What if there was no Ali, Frazier and Foreman?

The recent death of Joe Frazier got me thinking again about what Joe's career might have looked like without Ali and this led me to start thinking about rhe heavyweight division in the 60's and 70's if Ali hadn't been around. In addition to the original question about how Frazier's career might have been viewed differently, I also wondered about Liston and how long he might have held onto the title and also how Foreman's career would have panned out had he not had the mentally damaging defeat in Zaire.

In thinking about these questions, I started wondering how the heavyweight boxing scene would have looked in the 60's and 70's without Ali, Frazier and Foreman. Clearly it would no longer be known as the golden age of heavyweight boxing but who would benefit the most from their absence?

• Does anyone break through in the 60's to take Liston's title away from him or does he see out much the remainder of the decade and retire as champion having seen off all credible challengers?

• Does Norton win the title in the ring?

• Does Holmes pick up the title earlier and go on to reign for even longer than he did? Is Holmes more fondly remembered because he isn't in the shadow of the three great chammpions who went before him? Perhaps Holmes is regarded as the 2nd greatest heavyweight of all time behind Louis? Perhaps some argue that he is the greatest?

• What happens to men that are often seen as a footnote to the careers of Ali, Frazier and Foreman. Fighters such as Quarry, Ellis, Terrel, Mathis, Lyle and Young.

Holmes would gain the most in the absence of all three fighters and I'm pretty sure that Larry would have been a bit less bitter at being viewed as potentially the greatest heavyweight of all time by anyone outside his own head.

I imagine Liston would have held the title until the mid 60s.

Following that there would be a bit of a scramble between the Quarrys,Ellis, Bonavenas etc until Norton arived.

Norton holds the title for the most part in the 70s.

I think the biggest question mark is over Holmes. He only just about beat Norton in the late 70s for the title and its entirely possible he could have got his title shot sooner. Maybe he doesnt beat Norton at an earlier date.

So in my view Norton would be the biggest beneficiary and potentially a long reigning champion himself.

Boxing would probably be in a worse state today.

Windy wouldn't be one of our mods.

HW boxing today would be seen in not such a bad light. Every champion since Ali up to Tyson was compared back to the Ali/Frazier/Foreman. Today - its Ali/Frazier/Foreman/Tyson and if a fighter doesn't match up today - they're written off as a bum.

I didnt really consider Tyson, but in retrospect without Ali/Frazier/Foreman the impact he would have had on the sport would have been even more phenomenal than it was.

Without Ali to start with would boxing have been in the publics consciousness enough for any boxer to make an impact?

manos de piedra wrote:I didnt really consider Tyson, but in retrospect without Ali/Frazier/Foreman the impact he would have had on the sport would have been even more phenomenal than it was.

We'd quite possibly be referring to him as a Dempsey like figure - which, in some respects, he was.

I think its very difficult to ascertain how things would have panned out.

In a basic sense you would probably guess that Liston and Norton enjoy longer reigns as they were probably the two standouts outside Ali/Frazier/Foreman. Certainly Liston does anyway without Ali to dethrone him.

I would probably have to disagree with the view that Norton or Holmes are the biggest beneficiaries. For me Liston would be very much the winner in this. Its difficult to overemphasis how crippling the losses to Ali were to both his reputation, career and ultimate legacy. We have to remember that while Liston was generally unpopular and unappreciated, he was viewed as a massively formidable heavyweight and was also highly talented. One could say he was very unlucky to run into a young Clay when he did as there potentially werent a great many other heavyweights in history that have the beating of him head to head. Given the division at the time if there was no Ali around its easy to believe that Liston rules long and in devastating fashion. Contenders like London, Cooper, Mildenberger, Folley, Terrell and others would most likely have been crushed by Liston who I see been able to reign into the early 1970s and potentially retiring then as one of the most dominant heavyweights of all time. a stark contrast to how his legacy ended up due to Ali.

Depending on when Liston retired, I would say Norton is the most likely candidate to take over but I dont really see him being a long reigning or dominant champion notwithstanding he would surely win the title at some point. It could descend into a bit of a round robin with the likes of Norton, Holmes, Shavers, Quarry, Young and so on all vying for the title in the mid to late 1970s with Holmes eventually emerging as the next long reigning champion. Although potentially after a loss or two if he was thron into the title mix earlier than he was in reality.

Interesting point about Liston, CL. No doubt that he would have reigned longer than he did and could well have gone on into the '70's. I had him down as retiring in the late 60's but I guess there's nothing to stop him going on for a couple of years. I wonder if this would have saved him from his ultimate fate?

One name I didn't mention in the article was Bob Foster. Without Frazier and Ali could he have claimed the heavyweight title whilst still light heavy champion. He was brutally dealt with by Frazier and comfortably beaten by Ali and was also defeated in earlier encounters with Folley and Terrell but there is the possibility that in an open field, post-Liston, that he does manage to get his hands on the title. A remote chance but certainly a possibility.

I suppose on reflection you may be right about Liston, although I guess it depends on what way you look at it. Liston is usually regarded as a great heavyweight even after the losses to Ali whereas a guy like Norton was basically frozen out due to having to contend with four of the greatest heavyweights of all time in Ali, Foreman, Frazier and Holmes. If you take three of those away, and consider he may have faced Holmes at a more favourable time as a result its quite possible that Norton becomes seen as a great heavyweight as opposed to the contendership status he currently has. So he has a huge amount to gain himself and could make a massive leap up the rankings.

I would agree with the point on Liston also though but I think its close between the two as to who culd potentially have benefited more overall.

I would agree that Liston and Norton would be the main beneficiaries in this scenario (with perhaps Patterson as well, since he was still a legit challenger for the title in the late 60's/early 70's, and so could fill the gap between the two in the "round-robin" scenario as discussed above).

Just one quick point though, Liston was not at his peak when he faced Clay/Ali, not least because he was likely to be considerably older than he said, no one knew for sure how old he was. I'd say there were at least 3-5 years difference between is real age, and what was quoted.

Very interesting thread BTW.

That is true, but as good as Patterson was (I say very), you would struggle to find a fighter who suited Liston more:- somone a lot smaller, comes forward and has a questionable chin+was totally intimidated.

I think most people would agree that it was the run up to the title for which Liston is said to be in his prime. His fights post-Patterson, while credible were not of the same standard, nor were the opposition.

I'd say Liston's peak was probably his second fight with Cleavland Williams, which was about 1960, 4 years before he faced Clay.

Agree with many that Liston would be the greatest benificary of your scenario. I think he sometimes gets dealt an unfair hand due to the Clay defeats and really was a skilled fighter as well as a beast. He was in no way at his peak against Ali but feel he'd have more than enough to deal with what he would have had to face in Ali's absence.

The likes of Quarry and Chuvalo may have a chance of picking up a belt. I don't see anyone capable of dominating post Liston untill Big Lar and that includes Norton..