The clarified version of that is:Originally Posted by Jimboogie
One year does not a decline make.![]()
The clarified version of that is:Originally Posted by Jimboogie
One year does not a decline make.![]()
Just editedOriginally Posted by Jimboogie
If Foreman/Frazier was two greats in their prime
Ali beats Foreman 1 year after Frazier/Ali 1
So Frazier/Ali 1 would logically be two greats in their prime
And if Foreman/Frazier was two greats in their prime
Ali/Frazier 2 happened a year after it
What a difference a year makes, or so the saying goes
Na, its all about getting the beating of your life and never really recovering from it.
Just ask Iron Mike![]()
Hidden Content
Original & Best: The Sugar Man
Which is of course why Frazier wiped out former titlest Jimmy Ellis and perenial contender Jerry Quarry in his next two fights after Ali/Frazier 2Originally Posted by Jimboogie
He was only 32 when he packed it in,these days that would be a spring chicken
Ali - Foreman was definitely a great heavyweight beating a prime heavyweight. It's hard because anytime anyone loses, people are going to say that they weren't prime because the general feeling is that prime fighters just don't lose bouts. Some people say a fighter's prime last one bout, I think that's a peak not a prime.
But I definitely think the Frazier Ali beat was prime. The Foreman he beat was certainly prime.
Johnson had had the title for like 8 years before losing to Willard, and he was slow. He was good, but he wasn't prime. I'd say that the Tyson Buster beat was prime. We know Mike or his corner wasn't ready for a fight, but he was still considered unbeatable and had he knocked Buster out in that fight, we wouldn't have pointed to that as not being a prime Tyson.
Id certainly add Homes/Cooney
That was a great fight, one of my favorite ever in fact and while Cooney hit hard as hell, I'd stray very far from calling him a great fighter.
Its very rare that a Heavyweight beats a 'great' in their prime
Of course it is because whoever the fighter is, as soon as they lose people will say he wasnt in his prime. Its the first excuse you hear after any high profile popular fighter is beaten.
Originally Posted by beerjelly
Exactly my point. CC.
At that point though Cooney was 25-0,and had just scored succesive knockouts on Ken Norton,Ron Lyle,and Jimmy Young,matter of fact he won his next 3 fights by KO,until finally sucumbing to age and Michael Spinks in 87Originally Posted by amat
the problem is some fighters (lewis) get credit for beating past it greats and some don't!
Bowe/Holyfield
Douglas/Tyson sort of.
cc JimB
Lennox Lewis lost to Oliver McCall and Hasim Rahman, during his run... especially Rahman, who he never should have lost to.
Well, he redeemed himself in the rematch.
Holyfield lost during his run in prime years too.
Think Ali beat a old Liston he was like 35-38 maybe even older then that not taking anything away form Ali but in my book if you are 35 or 38 you are not a prime fighter anymore.
I agree with you Jim Boogie, Ali's beating of Foreman was probably the only time a 'prime' heavyweight was defeated. However others could argue that Foreman hadn't fully developed his skills at that point becuase he was so used to knocking people out.
Ultimately it's a self fufilling prophecy, a fighter loses, there is ALWAYS a reason or excuse.
But imo Tyson was destoyed by Douglas in his prime. I mean how old was Tyson then? 26?
No way you could argue he was past it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks