Joe Louis vs Muhammad Ali

[CarlosG815]

There are a few things to take into account because you are absolutely wrong - firstly, the physically fittest, toughest & sharpest version of post-ban Ali was the version that fought Ken Norton in their second bout. Anyone who has seen the fight will testify to the conditioning of Ali that night - he displayed most of the skills he possessed in his absolute prime during the 1960's and exhibited them with fluidity and guile. Ali realised he had to be in peak physical condition to go 12 rounds with Norton, after the shock he received 6 months previous. He was throwing his combinations with power and accuracy, hurt Norton in the 11th round with a straight right and was landing violent uppercuts the duration of the fight. He was also able to clinch Norton when necessary and the most crucial element that night was that he had most of his abilities with his footwork and legs back. The way he moved in portions of the fight were reminiscent of the way he moved during the 60's.


The dividing factor between the Ali that fought Frazier I and the Ali that fought Norton II were his legs. You claim that Ali had enough fights prior to the FOTC to shake off the ring rust? After an almost 4 year exile, he only had 2 fights, within a 2 month period, one of which was stopped on cuts in 3 rounds and the other against Oscar - simply put, Ali did not shake off the cobwebs. His fight with Oscar serves as evidence that Ali was clearly not ready to step into the ring with Frazier, just yet. Ali was flat-footed against Oscar, he looked sloppy and this fight must have been a shocking revelation to Ali himself, who would have realised he could not fight the same way he did prior to his ban. He lost that split second of reflexes he possessed which enabled him to avoid punches, and was getting tagged by punches he would never get tagged with during his physical prime.


This is not to downplay Frazier's win as you so aptly put it, this is to simply state one which is blatantly obvious. Frazier was an absolute juggernaut that night, at his supreme best and Ali put up a gallant effort, even though he had lost his legs and was slowly adapting to new ways of fighting, spending greater periods of the match on the ropes, which he was forced to do during his post-ban career. Ali's performance may have arguably been his most determined of his post-ban career period, but in no way possible, was he at his physical zenith. Frazier was the better fighter that night, but simply because I state Ali was not at his physical peak that night, during his post-ban career, doesn't mean I'm out to discredit Frazier.

This is simply not true. To say Ali wasn't at his best, and we could see a better version against another fighter is silly because Ali would not look against Frazier the way he would against Norton regardless of the version of Ali. Frazier was the better fighter, he trained harder, he wanted it more, and he won a fight against as good of a post ban version of Ali as any. You may not mean to discredit Frazier but the excuses you are making are discrediting his masterful performance and making you sound like an Ali apologist.

I am so tired of this excuse. A fighter has 3 months of camp with a lot of sparring, and he had 2 fights, I don't care how long they lasted. He had 2 camps, a lot of training and sparring, and 2 in the ring recorded bouts. How many fights did Ali need before fighting Frazier and getting back into shape? We all know what kind of shape Ali could get into with just 1 camp, so for you to pretend as if it was anything but Frazier being superior on that night is simply not true.

[Wild Blue Yonda]

Amen to that, CarlosG. Ali never made excuses, it's a shame so many do in his place. One of the most disgusting statements of that fight was Bert Sugar in the documentary, "Through The Eyes Of The World."

"The loser in that fight, became the winner. The winner in that fight, became the loser."

What a load of offensive bull****.

[right_hand_lead]

I'm by no means a boxing historian, but I just don't see anything but a Ali decision. I have nothing but respect for Louis, but it has bad style matchup written all over it for Louis.

It seems the options I'm reading for Louis are "he'll catch Ali in the late rounds". Hmmm who has one of the best chins in HW history again? I see a 66-67 Ali jabbing the hell out of louis with some well place right hands sprinkled in.

Louis had great skill, but you simply don't out-box a boxer, even one as unorthodox as Ali. Just my opinion.

[CarlosG815]

I'm by no means a boxing historian, but I just don't see anything but a Ali decision. I have nothing but respect for Louis, but it has bad style matchup written all over it for Louis.

It seems the options I'm reading for Louis are "he'll catch Ali in the late rounds". Hmmm who has one of the best chins in HW history again? I see a 66-67 Ali jabbing the hell out of louis with some well place right hands sprinkled in.

Louis had great skill, but you simply don't out-box a boxer, even one as unorthodox as Ali. Just my opinion.

Any legitimate "great" at the top of his game/prime of his career is capable of beating Ali.... I don't think it's a bad matchup at all for Joe Louis.

[joseph5620]

This is simply not true. To say Ali wasn't at his best, and we could see a better version against another fighter is silly because Ali would not look against Frazier the way he would against Norton regardless of the version of Ali. Frazier was the better fighter, he trained harder, he wanted it more, and he won a fight against as good of a post ban version of Ali as any. You may not mean to discredit Frazier but the excuses you are making are discrediting his masterful performance and making you sound like an Ali apologist.

I am so tired of this excuse. A fighter has 3 months of camp with a lot of sparring, and he had 2 fights, I don't care how long they lasted. He had 2 camps, a lot of training and sparring, and 2 in the ring recorded bouts. How many fights did Ali need before fighting Frazier and getting back into shape? We all know what kind of shape Ali could get into with just 1 camp, so for you to pretend as if it was anything but Frazier being superior on that night is simply not true.

Frazier was certainly at his best and a great fighter. But Ali was not at his best. Almost 4 years off? Is that really arguable?

[CarlosG815]

Frazier was certainly at his best and a great fighter. But Ali was not at his best. Almost 4 years off? Is that really arguable?

You're talking as if Frazier was his comeback fight... I am convinced that the only way this perception would not exist is if Ali had beaten Frazier in the FOTC. As long as history shows that he lost, his apologists will always have an excuse for him.

