Do You Agree With Monte Cox, That Ali's Peak/Prime Was The First Frazier Fight?

[Perfect Plex]

He says that Ali was at his best that night.

Link to article.
http://coxscorner.tripod.com/best_ali.html

Thoughts?

[CarlosG815]

I agree 100%. Ali fought a great fight but prime Frazier is just better than Ali.

[TheGreatA]

No.

Ali put up a great effort, especially considering the 3 year layoff and his less than stellar performance against Bonavena, but he lacked the stamina to fight for full 15 rounds against a man like Frazier.

In his younger days he did not exactly dance for 15 rounds, but he was able to move a lot more than he could against Frazier. It seemed as if Ali was banking on being able to discourage Frazier early by standing more flat-footed and punching at Frazier with full power behind his punches, but it had no effect on Frazier's aggressive tactics. By the time Ali realized that he was in for a long night, his legs were nearly gone and Frazier forced him to fight his type of a fight against the ropes, a fight he was always going to have the better of despite Ali's courageous attempts at holding him off.

Ali would have probably always had problems adjusting to Frazier's style. He needed to punch, move away and clinch Frazier, which is exactly what he did in the second fight, to the point of being overly cautious even. A prime 1967 Ali following this simple strategy (but a difficult one to put into practise) would have a good chance of beating the peak Joe Frazier of 1971, though it is no certainty.

It is my belief, and probably the general belief too, that we never truly saw a peak Ali, as some of his best years were spent in exile. However it allowed the likes of Joe Frazier and others like Quarry and Ellis to establish themselves in the division. When Ali first left boxing, there were no obvious contenders to his title after the win over Zora Folley, but when he came back there were numerous interesting challenges for him, Frazier being the most outstanding of the bunch.

[lazy]

It would be interesting if that Frazier fought the Ali before his layoff.

[bojangles1987]

No offense, but that's ludicrous to me. His prime was '66 or around then. The first Frazier fight is when everyone found out Ali was not quite as quick or elusive as he had once been.

[SBleeder]

Ridiculous. Ali was nowhere near as quick or accurate in the seventies as he was in the sixties.

[prinzemanspopa]

This is the same Monte Cox who will tell you how Joe Louis was washed up after his similar layoff.Odd how a fighter,who according to Monte Cox,was the "most powerful and fastest punching heavyweight boxer in ring history" and "makes very few mistakes",is unable to retain his skills after such a layoff,and yet,a fighter,who according to Cox,"made a lot of mistakes in the ring",would somehow still be able to retain his,despite the flawed technique and over-reliance on physical gifts that Cox suggests he had.


I don't think most would consider judging a fighter after just eighteen rounds in four years fair,either.I've never heard anyone claim that such a layoff did any fighter any good,let alone a fighter with the type of style that a layoff would hurt the most.


Note how the author fails to acknowledge Ali's long-winded struggle with Oscar Bonavena,whom Ali gassed out against before the middle rounds even started - Bonavena didn't need to set a pace or apply much pressure for that to happen,either.Bonavena fought a poor fight and still,besides Frazier,won more rounds against him than any other fighter up until Ken Norton convincingly beat the very best version of the comeback Ali.


Scoring well in the first five rounds,just one 1/3 of a championship fight is not a great performance.Lying on the ropes,covering up and conserving energy is not a great performance.Ring rust typically catches up to a fighter at around the same time Ali slowed down.



At a time when there was no better time for a rematch,when Ali had cleared his division and established himself as the undisputed top contender,Frazier ducked a career high purse because a fresh,sharp heavyweight contender presented a threat he proved he could never respond to.Three years of ducking and avoiding a rematch and only signing on when a former sparring partner had his success and he still failed.




This article is a testament to how how reliant Joe Frazier is on another man's legacy and accomplishments.How irrelevant he and his legacy would be without him.....leechin' ain't easy,man.

Ask yourself would a peak Ron Lyle hit Joe Frazier harder than the right hands Ali hit Frazier with that night?

Ask yourself this,Cox....what does Ron Lyle even have to do with this article?

Is this a reference to the many claims of Joe Frazier ducking Ron Lyle? Are you suggesting that we should believe that Ali hit harder than Lyle and that this fight is somehow proof that Frazier would have been able to absorb Lyle's best blows?



Overall,a very flawed article.It always helps to use documented facts rather than misguided opinions when writing articles like this.

[Barn]

I don't agree at all I believe Ali's prime was 1966 against Cleveland Williams 5 years earlier.
Against Cleveland Williams he still had his natural athletic ability and was had nearly finished maturing into an excellent fighter.

[SNVDoublePunch!]

Not physically. I don't agree with that at all. When someone says Ali VS so-and-so prime VS prime...I don't think of any version but first reign Ali.

[sonnyboyx2]

Ali vs Frazier (1) was the greatest ever performance by Muhammad Ali, yet his ultimate prime was the night he fought Floyd Patterson (1)