Would the accumulation of Holy's sharp hooks close Joe's eyes even sooner than ali closed them? Or would Joe be able to knock out Holy with his left hook? Would this fight be even more competitive and action-packed than Ali-Frazier 1?
Printable View
Would the accumulation of Holy's sharp hooks close Joe's eyes even sooner than ali closed them? Or would Joe be able to knock out Holy with his left hook? Would this fight be even more competitive and action-packed than Ali-Frazier 1?
Holyfield in his entire HW career, never fought an opponent as weak+bad as Joe Frazier.
Early KO for Holyfield and a total clowning of Joe.
I see this as a bad match up for Frazier. Evander was one of the greatest counter punchers in history, had a great chin and a ton of heart in addition to a slight size and speed advantage. I see Evander winning a taxing war, mixing in enough jabs, combos and grappling/rough infighting to win a hard fought decision. Joe was a beast and had great stamina, but was essentially a one arm fighter who wasn't very slick. I see Evander winning a taxing fight due to a bad style match up for Joe.
Holyfield would move around him and dance like nobody's business. Early Holyfield wins no matter if it was 12 or 15. But the older Holyfield would wear down and be susceptible to being stopped after 8.Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
Smaller less experienced Holyfield beats him easy, but heftier, more experienced and roided to the gills Holyfield is susceptible to being stopped by a featherfist? Even though he was rarely stopped in an era of superheavyweight punchers?Quote:
Originally Posted by ykdadamajaHolyfield would move around him and dance like nobody's business. Early Holyfield wins no matter if it was 12 or 15. But the older Holyfield would wear down and be susceptible to being stopped after 8.Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
Unbelievable!
Holyfield would beat his ass. Joe is overrated... plus Holyfield had better "nutrition" than Joe... he recognized the benefits of Vitamin S.... :D
Dude, your killing this forum today... Never been this funny LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Did the missus bring her bestie home for a 3some or something? ;D
The Joe Frazier that beat Ali and was undisputed champion of the World beats the best Holyfield.Quote:
Originally Posted by ykdadamajaHolyfield would move around him and dance like nobody's business. Early Holyfield wins no matter if it was 12 or 15. But the older Holyfield would wear down and be susceptible to being stopped after 8.Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
Sure mate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraThe Joe Frazier that beat Ali and was undisputed champion of the World beats the best Holyfield.Quote:
Originally Posted by ykdadamajaHolyfield would move around him and dance like nobody's business. Early Holyfield wins no matter if it was 12 or 15. But the older Holyfield would wear down and be susceptible to being stopped after 8.Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
The 1 dimensional Joe Frazier that did nothing but walk straight forward with that silly left hook that was so weak that, despite landing it over and over again on a completely defenceless and blind to punches Ali who could do nothing but hold him most of the fight, was unable to knock him out in 15 rounds because he was so weak, beats the BEST version of Holyfield.
Riddick Bowe was overcome by Holyfield once. But not the mighty Joe Frazier.
:lol1:
Unbelievable!
Joe was Olympic gold medalist that beat all that he could in the division in the late 60's and early 70's. His peak was 1971. Holyfield was inconsistent champion but at his best he could try and outbox Joe. Bert Copper wobbled and hurt Evander and that could happen. It would be a great war.
1971 Frazier can only be beat by Foreman. Too much goddam hustle, heart, and too great a chin. Joe got up 6 times from Foreman knockdowns. Holyfield couldnt hurt him.
The Frazier who beat Ali would be the lightest heavyweight Holyfield ever fought. I think its a fantastic fight, the combined heart on display immeasurable and all the chaos of throwing forks into a blender ;D. To me Holyfield has the best of both worlds combination punching off the jab and bulling and outmuscling Frazier who could come in squat and square and turn Joes face into a lumpy bumpy mess. No doubt Joe would land that hook(s) but see Holyfield to fast and complete of both hands and feet, turning.
Yes, Bert Cooper dropped the pre-roid Holyfield but lost by KO anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Cooper, basically a Frazier after many years of roids himself. Nice try!
