of himself and he was european champ

My dinner with Conteh

04-16-2009, 09:07 AM

He did, such is the world of dodgy rankings. He should never have received a tilt at the vacant title (Brnd August) even less so. He did make the most of his limited skills, so fair play, but he'd only ever have been Euro champ the way he did- fighting for a vacant title against no-mark whose ranking was achieved with the right contacts. I have the full story behind it somewhere, I'll look it up again.

GPater11093

04-16-2009, 09:24 AM

mcvey

04-16-2009, 10:16 AM

Wow! Ali actually predicted the round he could beat Richard Dunn in and got it right. Amazing. :lol:

It is what it is, a snippet of information that seems to have been of interest to some.

My dinner with Conteh

04-16-2009, 10:54 AM

It is a good story mate and one i've heard before but let's not forget who he was fighting. Dunn shouldn't have been anywhere near a world title shot.

ChrisPontius

04-16-2009, 11:13 AM

I agree, at least Ali should've let Dunn and Evangelista fight in a title eliminator. :dead

mcvey

04-16-2009, 11:31 AM

It is a good story mate and one i've heard before but let's not forget who he was fighting. Dunn shouldn't have been anywhere near a world title shot.

That would hold true for many fighters ,how far should we go back?
Munroe,Finnegan,London,Coopman,Roper, some of Holmes defences? Scott Frank!

My dinner with Conteh

04-16-2009, 04:42 PM

That would hold true for many fighters ,how far should we go back?
Munroe,Finnegan,London,Coopman,Roper, some of Holmes defences? Scott Frank!

You can go back as long as you want, there isn't a ban on talking about challengers who didn't merit a title shot. Indeed, in the same decade the likes of Kevin Finnegan, Willie Monroe and Bobby Watts didn't receive a shot at Monzon (not through ducking I hasten to add) and they were a far higher calibre than Dunn.

My dinner with Conteh

04-16-2009, 04:45 PM

That would hold true for many fighters ,how far should we go back?
Munroe,Finnegan,London,Coopman,Roper, some of Holmes defences? Scott Frank!

You can go back as long as you want, there isn't a ban on talking about challengers who didn't merit a title shot ;). Indeed, the same era saw the likes of Kevin Finnegan, Willie Monroe and Bobby Watts fail to receive a shot at Monzon (not through ducking I hasten to add) and they were a far higher calibre than Dunn.

mcvey

04-16-2009, 05:03 PM

I agree, at least Ali should've let Dunn and Evangelista fight in a title eliminator. :dead

How about a round robin ,with Stander and Daniels:yep

ChrisPontius

04-17-2009, 11:27 AM

How about a round robin ,with Stander and Daniels:yep

Ron "The Butcher" Stander TKO11 Alfredo Evangelista

:yep

mcvey

04-17-2009, 11:42 AM

Ron "The Butcher" Stander TKO11 Alfredo Evangelista

:yep

Never happened ,but here is one that did
Alfredo Evangelista v Terry Daniels .Winner Evangelista by 2 rd ko.
Difference between Evangelista and Stander and Daniels?
Evangelista was rated in the Ring top 10 for three straight years ,either no 7 or number 8.Stander and Daniels were NEVER rated.
Pot Kettle?:lol:

ChrisPontius

04-17-2009, 12:18 PM

Never happened ,but here is one that did
Alfredo Evangelista v Terry Daniels .Winner Evangelista by 2 rd ko.
Difference between Evangelista and Stander and Daniels?
Evangelista was rated in the Ring top 10 for three straight years ,either no 7 or number 8.Stander and Daniels were NEVER rated.
Pot Kettle?:lol:

You're talking about a fight where Daniels was on something like a 4-20 losing streak and had been retired for 3 years. Prime for prime, Terry eats Alfredo!

ChrisPontius

04-17-2009, 12:19 PM

As for pot kettle, i never said Frazier didn't fight undeserving challengers, so watch your words old man!

mcvey

04-17-2009, 12:55 PM

You're talking about a fight where Daniels was on something like a 4-20 losing streak and had been retired for 3 years. Prime for prime, Terry eats Alfredo!

Don't be silly, Daniels never beat a rated fighter was stopped 13times!
Twice by Light heavys! He lost 30 out of 66 fights.
Evangelista was a European Champion beat Renaldo Snipes and Lorenzo Zanon [ko2 rds],and had a record of 61 wins from 78 fights.
Along with Jack Finnegan, Daniels must be a contender for the worst challenger ever to fight for the heavyweight title.

