Beating Muhammad Ali

[BKM-2010]

The toughest task in heavyweight boxing history in most people's minds including mine. This goes far deeper than just the technical aspct. To even be in the realm of the possibility you need to be Ali's equal mentally. And then you run into the task of doing it technically/physically as well and that's when it becomes even harder. I have reason to believe that some could have beaten Ali at his best but nobody would beat him more than once in a 3 fight trilogy(again, at his best).

[young_robbed]

I have to agree with this Ali's true talent was his jab,take away that and he cant do much.

.....No. Ali's brilliance is far past his jab, maybe you should watch more of his fights. He was a diverse fighter and had far more than a jab, also had great combo punching, a helluva right cross and some nice check left hooks.

If taking away his jab was as easy as you say it is maybe Ali would have more losses. You're wrong here, man.

This really wasnt hard to do even smaller guys like Folley had success in their short fight ,if Norton was around in the 60's ,Ali would most likely lose because his jab in the 70s was more accurate and harder

Ali was screwing around with Folley for a good portion of that fight, and still dominated him and knock him down twice. Ali wouldn't lose to Norton. Ali's jab against Terrell, Liston and Williams was on point. **** even against Chuvalo or Patterson. His jab was very good, quick, versatile and damaging.

..the real myth is Ali in the 60's was better ,its false ,he just fought better ,bigger fighters in the 70s who were much more athletic from the previous era.

Actually that's not a myth, it's just an unpopular opinion of yours that Ali was better in the 70s. I disagree with you, and so would most people. Ali was far quicker, had better legs and footwork in the 60's, as well as better combo punching and a much better jab. Also his conditioning was very consistent in the 60s compared to the 70s. His reflexes, for example, were able to make his technical flaws not as significant. Norton only capitalized on Ali's flaws because Ali didn't have the speed or reflexes to make the flaws irrelevant. It was clear that Ali in 1966-67 was a far better fighter than the one that fought Frazier I or Quarry or Bonavena.

[Weltschmerz]

The young Ali relied mainly on his athleticism, as he was fundamentally flawed as a boxer. He would constantly make himself vulnerable to counters, for instance, and especially the left hook, as we saw with Frazier. Ali had a poor defense too, especially later on in his career. His defense consisted in covering up against the ropes, rather than blocking punches. He also didn't really know how to fight as an aggressor, relying mainly on covering opponents with flurries as they would put pressure on him.

[juggernaut666]

.....No. Ali's brilliance is far past his jab, maybe you should watch more of his fights. He was a diverse fighter and had far more than a jab, also had great combo punching, a helluva right cross and some nice check left hooks.

If taking away his jab was as easy as you say it is maybe Ali would have more losses. You're wrong here, man.



Ali was screwing around with Folley for a good portion of that fight, and still dominated him and knock him down twice. Ali wouldn't lose to Norton. Ali's jab against Terrell, Liston and Williams was on point. **** even against Chuvalo or Patterson. His jab was very good, quick, versatile and damaging.



Actually that's not a myth, it's just an unpopular opinion of yours that Ali was better in the 70s. I disagree with you, and so would most people. Ali was far quicker, had better legs and footwork in the 60's, as well as better combo punching and a much better jab. Also his conditioning was very consistent in the 60s compared to the 70s. His reflexes, for example, were able to make his technical flaws not as significant. Norton only capitalized on Ali's flaws because Ali didn't have the speed or reflexes to make the flaws irrelevant. It was clear that Ali in 1966-67 was a far better fighter than the one that fought Frazier I or Quarry or Bonavena.

Brilliance was not his forte...He fought the way he was forced to fight with the better fighters because lack of certain abilities with frazier he couldn't stop the aggressive style and struggled ,that's not brilliance...against foreman he laid on the ropes because really he had no choice until foreman tired out....Norton he was evenly matched because as stated nullify alis jab ,you nullify ali...the fighters he did out smart weren't world beaters really comparded to many histories fighters.His JAB was his savior in many cases ,it helped him dictate pace and fight style that was fought.the thing is ,no matter who makes what excuse for him ,if you thru flustery jabs at him he almost always back pedaled and had to reset...against a superior jabber and overall fighter this would get him in trouble...the 6'3 Norton showed that,he had a jab and reach to match ali.Anyone who listens to Alis post fight win with Quarry in 71 will hear his owm assessment of why hes better then compared to the 60's.Really the only thing that matters is having the actual fighter opinion of himself on your side no matter how unpopular it is.

He was no dummy and could adapt but he was no magician either.

[Weltschmerz]

I could see Jack Johnson, arguably the greatest defensive HW in history, giving Ali a massive amount of trouble.

[Ray Corso]

Frazier was well prepared for Ali after Ali's absense, remember they worked together briefly and knew each other very well. Ali underestimated his own
overall conditioning thinking the bout with Quarry was good enough but he errored thinking his legs were 15 round ready.
Frazier pressure was calculating he took his time stepping but when he set Ali up movement wise he stepped quickly and through whatever punch Ali was moving to. Ali always slid to his left to use his jab and was concerned with right hands over his jab but that was a rarity. He prefered going away from the left hook. Frazier caught him moving backwards instead of laterally and dropped Ali late, it happens. It was a calculated move but it took all night to do it!

You can make up any senerio you want but the bottom line is theres never been anyone his size that could set up people with movement in the division like he could. Ali was a master boxer on the move and this talk about him being a weak puncher is BS! When he spreads his stance and wipes his forehead he is challenging his opponent to exchance. Not many won those exchanges and very few accepted them. He had a great right hand lead over the top of jabs and when felt secure in close he had a great upper cut that could be long or short. He also threw a short left hook.upper cut that was quick and he cpould actually roll under it! Ali was very well schooled as a kid, he was National Golden Gloves Champion twice in the Open division fighting young men when he was a teenager. He was 95-5 as an amateur and back then that was an active career for a kid from the south.
We got robbed at seeing his best and he was robbed unfairly for his perfectly legal exceptions to the war! Remember he was proven innocent years later.