I was not trying anything just making a commentQuote:
Originally Posted by Max PowerYes, Bert Cooper dropped the pre-roid Holyfield but lost by KO anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Cooper, basically a Frazier after many years of roids himself. Nice try!
Joe Frazier would be wasted, most of the time in the first round, by virtually any fighter from the 90's onwards. He could not handle a hard punch.
Joe Frazier was about as glassed jawed as they come. The reason Foreman took 6 times to finish him was because Foreman was a push puncher and an arm puncher, not a concussive hitter. He never really clocked a decent opponent cold with 1 punch.
Frazier ducked all hard punchers of his era. He had to fight Foreman because it was his mandatory.
Holyfield beat fucking Mike Tyson and even knocked him out!
The fact that a chinny, featherfisted, punch bag half blind dwarf like Frazier could ever become a HW champion is testament to how weak the era was.
Who did Joe Frazier avoid? What big punchers?
You are really talking rubbish.
The ma was undisputed champion and had one of the longest reigns. Do not disrespect the great heavyweight champion and then praise bums of this year.
Otherwise I will get angry. :)
with all due consideration, this is about as bad as Paxtom's constant Ali-bashing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
I respect Joe Frazier, the BOXER.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I do not respect Joe Frazier, the mythology!
In terms of ATGness, Frazier > Leapai (obviously)
In terms of H2H Leapai > Frazier (also obviously)
what?
Joe Frazier was champion and olympic gold medalist and Leapai is not. How dare you equate the 2 together.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max PowerI respect Joe Frazier, the BOXER.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I do not respect Joe Frazier, the mythology!
In terms of ATGness, Frazier > Leapai (obviously)
In terms of H2H Leapai > Frazier (also obviously)
I didn't equate the 2 together at all, I clearly separated them totally.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterJoe Frazier was champion and olympic gold medalist and Leapai is not. How dare you equate the 2 together.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max PowerI respect Joe Frazier, the BOXER.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I do not respect Joe Frazier, the mythology!
In terms of ATGness, Frazier > Leapai (obviously)
In terms of H2H Leapai > Frazier (also obviously)
In Frazier's era, he won a gold medal and the HW championship. Against the criteria of his day, he achieved greatness that Alex Leapai does not even deserve a sniff at by the criteria of HIS era.
Agaisnt the criteria of Leapai's era though, Joe Frazier would never make it to the national or maybe even state side at Amateurm let alone the Olympics. He would never develop any aspirations to become a pro boxer at all because he wouldn't be good enough and were he to try he would never pass the medical test to be registered because he was half-blind (assuming that incident still occurred).
And were the Joe Frazier that WAS ever to have met the Leapai that IS in the same ring under some circumstance, Leapai would knock Frazier out in the first round under pretty much ANY circumstances! That is a fact!
And it takes nothing away from Frazier's greatness to say that! Frazier is STILL great! What he did in 1971 is still there. It will ALWAYS be there. It cannot NOT be there.
But that WAS 1971. And it is now nearly 2015!
Do not call Joe blind, bum or avoiding punchers then.
What a load of rubbish you and Bill Paxo, must do lunch together you like Bill must have had to manyQuote:
Originally Posted by Max PowerI didn't equate the 2 together at all, I clearly separated them totally.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterJoe Frazier was champion and olympic gold medalist and Leapai is not. How dare you equate the 2 together.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max PowerI respect Joe Frazier, the BOXER.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I do not respect Joe Frazier, the mythology!
In terms of ATGness, Frazier > Leapai (obviously)
In terms of H2H Leapai > Frazier (also obviously)
In Frazier's era, he won a gold medal and the HW championship. Against the criteria of his day, he achieved greatness that Alex Leapai does not even deserve a sniff at by the criteria of HIS era.
Agaisnt the criteria of Leapai's era though, Joe Frazier would never make it to the national or maybe even state side at Amateurm let alone the Olympics. He would never develop any aspirations to become a pro boxer at all because he wouldn't be good enough and were he to try he would never pass the medical test to be registered because he was half-blind (assuming that incident still occurred).
And were the Joe Frazier that WAS ever to have met the Leapai that IS in the same ring under some circumstance, Leapai would knock Frazier out in the first round under pretty much ANY circumstances! That is a fact!
