Monday, November 7, 2011

Joe Frazier: In the Shadow of the Greatest

Joe Frazier died of liver cancer tonight at the age of 67. I realize there's not much I can say about him that hasn't been said before, or that won't be said in the coming hours and days, but few celebrity deaths have meant so much to me, and I feel like I should write something about it anyway.

*****

To say that Joe Frazier was part of my childhood would be a bit of an overstatement. His last meaningful fight took place in 1976, nine years before I was born, but still, like Bradshaw or Staubach, I knew him. Boxing, perhaps even more than baseball, was a sport that I immediately latched onto. For a five year old, it was easy to understand; boxing's rule book is refreshingly short. You knock the other guy out, and you win. If you can't knock the other guy out, then the judges pick whoever performed the best. Simple. My earliest boxing memory is Buster Douglas's shocking upset of Mike Tyson; one of the greatest aspects of sports is that you can precisely date any event. I was not even four and a half years old at the time of the fight, which took place on February 11, 1990. I remember this, and yet I cannot recall a time in my life when I didn't know Joe Frazier.

The previous paragraph was difficult to write, and it required a great deal of editing and rewriting, for reasons that are completely unavoidable when discussing Frazier. This is a tribute to Joe Frazier, and yet it was almost impossible to write without making a reference to Muhammad Ali. For better or worse, Frazier's career will always be defined by his three fights against Ali. Though the second match (a unanimous decision in favor of Ali) is largely forgotten, the first ("The Fight of the Century") and the third ("The Thrilla in Manila") have become part of the boxing pantheon. As undeniably great as those matches were, I think it's a shame that Frazier has become just another part of Ali's legacy. After all, 92% of Frazier's fights were against other people. While I consider Muhammad Ali to be my idol and an unimpeachable legend, it is unfair to reduce his greatest rival to a footnote.

But it is also true that without Ali, Frazier's career likely would have been impressive but ultimately forgettable, with his greatest victories coming against Jimmy Ellis and Jerry Quarry, two solid contenders, no doubt, but not genuine threats. Frazier never fought Sonny Liston. He never fought Ron Lyle, Kenny Norton, or Leon Spinks. In the end, he lost four of his five most famous fights. After his incredible victory over Ali in 1971, he was annihilated by George
Foreman ("Down goes Frazier!" is still one of the most salient parts of Joe's legacy for me). The next three years would result in similar setbacks: the 1974 loss to Ali in the Garden, the TKO loss in the Thrilla in 1975, and yet another knockout loss to Foreman in 1976, in what would prove to be the final fight of his career, save for an abortive comeback bid in 1981 that resulted in a majority draw against journeyman Floyd Cummings. As understandably bitter as Frazier was toward Ali, he had to realize that his career peaked when Ali hit the canvas in round 15 of their 1971 bout. And no matter how much the subsequent losses hurt him, he always had this to fall back on: Ali never knocked him down.

Ali-Frazier I was a defining cultural moment in the United States, a symbolic struggle between races, religions, classes, and generations. Much to Frazier's dismay, and through no fault of his own, he was cast as the representative of White America, of the Establishment, and he became the darling of the elite class. Most painful for him was the knowledge that this was not a narrative that the media came up with on its own, but a storyline invented by Ali himself.

"He's not like me. He's the other type Negro. He's the Uncle Tom!" Ali said on a television interview program, in but one example of the type of rhetoric he used throughout the promotion of the fight.

Of course, Ali knew better. Frazier was raised in poverty that Ali could never imagine. In virtually every way imaginable, Frazier was "more black" than Ali. The only "sin" Frazier had committed was taking financial backing for his career from a group of rich white men. But what Ali also knew is that these words were deeply hurtful to Frazier, who was seemingly unable to take a joke, or didn't know that Ali was just trying to draw heat for the fight, or more likely, some combination of the two. When Frazier floored Ali in the final round, it had nothing to do with white vs. black or Christian vs. Muslim; it was an act of purification. When Frazier threw that left hook, Ali's words about Joe being too ugly, or too slow, or too dumb went out the window. I have still never seen a punch that is comparable in terms of pure aesthetic perfection.
















