Is it really DEFAMATION to post this photo?

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 13 Mar 2008, 07:14

I've tried to keep out but here I am...

Posting photos of Ali or Louis on the canvas seems pretty childish to me...

Anyway...

Frazier won the most meaningful fight of the three but Ali won the series 2-1... I do agree that Frazier's win is swept under the carpet, just as I believe Schmeling's win over Louis is...

Frazier and Schmeling's wins somehow mess up the history that the writers want to write. they want it simple and in black and white, there is no room for ambiguity as that would be too hard for the average punter to accept.

Joe and Ali were pretty much 50-50 in a head-to-head though Ali would beat more of the greats than Joe would.

I'm not sure about fingers in eyes but I never studied the film to that extent.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 13 Mar 2008, 09:07

Of course the first fight is the most meaningful; because Frazier won.

The first fight has been one of the most talked about, televised, and written about fights in history.
It's just silly to say it has been "swept under the rug".

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 13 Mar 2008, 09:34

Ambling Alp wrote:Of course the first fight is the most meaningful; because Frazier won.

The first fight has been one of the most talked about, televised, and written about fights in history.
It's just silly to say it has been "swept under the rug".

What I mean is Frazier and Schmeling never get mentioned in debates on who is the greatest HW of all-time despite having the 2 best wins of all-time. I think there's a contradiction in that.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 13 Mar 2008, 11:20

Well you have to look at the rest of their careers.
One huge win by itself doesn't make you a contender for being the best heavyweight of all time.
Schmeling was a very good fighter, but he was no where near being the best fighter of all time.
Frazier while obviously better than Schmeling, didn't do quite enough to legitimately be considered the very best.
Had Frazier won important fights against Foreman and the 2nd and 3rd fights against the guy who beat Patterson, Liston, Foreman and himself than he you certainly make a legitimate case for him.

These were historically important fights that hurt his cause when rating him.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 13 Mar 2008, 11:48

Ambling Alp wrote:Well you have to look at the rest of their careers.
One huge win by itself doesn't make you a contender for being the best heavyweight of all time.
Schmeling was a very good fighter, but he was no where near being the best fighter of all time.
Frazier while obviously better than Schmeling, didn't do quite enough to legitimately be considered the very best.
Had Frazier won important fights against Foreman and the 2nd and 3rd fights against the guy who beat Patterson, Liston, Foreman and himself than he you certainly make a legitimate case for him.

These were historically important fights that hurt his cause when rating him.

EVERYBODY except members of The Religion of Ali knows that the fact Frazier beat Ali and knocked Ali flat on his back in a "historically important fight that hurt Ali's cause when rating him."

That destroyed Ali's chances of being considered "the greatest of all time."

That is why members of The Religion of Ali work so frantically to shift attention away from the fight where Joe Frazier beat Ali thoroughly and knocked Ali flat on his back.

It's a tough world for Ali shills.

There is no way they can erase the fact that Joe Frazier beat Ali and knocked Ali flat on his back.

What a sorry bunch the Ali shills are, with their insistence that the fact Joe Frazier beat Ali and knocked Ali flat on his back doesn't matter.

LOL

.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 13 Mar 2008, 11:52

Ambling Alp wrote:Well you have to look at the rest of their careers.
One huge win by itself doesn't make you a contender for being the best heavyweight of all time.
Schmeling was a very good fighter, but he was no where near being the best fighter of all time.
Frazier while obviously better than Schmeling, didn't do quite enough to legitimately be considered the very best.
Had Frazier won important fights against Foreman and the 2nd and 3rd fights against the guy who beat Patterson, Liston, Foreman and himself than he you certainly make a legitimate case for him.

These were historically important fights that hurt his cause when rating him.

Of course, I totally appreciate your approach, and agree with it, but if a guy can KO Louis then he should at least be in with a shout, same for Frazier's win over Ali.

It makes me think that the very top guys Louis and Ali weren't perhaps as far above the rest as we often imagine when discussing our mythical match ups.

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 13 Mar 2008, 13:38

Ezzard wrote:I've tried to keep out but here I am...

Posting photos of Ali or Louis on the canvas seems pretty childish to me...

Anyway...

Frazier won the most meaningful fight of the three but Ali won the series 2-1... I do agree that Frazier's win is swept under the carpet, just as I believe Schmeling's win over Louis is...