And it takes nothing away from Frazier's greatness to say that! Frazier is STILL great! What he did in 1971 is still there. It will ALWAYS be there. It cannot NOT be there.
But that WAS 1971. And it is now nearly 2015!
stupid tablets.:vd:
I HAVE called Joe a bum previously so you have got me there, but I refrained myself this time by omitting that single derogatory comment out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
By my OWN little rating system, Frazier only lost 4 fights, hence, is not a bum.
But whether he ducked them or happenstance was the case, he did not fight the bigger punchers of his era like Mac Foster, Earnie Shavers, Sonny Liston, Ken Norton, Cleveland Williams, Ron Lyle etc.
And that Frazier was blind on 1 eye is simply a fact. It is what it is.
You can pump up Frazier's heart and talent for achieving what he did DESPITE being blind on 1 eye.
But you can also look at it that to be able to become HW champ seeing with only 1 eye as some kind of evidence of a weak era.
You could say the same thing about Wlad being unbeaten for 10 years and having 17 defences.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max PowerI HAVE called Joe a bum previously so you have got me there, but I refrained myself this time by omitting that single derogatory comment out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
By my OWN little rating system, Frazier only lost 4 fights, hence, is not a bum.
But whether he ducked them or happenstance was the case, he did not fight the bigger punchers of his era like Mac Foster, Earnie Shavers, Sonny Liston, Ken Norton, Cleveland Williams, Ron Lyle etc.
And that Frazier was blind on 1 eye is simply a fact. It is what it is.
You can pump up Frazier's heart and talent for achieving what he did DESPITE being blind on 1 eye.
But you can also look at it that to be able to become HW champ seeing with only 1 eye as some kind of evidence of a weak era.
Joe was already shot--I say Joe was shot about 60% after the brutal beating Ali laid on him on March 8, 1971, and Big George Foreaman took the other 40% out of him in January 1973 in Kingston, Jamaica. Frazier had nothign left after that. Cleveland wms? He was done by the time Joe won the Gold and was any kind of contender. Why would Joe fight HIM? Liston was already done in '65. Why woud Joe fight HIM? Lyle and Shavers peaked way after Joe was already shot. And Norton wasnt a big puncher AT ALL>Quote:
Originally Posted by Max PowerI HAVE called Joe a bum previously so you have got me there, but I refrained myself this time by omitting that single derogatory comment out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
By my OWN little rating system, Frazier only lost 4 fights, hence, is not a bum.
But whether he ducked them or happenstance was the case, he did not fight the bigger punchers of his era like Mac Foster, Earnie Shavers, Sonny Liston, Ken Norton, Cleveland Williams, Ron Lyle etc.
And that Frazier was blind on 1 eye is simply a fact. It is what it is.
You can pump up Frazier's heart and talent for achieving what he did DESPITE being blind on 1 eye.
But you can also look at it that to be able to become HW champ seeing with only 1 eye as some kind of evidence of a weak era.
Give Joe some credit for taking a 2nd fight with Goerge Foreman in 1975. How's that 2nd fight "avoiding the big punchers"?
Alright so happenstance has it then.Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
As a matter of fact I don't think ANY of those guys are REALLY hard punchers compared with now times but they were considered so in those days.
Yes, fair enough, I'll concede to you Joe had heart to face Foreman again, I'll never claim he ducked hard punchers again.
Fact is there simply weren't any around really except Foreman.
"Mahammad Ali- brutal beating left him 60% shot"? What, in FOTC?
Come on though, Frazier goes 15 rounds without a KO with one of the most featherfisted boxers of all time and he is shot? You already had me with the rest of your statement, I wouldn't have mentioned that!
Frazier pasted Ali in 71. He would have scored the KO had he had a hard punch himself!
Anyway I fail to see how any of this makes a case for Joe to have a competitive fight with Holyfield.
Holyfield hit far harder than Joe, was faster, longer, stronger, iron chinned and elite skilled by comparison.
Take reflexless powder puff Ali out of FOTC and insert Evander of ANY time and Joe ain't going 15, 12, or even 6 I don't reckon.