At his best I've never seen anyone who could contend with his abilities!
He was the fastest moving fastest handed heavy of all time and had all the experience too. He could adapt and win!!
With 61 fights and a 61% ko victory rate being stopped ONCE far beyond his best he handles anyone today.
As for which Ali is better, all of them their all him!!!
Ray.

[billeau2]

Frazier was well prepared for Ali after Ali's absense, remember they worked together briefly and knew each other very well. Ali underestimated his own
overall conditioning thinking the bout with Quarry was good enough but he errored thinking his legs were 15 round ready.
Frazier pressure was calculating he took his time stepping but when he set Ali up movement wise he stepped quickly and through whatever punch Ali was moving to. Ali always slid to his left to use his jab and was concerned with right hands over his jab but that was a rarity. He prefered going away from the left hook. Frazier caught him moving backwards instead of laterally and dropped Ali late, it happens. It was a calculated move but it took all night to do it!

You can make up any senerio you want but the bottom line is theres never been anyone his size that could set up people with movement in the division like he could. Ali was a master boxer on the move and this talk about him being a weak puncher is BS! When he spreads his stance and wipes his forehead he is challenging his opponent to exchance. Not many won those exchanges and very few accepted them. He had a great right hand lead over the top of jabs and when felt secure in close he had a great upper cut that could be long or short. He also threw a short left hook.upper cut that was quick and he cpould actually roll under it! Ali was very well schooled as a kid, he was National Golden Gloves Champion twice in the Open division fighting young men when he was a teenager. He was 95-5 as an amateur and back then that was an active career for a kid from the south.
We got robbed at seeing his best and he was robbed unfairly for his perfectly legal exceptions to the war! Remember he was proven innocent years later.

At his best I've never seen anyone who could contend with his abilities!
He was the fastest moving fastest handed heavy of all time and had all the experience too. He could adapt and win!!
With 61 fights and a 61% ko victory rate being stopped ONCE far beyond his best he handles anyone today.
As for which Ali is better, all of them their all him!!!
Ray.

Thanks for putting things in perspective Ray...Ali had a real geniune like for the martial arts set....back in the day there was a tai Kwon Do place on 86th street and lex in NYC...Richard Chung me thinks and Ali's face was plastered everywhere because he would go there and train. Watch olympic Tai Kwon Do guys with their quick feet and how they backend their weight....Ali got some of those moves from the same teachers. The kicks from real TKD (not the mall **** we have now) are reaaaaally quick and circular...you cannot block em one has to learn to move the head from the waist, again watch Ali doing this against punches. Ali was an inveterate learner and he always was extremely giving and respectful of martial artists...even going out of his way not to embarrass the ****ty kickboxers who loved to spar with him...but not for nothing! Ali's movement, what we call tai sabaki in the Japo arts...was perfected. Again you learn this from avoiding kicks because when a small fast fleet footed korean stylist is shooting legs, you cannot block em, you have to move.

[rightsideup]

Frazier was well prepared for Ali after Ali's absense, remember they worked together briefly and knew each other very well. Ali underestimated his own
overall conditioning thinking the bout with Quarry was good enough but he errored thinking his legs were 15 round ready.
Frazier pressure was calculating he took his time stepping but when he set Ali up movement wise he stepped quickly and through whatever punch Ali was moving to. Ali always slid to his left to use his jab and was concerned with right hands over his jab but that was a rarity. He prefered going away from the left hook. Frazier caught him moving backwards instead of laterally and dropped Ali late, it happens. It was a calculated move but it took all night to do it!

You can make up any senerio you want but the bottom line is theres never been anyone his size that could set up people with movement in the division like he could. Ali was a master boxer on the move and this talk about him being a weak puncher is BS! When he spreads his stance and wipes his forehead he is challenging his opponent to exchance. Not many won those exchanges and very few accepted them. He had a great right hand lead over the top of jabs and when felt secure in close he had a great upper cut that could be long or short. He also threw a short left hook.upper cut that was quick and he cpould actually roll under it! Ali was very well schooled as a kid, he was National Golden Gloves Champion twice in the Open division fighting young men when he was a teenager. He was 95-5 as an amateur and back then that was an active career for a kid from the south.
We got robbed at seeing his best and he was robbed unfairly for his perfectly legal exceptions to the war! Remember he was proven innocent years later.

At his best I've never seen anyone who could contend with his abilities!
He was the fastest moving fastest handed heavy of all time and had all the experience too. He could adapt and win!!
With 61 fights and a 61% ko victory rate being stopped ONCE far beyond his best he handles anyone today.
As for which Ali is better, all of them their all him!!!
Ray.

nice post ray

[billeau2]

Stephen breadman

This is Breadman's response regarding Ali: It would be nice for people to read this to get some perspective on Ali because: how quickly we forget those who should stand on a proverbial shortlist.

http://www.boxingscene.com/daily-bre...edition--90519

[The Old LefHook]

The Clay who wasted Liston the first time was what I would call barely beatable.

Sonny proved he was not slow footed in almost chasing Clay down. Sonny was a great heavyweight but he simply met a greater one.

Clay's quick feet of that period would have danced circles around Norton who dragged his foot behind like a cripple. Kenny was much slower afoot than Liston, who gave it his best against Clay. I like Billeau's post about kickboxing and Ali's footwork. I think there is something to it.