Frazier and Schmeling's wins somehow mess up the history that the writers want to write. they want it simple and in black and white, there is no room for ambiguity as that would be too hard for the average punter to accept.

Joe and Ali were pretty much 50-50 in a head-to-head though Ali would beat more of the greats than Joe would.

I'm not sure about fingers in eyes but I never studied the film to that extent.

But you are comfortable with the claim that Arthur Mercante was the sort of fellow who would accept money to foul a fighter?

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 13 Mar 2008, 13:39

granberry wrote:
Ambling Alp wrote:Well you have to look at the rest of their careers.
One huge win by itself doesn't make you a contender for being the best heavyweight of all time.
Schmeling was a very good fighter, but he was no where near being the best fighter of all time.
Frazier while obviously better than Schmeling, didn't do quite enough to legitimately be considered the very best.
Had Frazier won important fights against Foreman and the 2nd and 3rd fights against the guy who beat Patterson, Liston, Foreman and himself than he you certainly make a legitimate case for him.

These were historically important fights that hurt his cause when rating him.
EVERYBODY except members of The Religion of Ali knows that the fact Frazier beat Ali and knocked Ali flat on his back in a "historically important fight that hurt Ali's cause when rating him."

That destroyed Ali's chances of being considered "the greatest of all time."

That is why members of The Religion of Ali work so frantically to shift attention away from the fight where Joe Frazier beat Ali thoroughly and knocked Ali flat on his back.

It's a tough world for Ali shills.

There is no way they can erase the fact that Joe Frazier beat Ali and knocked Ali flat on his back.

What a sorry bunch the Ali shills are, with their insistence that the fact Joe Frazier beat Ali and knocked Ali flat on his back doesn't matter.

LOL

.

granberry, I have seen the light of your philosophical take on life. And perhaps you are on to something. What you are asking of everyone here is to do the following.

Assess your life work, your entire career. Think of all the times good and bad and average. Now take the weakest moment, the most dramatic seeming "failure" or "dissapointment" you have ever experienced. Then use that moment in time to absolutely define your career.

For Ali it may well be the the moment he was deposited to the canvas by Joe Frazier at or near his prime.

For granberry it was when he dropped his mop out of the second story window while bragging to his son of his world class prowess as a janitor.

Now Ali got up and within seconds turned in what could be considered some of his greater moments in his career as he found the will to continue to be competitive.

No such luck for the granner......when the boss heard of the lost mop it was the pink slip for him.

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 13 Mar 2008, 13:47

Ezzard wrote:
Ambling Alp wrote:Well you have to look at the rest of their careers.
One huge win by itself doesn't make you a contender for being the best heavyweight of all time.
Schmeling was a very good fighter, but he was no where near being the best fighter of all time.
Frazier while obviously better than Schmeling, didn't do quite enough to legitimately be considered the very best.
Had Frazier won important fights against Foreman and the 2nd and 3rd fights against the guy who beat Patterson, Liston, Foreman and himself than he you certainly make a legitimate case for him.

These were historically important fights that hurt his cause when rating him.
Of course, I totally appreciate your approach, and agree with it, but if a guy can KO Louis then he should at least be in with a shout, same for Frazier's win over Ali.

It makes me think that the very top guys Louis and Ali weren't perhaps as far above the rest as we often imagine when discussing our mythical match ups.

Neither Ali nor Louis were way ahead of the best of the rest. I don't believe any knowledagble fan claims that.

Joe Frazier was a great fighter in his own right.

Respecting Ali's achievements doesn't make one a shill etc except to those on the lunatic fringe.

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 13 Mar 2008, 13:59

granberry wrote: What a sorry bunch the Ali shills are, with their insistence that the fact Joe Frazier beat Ali and knocked Ali flat on his back doesn't matter.

LOL

I see your 'story' about you and Georgie Benton was ignored by the real boxing guys in "the greatest thread ever".

Has anyone replied to any of your ridiculous posts in there since you went mad the day they called you out as a fraud? Even that fellow Dagos seems to have realised you are bad news and best ignored.

By the way, the Benton 'story' sounds like bullshite to me. Did you have a little drink before you posted that rubbish?

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 13 Mar 2008, 15:37

Collins2000 wrote:
granberry wrote: What a sorry bunch the Ali shills are, with their insistence that the fact Joe Frazier beat Ali and knocked Ali flat on his back doesn't matter.