I don't want to put up pics or vids again but if you seen Frazier up against Holyfield a small child could see immediately there's no contest.
Why disrespect Ali you Muppet?
Ali had one of the best chins in history.
No one says Ali was a knockout artist either.
You make concessions and then insult the fighters further.
On what grounds?Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Being knocked by 185lb Cooper who had a bummy record?
Atleast when Wladimir got knocked down by a bum it was by a man mountain puncher and through exhaustion.
Muhammad Ali grew a lot stronger in his second career (his REAL prime) and DID have an iron chin in relation to his era.
But then again, the time he met a really hard puncher Foreman, he didn't really take any head shots because he was tortoise shelled on the ropes. Good on him for that, whatever works, he got the win.
But I don't think you can make a case for one of the hardest chins in "history" by taking shots from Frazier!
Imagine if we replaced Frazier's hooks with say, Tommy Morrison's?
Faster, sharper and about 3x harder? Really think his "chin" would have saved him then?
Chin is relative to the era, obviously. Claiming best in "history" can only include boxers up to that point in time. As it goes on there will be more and more boxers that both hit harder and take punches.
Ali withstood the punches of the strongest fighters in history. Fact.
Wlad has a vulnerable chin. You can see that in him anytime a fighter gets in close. It is not smart it is scared and unnecessary. The Povetkin fight illustrated that clearly.
Any boxer would have a vulnerable chin against this crop of fighters. Have a look at the bloody guys he fights! They are the hardest punchers the world has ever seen. It is DEFINITELY smart. If he was scared, he wouldn't get in there with them. It is unnecessary if you want to score lots of early round KO's. It is DEFINITELY necessary if you want to barely get hit, win nearly every round of boxing you fight and go 10 years without a loss.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Ali withstood the strongest fighters in history did he? LOL Yeah right! Most of Ali's opponents were not even real HW's. Get real!
If they were not heavyweights what were they lightweights? ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Max PowerAny boxer would have a vulnerable chin against this crop of fighters. Have a look at the bloody guys he fights! They are the hardest punchers the world has ever seen. It is DEFINITELY smart. If he was scared, he wouldn't get in there with them. It is unnecessary if you want to score lots of early round KO's. It is DEFINITELY necessary if you want to barely get hit, win nearly every round of boxing you fight and go 10 years without a loss.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Ali withstood the strongest fighters in history did he? LOL Yeah right! Most of Ali's opponents were not even real HW's. Get real!
Follow me closely here, not just Master but all of the OTNB..Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterIf they were not heavyweights what were they lightweights? ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Max PowerAny boxer would have a vulnerable chin against this crop of fighters. Have a look at the bloody guys he fights! They are the hardest punchers the world has ever seen. It is DEFINITELY smart. If he was scared, he wouldn't get in there with them. It is unnecessary if you want to score lots of early round KO's. It is DEFINITELY necessary if you want to barely get hit, win nearly every round of boxing you fight and go 10 years without a loss.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Ali withstood the strongest fighters in history did he? LOL Yeah right! Most of Ali's opponents were not even real HW's. Get real!
This is how we would describe Ali's opponents today very briefly...
Ali himself would be described as a former Cruiser and light HW.
Of Ali's opponents, 50%, HALF of them were CRUISERWEIGHTS or even light-HW's! And Wladmir would not even be ALLOWED to knock them out.
Of the remaining opponents, another HALF of them would be considered FORMER CW's (or former subs). Wladimir was never troubled by any such opponents and please note the BEST ones in this class he fought, (Chambers, Haye, Byrd) were several leagues better than any of the comparable oppnents of Ali's (and I would say even of Ali himself!)
OF the remaining QUARTER of Ali's opponnts, the natural HW's, who ALWAYS boxed over 200+, MOST of them were bums!
Now given all of this, Wladimir was OUTWEIGED as often as he outweighed.
And Ali OUTWEIGHED his opponents in 70%! of his fights (almost all of them in his 60's reign!)
So no, they were HW's by the THEN standard. They are NOT HW's by today's standard.