ChrisPontius

04-17-2009, 01:09 PM

Don't be silly, Daniels never beat a rated fighter was stopped 13times!
Twice by Light heavys! He lost 30 out of 66 fights.
Evangelista was a European Champion beat Renaldo Snipes and Lorenzo Zanon [ko2 rds],and had a record of 61 wins from 78 fights.
Along with Jack Finnegan, Daniels must be a contender for the worst challenger ever to fight for the heavyweight title.

Well, i can't say you're not trying. I was just having a go. What do you think of my new avatar?

mcvey

04-17-2009, 02:28 PM

Well, i can't say you're not trying. I was just having a go. What do you think of my new avatar?

Very topical!
ps give me your predictions for the Haye Wlad ,and Hatton Pac man fights please CP.
ps You used a capital I there ,delusions of granduer?:lol:

ChrisPontius

04-18-2009, 06:03 AM

Very topical!
ps give me your predictions for the Haye Wlad ,and Hatton Pac man fights please CP.

Haye TKO4 Wlad: i'm going for the upset, because Wlad is slowing down physically and Haye has exactly the tools (great speed & power) to pull a Sanders on him. However David is a bit predictable in his combinations (jab-right-hook), so if that or his countering is not effective immediately, then he's toast because he's not going to take Wlad's best shot. In every fight the last few years, Wlad started by feeling out his opponent. It worked like a charm, but it may backfire against a quick starter like Haye.

As for the other one, i'm picking Pac to beat Hatton in a close fight. I think Pac's speed and workrate will make the difference, though it's interesting to see him deal with Hatton's aggression and size.

By the way, how long does one have to go back to have two Brits fight in both of the biggest upcoming boxing blockbusters?

ps You used a capital I there ,delusions of granduer?:lol:

I always get delusions of grandeur when talking to you, though in this case i made it a capital because it was the start of a sentence. ;)

flamengo

04-18-2009, 06:11 AM

Pontius... Hate vs Wlad is not a BLOCKBUSTER. Its a MUPPET SHOW.

You're right though. There are two coming BlockBusters..

Pac-Hatton. Hatton wins by TKO 5.

Mundine-Geale. Mundine wins by KO3

Bill Butcher

04-18-2009, 11:17 AM

Frazier is right the first fight was the greater.

The 1st fight was bigger but the 3rd fight was a better fight.

Bill Butcher

04-18-2009, 11:22 AM

The FOTC was the greater fight because they were both unbeaten and there was more on the line. Ali took a beating Marvel, there's no denying he was beaten pretty soundly.

Nah, close fight, soundly my ass.

Bill Butcher

04-18-2009, 11:29 AM

he could never beat that version of Frazier...prime for prime

You dont think so ?

If you take the 71 Ali out & replace him with the 66/67 Ali, you DONT SERIOUSLY think Ali could have outpointed Joe ?

I dont believe you, honestly, I really dont see how you could expect Frazier to beat that version of Muhammad Ali, your pulling my dick, right ?

Bill Butcher

04-18-2009, 11:45 AM

He said "MAY" always be, not exactly the "sure" statement you're referring to. And i see no reason why Frazier would not be Ali's kryptonite. Watch the Chuvalo fight.

Whats wrong with you people, Frazier hits harder & is different to Chuvalo, Ali aint gonna put in a mirror image performance vs Frazier, hell, if he fought Chuvalo 5 months later the fight would have likely been completely different.
Ali GAVE Chuvalo every chance he got & George STILL took no more than 2 rds out of 15.
If thats Frazier`s blueprint to beat Ali... my hard earned is on Ali & loads of it.

groove

04-18-2009, 02:08 PM

i agree this forum gets funnier everyday. on another thread they're saying foreman's power is the most overrated ever :lol:

round15

04-18-2009, 07:10 PM

Whats wrong with you people, Frazier hits harder & is different to Chuvalo, Ali aint gonna put in a mirror image performance vs Frazier, hell, if he fought Chuvalo 5 months later the fight would have likely been completely different.
Ali GAVE Chuvalo every chance he got & George STILL took no more than 2 rds out of 15.
If thats Frazier`s blueprint to beat Ali... my hard earned is on Ali & loads of it.

Chuvalo gave Ali a pretty good beating to the body even though Ali was the clear winner in that fight. Ali spent some time in the hospital after that fight apparently suffering some internal bleeding from Chuvalo's shots.

Late 60's Ali didn't hit as hard as the 70's Ali, and I'd bet on Frazier putting the 1960's Ali down on the canvas once or twice early in the fight. This version of Ali could win a decision over Frazier, but I'd bet on Frazier's pressure to give Ali problems any time in their careers.