LOL

I see your 'story' about you and Georgie Benton was ignored by the real boxing guys in "the greatest thread ever".

Has anyone replied to any of your ridiculous posts in there since you went mad the day they called you out as a fraud? Even that fellow Dagos seems to have realised you are bad news and best ignored.

By the way, the Benton 'story' sounds like bullshite to me. Did you have a little drink before you posted that rubbish?

Poor collins will NEVER comprehend--I don't care what an Ali shill like collins thinks.

collins, the poisonous feminine snake of boxrec,

is still fixated on who talks to whom,

just like any petty, hysterical 14-year-old girl would be.

Run to your fellow 14-year-old girls, collins, and breathlessly report the vitally important news of who is talking to whom.

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 13 Mar 2008, 15:43

granberry wrote:
Collins2000 wrote:
granberry wrote: What a sorry bunch the Ali shills are, with their insistence that the fact Joe Frazier beat Ali and knocked Ali flat on his back doesn't matter.

LOL

I see your 'story' about you and Georgie Benton was ignored by the real boxing guys in "the greatest thread ever".

Has anyone replied to any of your ridiculous posts in there since you went mad the day they called you out as a fraud? Even that fellow Dagos seems to have realised you are bad news and best ignored.

By the way, the Benton 'story' sounds like bullshite to me. Did you have a little drink before you posted that rubbish?

Poor collins will NEVER comprehend--I don't care what an Ali shill like collins thinks.

collins, the poisonous feminine snake of boxrec,

is still fixated on who talks to whom,

just like any petty, hysterical 14-year-old girl would be.

Run to your fellow 14-year-old girls, collins, and breathlessly report the vitally important news of who is talking to whom.

Come on, granberry, you were in raptures when those fellows responded to your original posts. You know, before you started abusing them like you do to anyone who doesn't believe your bullshite.

Now, they just ignore you. Yet you still post in the hope they will relent.

Look, pal, they aren't interested in your ridiculous claims. They labelled you a blowhard fraud. And they were right.

What possible interest would real boxing people have in your ignorant pig swill?

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 13 Mar 2008, 16:17

collins, the poisonous, feminine snake of boxrec, pollutes boxrec with his non-boxing, feminine posts.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 13 Mar 2008, 16:48

granny shells Ali shills
down by the seashore

how many rounds of shells does granny shoot at shills?

Did you ever wonder what granny thinks of Harry Wills?

I didn't think so.

Though I didn't know so

But I have often wondered if he once worked with Topo Gigo....

ebeneezer · Post by **ebeneezer** » 13 Mar 2008, 17:38

granberry wrote:collins, the poisonous, feminine snake of boxrec, pollutes boxrec with his non-boxing, feminine posts.

Hahahahaaa!!

Seriously though - why is this idiot not banned yet?

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 13 Mar 2008, 17:52

granberry at the boxing gym

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 13 Mar 2008, 18:18

No opinion will get you banned.

observer1 · Post by **observer1** » 13 Mar 2008, 18:30

Credit when its due Granberry certainly never gets tired.

Its good no Opinion gets you banned, but what about being a nuisance in general ?

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 13 Mar 2008, 18:41

Basically, what you have here is a bunch of Joe Louis and Joe Frazier nuthuggers trying to lecture Ali fans about objectivity.

Anyone who says Ali was just fine and dandy coming off his layoff doesn't know anything about boxing. Sugar Ray Robinson came off a two year layoff, had a tune up, and lost to Ralf Tiger Jones, who, again, was not Joe Frazier; and on top of that there were no rematches... I guess Robinson isn't the GOAT then? Does anyone question Robinson's legacy on the basis of that fight... besides granberry, that is?

Ali-Frazier II is the most important fight in the trilogy, because they were neither too old and they were on a LEVEL playing field. Ali was at a disadvantage in the first fight, and all the BS rhetoric in the world doesn't change that. He was not ready for that kind of 15 round fight. If it was Frazier coming off a three year layoff, having only been back for five months, going in against a prime Ali; you can bet your ass Frazier fans would not consider that a real win. In the second fight they were both active, both ready, and Ali won. If you don't like; tough.

If you want to talk about results, Ali won the trilogy. If you want to talk about who would win at their best, the answer is Ali.