Not that it stopped Ali, who continued his torrent of insults toward Frazier until the end of their careers. Even the phrase "Thrilla in Manila" originated as a jibe at Frazier: "It's gonna be a thrilla, and a chilla, and a killa, when I get the gorilla in Manila." For 46 minutes, the two men brutalized each other, and sadly, inevitably, neither was ever the same. When Frazier's corner stopped the fight after round 14, Ali was too tired to even celebrate. He later claimed, "It was the closest thing to dying that I know of."

Sad, too, is the fact that Joe never truly forgave Ali. Even as Muhammad morphed into a national treasure, Frazier viewed his deteriorating physical condition as karmic retribution, penance for all the evils he had perpetrated. Finally, for the first time, Frazier was the man who had all the words, while Ali's condition had rendered him virtually unable to speak. Obviously, I cannot truly understand what it was like to be on the receiving end, but I wish the two had been able to make amends. Ali harbored no ill will toward Frazier, viewing their press battles as nothing more than promotional stunts. But to Joe it was deadly serious. As recently as five years ago, if you called Joe Frazier's cell phone, you heard this voice mail message:


Such words are cruel and difficult to forgive, but I can almost understand them. Frazier lived in Ali's shadow for over 40 years, and he knew, maybe more than anybody else, that he had done as much for Muhammad as Muhammad had done for him. Yes, Ali will always have more cultural significance; he deserves that, and it isn't the result of some kind of anti-Frazier bias. Ali was larger than life, and he stood for ideals that carried far beyond the boundaries of the boxing ring. But people who know boxing will never forget Joe Frazier stalking his prey around the ring, taking unbelievable amounts of punishment, and unleashing the most devastating left hook the world has ever seen. Nobody will ever take that away from him. For a brief moment, on the night of March 8, 1971, Frazier stood over a fallen Ali. He had walked through it all, and at least for a little while, he was the greatest.















*****
I've realized that there's a ton more stuff I could say about Joe Frazier, and so I've neglected an entire section about George Foreman that I had planned to write. I know there have been millions of words written about Ali-Frazier (Ali's name always comes first, and I'm not convinced it's just because of alphabetical order), but after giving it some thought, I realized that the two are such a huge part of one another that it's not even possible to tell one's life story without the other playing a key role. I've seen so many documentaries and read so many stories from Ali's perspective, but I'd love to see something through the eyes of Frazier. The closest I've seen comes from his brief segment in Facing Ali, which was amazing but left me desperately wanting more. I hope that time is kind to Frazier. His body of work is so much shorter than so many of the other greatest fighters (37 fights, compared to Ali's 61 and Foreman's 81), but anybody who's ever actually watched him won't be fooled by his lack of "quality wins." He was the first man to ever beat Muhammad Ali, and I'm not sure that Joe ever really needed another victory after that. He had made his peace.

Sunday, June 26, 2011

Manic Monday at Wimbledon

Who says this is a young man's game? Granted, "young" in the tennis world means something quite different than it does almost anywhere else, but in any case, this year's Wimbledon round of 16 seems like it contains a glut of players who are just about ready to enter the old folks' home. It makes the appearance of 18-year-old Bernard Tomic all the more striking. What's this whippersnapper doing here? Xavier Malisse and Michael Llodra are even representing the over-30 crowd, that group of players whose golf equivalents would have carried their AARP cards for well over a decade (Marat Safin, aged 31, is now playing on the seniors' tennis tour). Among the other survivors is a cadre of 29-year-olds, Mardy Fish, Lukasz Kubot, Feliciano Lopez, David Ferrer, Mikhail Youzhny, and of course, Roger Federer. For those scoring at home, that means that half of the remaining field is 29 or older (in comparison, only 5 of 16 at the French Open and 4 of 16 at the Australian Open were that old).

All of these things are true, but at the same time, there is a feeling of pointlessness surrounding it. None of these guys, except for Federer, has any shot of winning the tournament. The actual contenders are in their early to mid-20s; for the uninitiated, 22 of the last 25 majors have been won by either Federer or Rafael Nadal, while Novak Djokovic took two and Juan Martin del Potro (Nadal's opponent Monday) won the other. It seems almost inconceivable that anybody else might win it all this year, even poor Andy Murray, who will be crucified in the press if he achieves anything short of holding up the championship trophy next Sunday. But that's thinking big picture. In the short term, a lot of different things could happen. Presumably, everybody left believes, however foolishly, that they can still win the whole thing. It's still early enough in the tournament for somebody to forget his place and pull off an upset that will set the stage for a miraculous run to the title one of the other favorites to win instead. In order, starting at the top of the draw:

(1) Rafael Nadal vs. (24) Juan Martin del Potro
I would consider this to be the best of two marquee match-ups on the day. Nadal's credentials speak for themselves: 10 overall major titles, 2-time Wimbledon champ, etc., but the (24) next to del Potro's name is very misleading. In truth, he is the fifth best player in the world, but he is still working his way back up the rankings after missing all of 2010 with a wrist injury. Del Potro steamrolled Nadal 2, 2, and 2 on his way to the 2009 U.S. Open title, but Nadal leads the overall head-to-head 6-3 and won their only grass court match.