It was a version of Ali that was just as good as any other post ban version of Ali. That, I do not believe is arguable.

[PEBBLES!]

This is simply not true.

Your narrow-mind and simple, cloth-eared views on boxing don't allow you to judge both fighters with absolute objectivity.

To say Ali wasn't at his best, and we could see a better version against another fighter is silly because Ali would not look against Frazier the way he would against Norton regardless of the version of Ali.

No he wouldn't, but you seem to turn a blind eye to the fact that Norton was an even worse stylistic match-up for Ali, than Frazier was. So for Ali to look as sharp, quick-footed and strong as he did against Norton is a tremendous feat. Especially considering the fact he was made to look very poor in their 1st and 3rd bouts. To claim Ali was not at his physical best is to be a just and objective observer - I stated my reasons, yet all you seem to muster is "stop making excuses", the same old, tedious, screed. You have given no comparisons, you have not analysed Ali's physical strengths and weaknesses in both Norton II and Frazier I, you better bring more to the discussion than just "stop discrediting Frazier", 'cause I have limited time for inferior boxing minds like you.

he won a fight against as good of a post ban version of Ali as any

You've regurgitated this statement many times without actually stating any solid points as to how this can be possibly true.

You may not mean to discredit Frazier but the excuses you are making are discrediting his masterful performance and making you sound like an Ali apologist.

The only simpleton making excuses is you. I'm trying to be as objective as possible, and quite frankly your fanboyish attempts to defend Frazier are embarrassing.

I am so tired of this excuse.

I'm tired of you typing away like a special ed kid without making a single solid point.

A fighter has 3 months of camp with a lot of sparring, and he had 2 fights,I don't care how long they lasted.

Ofcourse you don't care how long they lasted - which is why you are wrong. If you were fair and objective you would realise a 3 round tune-up fight which was stopped on cuts and a fight with Bonavena is not enough to remove the ring rust that accumulated over almost 4 years of inactivity. I've stated my reasons as to how Ali looked in that fight.

He had 2 camps, a lot of training and sparring, and 2 in the ring recorded bouts. How many fights did Ali need before fighting Frazier and getting back into shape?

If you have ever seen the Bonavena fight, which I'm sure you haven't, Ali certainly was not ready to get in the ring with Frazier at that point. Sure, Ali exhibited a terrific performance that night, but it would have been greatly improved with a couple more bouts under his sleeve.

We all know what kind of shape Ali could get into with just 1 camp, so for you to pretend as if it was anything but Frazier being superior on that night is simply not true.

Training camps are not fights. No matter how many times you tell yourself that Ali could've shaken off 'ring-rust' during his Frazier training camp you are wrong.

[PEBBLES!]

You're talking as if Frazier was his comeback fight... I am convinced that the only way this perception would not exist is if Ali had beaten Frazier in the FOTC. As long as history shows that he lost, his apologists will always have an excuse for him.

It was a version of Ali that was just as good as any other post ban version of Ali. That, I do not believe is arguable.

I stated clear points as to why Norton II was the better version of Ali. You are just spouting the same garb.

[CarlosG815]

Your narrow-mind and simple, cloth-eared views on boxing don't allow you to judge both fighters with absolute objectivity.




No he wouldn't, but you seem to turn a blind eye to the fact that Norton was an even worse stylistic match-up for Ali, than Frazier was. So for Ali to look as sharp, quick-footed and strong as he did against Norton is a tremendous feat. Especially considering the fact he was made to look very poor in their 1st and 3rd bouts. To claim Ali was not at his physical best is to be a just and objective observer - I stated my reasons, yet all you seem to muster is "stop making excuses", the same old, tedious, screed. You have given no comparisons, you have not analysed Ali's physical strengths and weaknesses in both Norton II and Frazier I, you better bring more to the discussion than just "stop discrediting Frazier", 'cause I have limited time for inferior boxing minds like you.



You've regurgitated this statement many times without actually stating any solid points as to how this can be possibly true.




The only simpleton making excuses is you. I'm trying to be as objective as possible, and quite frankly your fanboyish attempts to defend Frazier are embarrassing.




I'm tired of you typing away like a special ed kid without making a single solid point.



Ofcourse you don't care how long they lasted - which is why you are wrong. If you were fair and objective you would realise a 3 round tune-up fight which was stopped on cuts and a fight with Bonavena is not enough to remove the ring rust that accumulated over almost 4 years of inactivity. I've stated my reasons as to how Ali looked in that fight.




If you have ever seen the Bonavena fight, which I'm sure you haven't, Ali certainly was not ready to get in the ring with Frazier at that point. Sure, Ali exhibited a terrific performance that night, but it would have been greatly improved with a couple more bouts under his sleeve.




Training camps are not fights. No matter how many times you tell yourself that Ali could've shaken off 'ring-rust' during his Frazier training camp you are wrong.

I will say that I disagree with you and I do stand by what I have stated above, but I'm not going to debate miniscule details, that nobody has anyway of knowing as fact, as you seem to believe you do, with anybody.

[CarlosG815]

You are a such a simpleton.

I stated clear points as to why Norton II was the better version of Ali. You are just spouting the same garb.

And you are too simple to realize that Frazier is the far superior fighter in comparison to Norton, and he sets a pace unlike any Norton ever has, and his style is a lot more deadly, so to use Ali's performance against Norton in their second fight will never be a good gauge as to how Ali would ever do against Frazier.

I know you're not going to get it, because you are past the point of using logic in your reasoning, and are now speaking strictly out of pride and not wanting to be wrong.

Just get it.