In his prime how good do you feel Joe Frazier was?

[evangelista !?]

great fighter, just wondering why he lose against foreman

[GJC]

Apart from me,Where does he fail to get respect? The guy just got his own documentary dedicated to carving up the legacy of his long time rival,HBO certainly respected Frazier enough to air this documentary,Ignorant casual,boxing fans respected Frazier enough to believe that he really was the victim they tried to portray him as

The is another guy on here mrboxer I think his name is who states that Frazier couldn't beat anyone in the current top 50.
The documentary you refer to was the Thrilla in Manilla I assume?
I thought it was balanced in so far as both of them came out quite badly to be honest.
Read Ghosts of Manilla on which I assume it was based which I much preferred.

[BigMacFoster]

The day I run out of toilet paper,Is the day that is read a boxing book,I could care less about what some old decrepit fart has to say on boxing,Most boxing books have an agenda,No matter who they are written by.

My issue is with their portraying of Joe frazier as a victim of Ali's legacy,

frazier is a product of Ali's legacy,The only reason he is remembered is because of Ali.

If you wish to look at a victim of Ali's legacy then look no further than Ernie "What's my name" Terrell,A former heavyweight champion and a very good fighter - remembered as nothing else than Ali's whipping boy.


Where is Terrell's documentary? Where is Terrell's pity?

Hell most people think Ali was just,in the way he treated Terrell,That Terrell reused to recognize him by his new name and deserved what he got.

Yet when Ali throws a few childish taunts in old poor joe fraziers face then it seems joe frazier has been treated worse than a **** victim.


Don't buy into frazier and Ali's supposed past close friendship either.

Nope. Anyone. Even though Foreman was and always would've been a bad stylistic matchup for him he would've given Foreman a fight at his best, not to make excuses but he really wasn't the same after the first Ali fight.

You just made an excuse

[�ringer]

To hate a subject,You must have to invest emotional time into it,I doubt most modern fans care enough for Joe frazier to actually hate him.

He get's more credit than he deserves and for you to try and portray him as underrated,unappreciated former champion shows what the powers of a documentary can do to the mind of an ignoramus.




It does say enough,It says enough about you and how delusional you are.

Hate may be a strong word, but I definitely sense a certain amount of dislike for him, to put it mildly.

I'm not trying to portray him as anything ; Joe's credentials speak for themselves, and that portrays him as the individual he is.

I just don't feel he gets the same amount of respect as many of the other Heavyweight "Greats".

And what are you even bringing up the Documentary for? I've been an avid Frazier fan since I started watching boxing in '95 ; my opinion of the man was already formed long before HBO decided to do a documentary on him.

And if I'm delusional, you're equally if not even moreso with your crackpot theories and bull**** conspiracies.

[JAB5239]

Ducking - To evade; dodge: duck responsibility; To evade a responsibility or obligation

Avoiding - To stay clear of; shun; To keep from happening

Such definitions can be found over the intenet,Pal.It really doesn't take a genius to tell the difference between the two especially in a boxing sense.



Which hadn't prevented frazier from defending his titles against two no hopers in Terry Daniels and Ron Stander.

Stop resorting back to the ducking argument,I've already explained this.

Ron Lyle was a top heavyweight from 1972 to 1976,Around the same amount of time frazier was still relevant to the heavyweight division.No fight?
I wonder why......





Please do present the argument that I gave for foster being in position to fight frazier after he lost to Quarry.

Did I ever give such an argument? I don't think I did,Lay off the fairy cakes son.





To hate a subject,You must have to invest emotional time into it,I doubt most modern fans care enough for Joe frazier to actually hate him.

He get's more credit than he deserves and for you to try and portray him as underrated,unappreciated former champion shows what the powers of a documentary can do to the mind of an ignoramus.




It does say enough,It says enough about you and how delusional you are.

This is getting old and tired. You do realize there is a reason nobody agree's with you, right Piss******?

[BigMacFoster]

Why would I want anyone to agree with me? I have my own opinions and thoughts and could care less who shares them.