This is a very dangerous match for Rafa, but I expect he'll pull it out. Nadal in 5.

(10) Mardy Fish vs. (6) Tomas Berdych
It's a borderline miracle that Mardy made it this far, but all good things have to come to an end. Berdych made the final here at Wimbledon last year, and I just don't believe Fish has the firepower to end his run this time around. At least he got an American into the second week for a change.

Berdych in 3.

(4) Andy Murray vs. (17) Richard Gasquet
This is the second best match-up among the round of 16 contests. It's intriguing on a few different levels. First of all, there's the inevitable circus that surrounds all of Murray's matches at SW19. Second, they both have the potential to turn into total headcases on the court (and off the court, in Gasquet's case). Finally, they're both supremely talented tennis players. Murray has come close but never gotten over the hump. Gasquet possesses top 5 talent but is one of the few psychologically frail players you'll see on the men's tour. Like Nadal, Murray has a tremendously dangerous match, especially considering that he's guaranteed to get an unseeded player in the quarters (either Kubot or Lopez), meaning he'll be an overwhelming favorite to reach the semis. In other words, the pressure will be suffocating.

Still, I feel like Murray will prevail (or do I just hope it?). Murray in 4.

Lukasz Kubot vs. Feliciano Lopez
What are these guys doing here? Feliciano Lopez has spent more time modeling than playing tennis, and Kubot... well, I don't really know what he does. Lopez upset Roddick, and though he doesn't have the game to knock off an elite player, he has more than enough to defeat Kubot.

Following the principle of "if I don't know what you look like, you can't be in the Wimbledon quarters," Lopez wins in 3.

(7) David Ferrer vs. (12) Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
This has the potential to be an entertaining match, even though I don't consider either to be top-tier talent. Ferrer is a tremendously dogged competitor who makes up for more or less average strokes by sheer force of will, and Tsonga, the former Australian Open finalist, is a powerful but inconsistent baseliner. They are playing for the right to be Federer's sacrificial lamb in the quarterfinals.

Tough to call, but I think Tsonga takes it in 5.

(3) Roger Federer vs. (18) Mikhail Youzhny
Ok, so Youzhny is no jabroni. He's a solid veteran who's stayed around his current ranking for many years now, made some nice runs in majors (even beat Nadal once!), etc., etc. But let's be clear. Roger Federer has won this tournament six times and hasn't lost before the quarterfinals of any major since the Harding administration. Fed might have his first hiccup of the tournament, but there's no possible way he loses.

Federer in 4 (but probably 3).

Bernard Tomic vs. Xavier Malisse
Again, another match pitting two unseeded players against one another, but the contrast between these two is striking. Tomic is a teenage phenom (or so the Aussies say) who is currently around #160 in the world but will likely see that ranking rise at a rapid rate in the near future. X-Man is a journeyman Belgian who has been playing professionally literally since the time I began watching tennis (in 1999). The best I can tell, he's always been #40 in the world. He made a semifinal run at Wimbledon a few years back but has otherwise never been past the 4th round of a major. This is a match I can see going either way. What wins out: great talent and no experience or mediocre talent and tons of experience? I'll take the young guy this time around.

Tomic wins, barely, in 5. Then he gets eviscerated by Djokovic in the next round.

(2) Novak Djokovic vs. (19) Michael Llodra
Novak Djokovic is good. He's really, really good. Michael Llodra is old. And he serves and volleys (in 2011!). I'm happy for him that he made it this far, but Ward, Mello, and Lu isn't exactly a murderer's row of guys to get through to make it into the 4th round. The Djoker got his minor roadblock out of the way when he dropped a set to Marcos Baghdatis in his previous match, so it should be smooth sailing until the Federer match-up in the semis.

Djokovic in an easy 3 sets.

*****