Ali is Overrated

[LondonRingRules]

You better check the record, Ellis was NOT post exhile.
Poet

** You'd better check your shorts. You done laid a BIG one.

The Ellis fight took place in 71 after Frazier. Ali didn't box from his March 67 bout with Folley until his Oct 70 bout against Quarry, then Bonavena, then Frazier, and THEN Ellis.

Poet leads with his face,
No need for any mace,
Just a good whippin'
with frilly lace.

[StarshipTrooper]

I stand corrected on the date of the Ellis fight. However I notice you carefully avoided the other points made in that post.

Poet

[Brassangel]

Seeing as how Ali really only fought three times in his alleged "prime," certainly not against the greatest fighters around, it's difficult to say what he was really capable of.

What's rediculous is the way people forgive him for losses suffered after exile, dismissing them because of the layoff. What's more rediculous is how people judge his "prime" as a time when he wasn't fighting. His physical prime may have been in 1967, but his boxing prime was 1971-1975. That's when he fought his biggest fights, that's when he was smarter in the ring than ever before, and that's the Ali that Dundee has said (though I'm sure he's contradicted himself at some point) he would take over any before or after.

What's funny is the crazy amounts of hipocratic commentary that surrounds Ali. I'll give an example I've given before for the kiddies:

Muhammad Ali had 3 years off. He came back and had 18 rounds of tough competition from Jerry Quarry and Oscar Bonavena in the course of six months; two solid contenders from that time. These awkward, pressuring opponents were chosen as opponents to better prepare Ali for Frazier. He then fought, and lost, to Joe Frazier before getting back on the title track. Everyone forgives him for this loss.

Mike Tyson had 4 years off. He came back and had 9 rounds of competition from four complete jokers, spread out over the course of a year. These fighters in no way shape or form prepared him (nor did his worthless corner) for a showdown with the tough, durable, Evander Holyfield. Mike Tyson then fought, and lost, to Holyfield. Everybody uses this as a "see, Mike Tyson was overrated" case-and-point.

Given the circumstances surrounding their respective lives, Mike Tyson should be permitted far more excuses than is Muhammad Ali. Given their places in society, however, and people's hard-ons for the nostalgic; as well as their pre-exile careers and personal lives aside, they will forever erase Ali's losses from their minds, while exemplifying those of someone like Mike Tyson.

Does this mean that Ali is overrated? Yes...and no.

Muhammad Ali is certainly one of the top 3 heavyweights of all-time, probably behind only Joe Louis, if anyone. He was never invincible, he was never simply "too fast" for any of the other greats in history, nor would he breeze through anyone at the top of the list.

When it comes down to it, it's two men, in a ring with gloves, time, and mortal bodies.

[StarshipTrooper]

His physical prime may have been in 1967, but his boxing prime was 1971-1975. That's when he fought his biggest fights, that's when he was smarter in the ring than ever before

First off, is it at all possible for you to weigh in on a subject without sounding like a sarcastic prick?

Second, Ali's prime was NOT 1971-1975. You need to read the contempary accounts, practically everyone who saw him said he wasn't the same fighter. His speed had erroded. Physical prime IS boxing prime; boxing is above all a physical sport. Ali's prime was from 1965-1967 when he fought not three times but nine times with wins over Folley, Williams, Patterson, Terrell, and Chuvalo. All good fighters, all top contenders, all well regarded at the time. If you don't believe his "physical" prime is the same as his "boxing" prime than it would seem to me you don't believe speed is a major factor in boxing. Isn't speed what sets Floyd Mayweather apart from the competition?

Thirdly, by the standard you're setting for Ali's prime ie. all his "big" fights against "good" opponents were after 1971, then Joe Louis' prime was after WWII since after all that was when he fought Joe Walcott, Ezzard Charles, Lee Savold, and Rocky Marciano. Afterall, those were all his "good" opponents wheren't they? Now obviously I don't for a minute believe that was Louis' prime. Nor do I believe that those were all his "good" opponents.
It's REAL easy for someone to say "oh, Zora Folley was crap" or "Max Baer couldn't beat my Grandmother". The contemporaries of those fighters had a very different view them.

Poet

[Frazier's 15th round]

Joe Frazier was blind in one eye, had diabetes, and hypertension. Yet he still battered Ali 11-4 in rounds. I don't even want to imagine how badly a healthy Joe Frazier would have beaten Ali.

[StarshipTrooper]

Joe Frazier was blind in one eye, had diabetes, and hypertension. Yet he still battered Ali 11-4 in rounds. I don't even want to imagine how badly a healthy Joe Frazier would have beaten Ali.

You need to read Joe's biography again. While I don't know when he developed diabetes, I DO know he wasn't blind in one eye until AFTER the Manila fight. That's why he went into the second Foreman fight with a contact in the eye, with disasterous results. BTW I HAVE read Fraziers autobiography, I happen to be a Joe Frazier fan. Please don't tarnish Joe's accomplishment in the first Ali fight by making outrageous claims. Now! If you want to talk Frazier lets! LOL!

PS. I have a number of Frazier's fights on video file.

Poet

[LondonRingRules]

Physical prime IS boxing prime;
Poet

** Nope. I keep telling you to change your shorts. It's embarassing to see you in that state.

Prime is a combination of mental and physical for a sport. In boxing prime is also style dependent. A fighter relying on speed will not have a long career for example.

Jersey Joe, Archie Moore, and Oleg Maskaev are some fighters who did better after the typical athletic physical prime of 21-29. Tyson deteriorated severely after age 24 from his previous state.

Now, change those shorts so they will readmit you into school.

[StarshipTrooper]

Okay, I get it. You're just a **** talking ****** who isn't worth my effort. Please try again when you know what the f*** you're talking about. Obviously you either a. know absolutely nothing about boxing, or b. know absolutely nothing about boxing, or c. you're just an ignorant moron.

Poet

[Tha_Greatest]

Ali is overated, great heavyweight no doubt but not nearly the freakishly great boxer historians have made him out to be. Hell, Holyfield in his prime would have taken this guy in hard fought 12 round TKO. Go ahead, let the flaming begin.

And BTW, to the guy who said Ali was a great human being outside the ring- what the hell have you been smoking!?

Thank You, Believe This

[fasman]

Ali is NOT overrated!!!!!