As for ezzard... you have no basis for saying that Frazier and Schmeling's wins were swept under the carpet, and you have no basis for saying that either of the two were swept under the carpet. Few people would even know who Max Schmeling was if it wasn't for that first Louis fight. Frazier would be better known, but he would not have anywhere near the same prestige either. And they both lost rematches, and they still get credit for their overrated wins over Louis and Ali. Does anyone say that DeJesus was swept under the carpet for his win over Duran, or that DeJesus was better than Duran because he won the first fight? Nope.

As for it being "childish" to post pictures of Louis on the ground, I'm simply making a point that knock downs don't mean shit. Louis was knocked down six more times than Ali, Frazier was knocked down even more than that; I don't see anyone questioning their legacy on that basis. Who gives a shit about knock downs? According to some of you people, Frazier's knock down is more important than Ali's TKO.

I know some of you think its very impressive to stike out against the popular fighters, while trying to build up the underrated guys; but you take it too far when you try to suggest that one tainted Frazier win means more than two Ali wins, or that the guy who beat Liston, Patterson, Frazier and Foreman gets "too much credit." No Heavyweight beat better opponents than Ali.

ebeneezer · Post by **ebeneezer** » 13 Mar 2008, 18:50

Calling someone a feminine snake isn't an opinion,surely

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 13 Mar 2008, 19:13

ebeneezer wrote:Calling someone a feminine snake isn't an opinion,surely

true, however can't we make room for an eccentric curmudgeon who really does no harm other than to roar and bark a bit? His opinions are so strong he can't help his reactions. And honestly we often provoke his responses.

He's obviously had some honest ring experience which he likes to point out is more than I've had. On a few things he gets it quite right. The fact that he embellishes or that he is gruff is irrelevant I.M.H.O.

In many cases he has taken ribbings with some humor, and the fact that he won't budge an inch regarding his opinions or accept even a light jab without throwing a verbal counter punch shows a granite like quality.

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 13 Mar 2008, 19:21

BoxBuzz wrote:
ebeneezer wrote:Calling someone a feminine snake isn't an opinion,surely
true, however can't we make room for an eccentric curmudgeon who really does no harm other than to roar and bark a bit? His opinions are so strong he can't help his reactions. And honestly we often provoke his responses.

He's obviously had some honest ring experience which he likes to point out is more than I've had. On a few things he gets it quite right. The fact that he embellishes or that he is gruff is irrelevant I.M.H.O.

In many cases he has taken ribbings with some humor, and the fact that he won't budge an inch in his opinions shows a granite like quality.

I have no wish to see granberry banned. I find him amusing and he gets as much as he gives in the way of cuffs and kicks.

And I don't mind what he calls me although I think I prefer 'femine snake' to 'lowest form of insect'............................

Hahahahah, honest ring experience? Well, buzzy, YOU might think that but you never even had a fight with your sister, you dilettante. The real boxing guys in "the greatest thread ever" say he is a complete fraud and I tend to agree.

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 13 Mar 2008, 21:38

Geez, Collins, that was a shot below the belt, posting that photo of Family Guy's resident creepo. I can see why he calls you the, "poisonous snake." On that note, do you really prefer that title to, "lowest insect"? Or are you in fact jealous I have that mantle?

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 13 Mar 2008, 23:44

Collins2000 wrote:[

Hahahahah, honest ring experience? Well, buzzy, YOU might think that but you never even had a fight with your sister, you dilettante. The real boxing guys in "the greatest thread ever" say he is a complete fraud and I tend to agree.

It's all relative...those guys are the real deal no doubt. But I suspect granberry has rubbed shoulders with the sport in a way that probably deserves some respect.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 14 Mar 2008, 07:30

Collins2000 wrote:
Ezzard wrote:I've tried to keep out but here I am...

Posting photos of Ali or Louis on the canvas seems pretty childish to me...

Anyway...

Frazier won the most meaningful fight of the three but Ali won the series 2-1... I do agree that Frazier's win is swept under the carpet, just as I believe Schmeling's win over Louis is...

Frazier and Schmeling's wins somehow mess up the history that the writers want to write. they want it simple and in black and white, there is no room for ambiguity as that would be too hard for the average punter to accept.

Joe and Ali were pretty much 50-50 in a head-to-head though Ali would beat more of the greats than Joe would.

I'm not sure about fingers in eyes but I never studied the film to that extent.

But you are comfortable with the claim that Arthur Mercante was the sort of fellow who would accept money to foul a fighter?

Never met him... Everyone has a price though.