They were quality HW's by the THEN standard. Not quality HW's by TODAYS standard.
And how did they fare against their opposition? Despite Wladimir's opposition objectively being about 100x better than Ali's, everything considered, Ali STRUGGLD BADLY throughout his whole career, whilst Wladimir has delivered the most dominant display of boxing ever, barely ever losing a single round the whole time and knocking most of his oppoennts out!
I would say that's case closed!
The Clay/Ali era, was an unusually weak era beyond any doubt, even given the timeframe!
This is why you have to be careful comparing different eras. in Ali's era, the vast majority of HW's are smaller than today. nowadays ,they also have much more high tech training facilities , various supplements (even the legal ones) that benefit athletes of today. Fuck me, they should be better Today!
Even in other sports this is the case . for example, Athletics, World Records get beat and times go down all the time. Jesse Owens wouldn't make an Olympic final now, does that mean a guy who finishes last in the final is greater than Jesse Owens? that's Bullshit!
and when it comes to Ali, I have to take issue a bit . I would say he is about the same size (6 foot 2 or 3 , 210LBS.) as Haye. I would wager that most people believe Ali would beat Haye. and that is despite the fact that Ali's prime was 45 years ago, he didn't have access to the training facilities and techniques that Haye did and didn't have the benefit of nutrition and supplement advances that Haye has.
With all those disadvantages Ali had , the only boxer who I can think of who succeeded in similar circumstances was Rocky vs Drago!!! :rolleyes:
there has to be a bit of licence for the era someone was born in, or it's pointless even talking about it.
You really are an imbecile of course I am talking about those standards as that is all Ali could do is fight in those standards just as Wlad can fight in these standards.
20 years from now we will get Max Power junior talking the same crap you will about Wlad because they may be considered small.
Bigger does not mean better. I have no doubt Tyson and Lewis would wipe the current peak and experienced Wlad. Tyson would be regarded as smaller but he certainly hit harder.
Maybe your right there Master. Lennox might beat Wlad, but then again Lennox struggled with HEAPS of opponents that we pretty much know would never lose a round against. And Tyson was tied up by Green and Tillis, dudes who would never step into a ring with current Wladimir, and he was thoroughly bashed badly by featherfist bummy Buster Douglas. So equally plausible is Wladimir outboxes Lennox and dismantles Tyson, probably knocking both out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Sorry but in a H2H match up, bigger statistically gives you a MAJOR advantage. Therefore is IS better, not by assumption, but by incontivertible fact.
A good big man, beats a good little man all else equal. AND a heavy bum can cause more problems sometimes than a light skilled fighter because they are often more dangerous!
There will only be a Max Jnr 20 years from now sprouting similar stuff about this generation if my generation of fans become as naïve as the OTNB are today and assume that the Klitschko era will never be beaten and featured boxers of the highest quality and the new era is inept (as occurs today). However I think we are now in an awakening.
For the first time in history, many of us have woken up and realised we ARE in the best era NOW, BEFORE that era is long in the past (as has happened since the dawn of boxing. It has been claimed that boxing has been getting progressively worse since its inception!)
Good one buddy, you compare featherfist Ali to knockout artist Haye. Haye has some of the most outstanding reflexes ever seen at HW ever. Ali was a human punching bag of unmatched disgrace. At any given weight, Haye is heaps faster than Ali, not to mention several times more powerful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
Ali would not last more than 3 rounds with David Haye, not under any circumstances!
Haye would KO Ali with or without a broken toe,! I BET YOUR GOOD TO YOUR WIFE YOU NEVER GO HOME.:vd:Quote:
Originally Posted by Max PowerGood one buddy, you compare featherfist Ali to knockout artist Haye. Haye has some of the most outstanding reflexes ever seen at HW ever. Ali was a human punching bag of unmatched disgrace. At any given weight, Haye is heaps faster than Ali, not to mention several times more powerful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
Ali would not last more than 3 rounds with David Haye, not under any circumstances!
I just don't understand why so much stock is put into Haye at heavyweight based on beating up John Ruiz. It has to be that because he certainly has not done anything else there, literally.