I'm glad others don't share my opinions,Having someone else agree with an opinion doesn't make it anymore legitimate.

And if I'm delusional, you're equally if not even moreso with your crackpot theories and bull**** conspiracies.

There is no fooling a lie detector test.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The day I stopped taking you seriously..........Prick!

[GJC]

The day I run out of toilet paper,Is the day that is read a boxing book,I could care less about what some old decrepit fart has to say on boxing,Most boxing books have an agenda,No matter who they are written by.

My issue is with their portraying of Joe frazier as a victim of Ali's legacy,

frazier is a product of Ali's legacy,The only reason he is remembered is because of Ali.

If you wish to look at a victim of Ali's legacy then look no further than Ernie "What's my name" Terrell,A former heavyweight champion and a very good fighter - remembered as nothing else than Ali's whipping boy.


Where is Terrell's documentary? Where is Terrell's pity?

Hell most people think Ali was just,in the way he treated Terrell,That Terrell reused to recognize him by his new name and deserved what he got.

Yet when Ali throws a few childish taunts in old poor joe fraziers face then it seems joe frazier has been treated worse than a **** victim.


Don't buy into frazier and Ali's supposed past close friendship either.





You just made an excuse

Might broaden your horizons if you read the odd book Poop its how we grow as people to embrace new things, hear different views. Sure the author might have an agenda but by the same token you have a filter so should be able to weigh up whether their view holds merit.
Re Frazier, I think it is 6 of one half a dozen of the other. Ali probably did push it a bit to far but then his rivalry with Frazier lasted longer and Frazier is also thin skinned and after 30 years ought to be able to move on.
Re Terrell I would agree Ali's treatment of Terrell was cruel as was his treatment of Patterson, maybe he would have wanted to do the same to Frazier but didn't get the same opportunity.

[BigMacFoster]

Might broaden your horizons if you read the odd book Poop its how we grow as people to embrace new things, hear different views. Sure the author might have an agenda but by the same token you have a filter so should be able to weigh up whether their view holds merit.
Re Frazier, I think it is 6 of one half a dozen of the other. Ali probably did push it a bit to far but then his rivalry with Frazier lasted longer and Frazier is also thin skinned and after 30 years ought to be able to move on.
Re Terrell I would agree Ali's treatment of Terrell was cruel as was his treatment of Patterson, maybe he would have wanted to do the same to Frazier but didn't get the same opportunity.

I have read just one boxing book - Nigel Benn's biography,It was interesting to learn of his backstory especially that of his older brothers death but I cannot remember much ater his stint in the army as it just didn't interest me.

I also read limited preview sections on Ken Norton and Earnie Shavers biographies,And didn't find their boxing stories very interesting either.

Perhaps because I know of their careers and the things they are telling me is nothing new,I am more in the pocket of simply watching fights rather than a documentary or book reviewing them for me.


It doesn't matter who is writing the book or what the topic is,Any author always has an agenda

[sonnyboyx2]

I have read just one boxing book - Nigel Benn's biography,It was interesting to learn of his backstory especially that of his older brothers death but I cannot remember much ater his stint in the army as it just didn't interest me.

I also read limited preview sections on Ken Norton and Earnie Shavers biographies,And didn't find their boxing stories very interesting either.

Perhaps because I know of their careers and the things they are telling me is nothing new,I am more in the pocket of simply watching fights rather than a documentary or book reviewing them for me.


It doesn't matter who is writing the book or what the topic is,Any author always has an agenda

read the book `Dark Trade` which was Sports book of the year and the best boxing book ive ever read, it tells about Toney, Hamed, Benn, Tyson and more.. by a guy who lived with them

[GJC]

I am more in the pocket of simply watching fights rather than a documentary or book reviewing them for me.

Well they are certainly not a substitute for watching fights but can be interesting and give some background, some are better than others Hugh Mcilveney is a good writer whereas as Burt Sugar I don't much care for.

It doesn't matter who is writing the book or what the topic is,Any author always has an agenda

An author always has an opinion for sure.
An agenda? Some maybe do but not all.