What nobody here is thinking about
Your all
A) Being brit homers
B) The title of the thread is 60's Ali,he didnt fight Frazier or Foreman in the 60's,so your judging the Ali of the title thread,on the footage youve seen of Ali of the 70's after a 3 year layoff.Thats like trying to say the Tyson who fought Jesse Ferguson,is exactly the same as the one who lost to Lennox Lewis. If that was the case,lets dig up Joe Louis and see if he can re-win the title.
Lewis's footwork was plodding,and can not see the chin that couldnt survive Oliver "Tears" McCall surviving Ali.
Bowe,you could make a case for a motivated Bowe,but after he won the title,you couldnt get the words motivated and Bowe in to the same sentance with a forklift
Both fighters regardless,rely on cutting off the ring,that was more or less impossable with that version of Ali
Ali's only real flaw was underestimating guys,and playing,not getting dropped,or outworked. He could have dropped Patterson at any time he wanted,but he screwed around with him.Even Ali Mach 2 could have dropped Wepner easily early on,but wanted to get in some rounds,but unlike say Chuvallo or Bonavena,or Foley(etc),and I give Chuck all the credit on earth for this,he was so happy to still be standing it gave him an extra gear.But even Wepner realised in the last couple of rounds that Ali was just fooling with him,and he'd just gotten lucky on the knockdown.I often wonder looking at Ali's face when he gets up if he was just torturing the guy because he was mad about it. Ali definitly could be like that so its possible.
Like it or not,we still discuss and compare to Ali,even though he hasnt been able to hold a cup of coffee for over 20 years now,is he was just that damned good.Somehow you cant seem to get a very rousing 4 page Ken Norton debate going