... the fight where we looked at him and said he was a tab bit slower and older? It had to have happened during the mid-70's. But, can anyone pinpoint the fight where we said he looked particularly slower and less mobile?
Printable View
... the fight where we looked at him and said he was a tab bit slower and older? It had to have happened during the mid-70's. But, can anyone pinpoint the fight where we said he looked particularly slower and less mobile?
Muhammad Ali looked 'terrible' against Chuck Wepner in March 1975.
And that was only 5-Months after his bout with George Foreman.
Muhammad looked poor in Training Camp at Deer Lake, where he got lumped
up by Roy 'Tiger' Williams.
That only told me, that his win over George Foreman was a fluke.
I'm gonna look for that Wepner vid. Because in the Foreman fight, we can tell Ali was getting pounded on, but he didn't appear to be on his way to looking like a walking zombie. He still had his reflexes as if he was in there with Sonny Liston or Ernie Terrell.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom
You can't only go by the fight with Chuck Wepner.
I saw Muhammad Ali at his Training Camp prior to that bout in Cleveland.
He showed absolutely nothing, and was getting pounded on by Roy 'Tiger' Williams
in early 1975.
And Larry Holmes easily out jabbed him.
His reflexes weren't completely gone, but he wasn't performing well.
The Larry Holmes fight should've never happened.
Between that, and Larry's constant whining about color, are the main reasons I've always hated Larry Holmes.
I remember the incident where he was being interviewed in the corner by a reporter and he said he was old and slow and in his younger days he would have beaten this fighter.
I do not know who it was either?
Who ever stands still in front of a puncher like Foreman for 8 rounds doesn't do so by 'fluke'.
George Foreman's arms were hanging like heavy water-logged branches by Round 3.
He was done to a turn.
It still took Muhammad Ali 4 1/2 Rounds more to drop an exhausted lumbering galoot.
That lumbering galoot as you call him was the hardest hitting heavyweight ever and was never stopped by any other opponent he ever faced again. Only you could see the worst in Ali.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom
George Foreman,
Arguably, fought the worst fight in boxing history.
No plan, other than throwing windmill looping punches, until he was exhausted.
Muhammad Ali did not fight great. He just could absorb a lot of punches, due to
the thickness of his skull.
Ali was almost in the full onset of Parkinson's by then.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
I always wondered if his stint in jail had something to do with it? You know they were doing all types of shit with black inmates, experimenting with syphilis and the like. All types of shit.
Those were the last days of the durable heavyweights. I dunno what happened?!?! Was it that the fighters hit harder with more skill now, or was it that these dudes were just badass and tough as nails?Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamGB
Vitali was a throwback to the tough as nails days of Foreman, Lyle, Norton, Ali and Frazier. During the fight with Lewis, that uppercut in round five I think it was, would have decapitated a Rhinoceros.
Muhammad Ali,
In sparring, Muhammad liked taking shots to the head and body. He believed it toughened him up.
Of course, when he reached 35 or so, his brain was 'loose'.
Eubanks did the same, said it helped him get use to getting hit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom
Muhammad Ali was tough and durable.
Thick skulls can absorb those heavy blows.