"when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
Galt....but the forced exile !!!!!!!!!
The forced exile.....
The forced exile.....
-
TheOneIsHere2008
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1181
- Joined: 01 Jul 2008, 12:09
-
TheOneIsHere2008
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1181
- Joined: 01 Jul 2008, 12:09
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
Robinson wrote:Galt....but the forced exile !!!!!!!!!
The forced exile.....
I hope Master Colllins isn't reading this thread...
He might get to add another scalp to add to his selection...
This whole spectacle is rather sad and if I might say embarrassing...
:P
Last edited by TheOneIsHere2008 on 26 Aug 2008, 04:08, edited 1 time in total.
-
TheOneIsHere2008
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1181
- Joined: 01 Jul 2008, 12:09
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
"The laws of physiology are immuttable."John Galt wrote:A 33 year old man who doesn't smoke, drink, or abuse drugs, who still trains, and is still motivated should not be past his prime. Lifestyle is a better indicator of conditioning than age. Age, by itself means little.
You are entitled to your opinion...I will embrace the collective and informed opinion of the boxing world from the legendary promoter ,Bob Arum, the legendary boxing historian, Hank Kaplan, to the legendary trainer and wise man of boxing, Cus D'Amato , that Muhammad Ali was not the same fighter he was before his exile...
As long as I have one breath in my body I will not stand by to see history rewritten and the heroic accomplishments of the greatest warrior in heavyweight history be diminished... I will not be a party to watching Muhammad Ali's historic victory over the invincible George Foreman be taken away on a internet board...
A past his prime Muhammad Ali turned a prime George Foreman inside out...
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
signed.Robinson wrote:No they are just boxers, nothing more or less.
Ali went on to a pretty good showing against the
worlds heavyweight champion so, he must have been
close to his 'prime'.
No desperation here, I consider myself pretty neutral
on the Ali vs crowd....I aknowledge that Ali is easily
one of the greats, but at the same time I do not
subscribe to the notion of absolute supremacy that
you seem to.
What Foreman did show regardless of his career that
ended in 1977 is that he was a very inteligent man
who became a schooled master in the sport of boxing
losing to Ali was a part of this process.
I wish that the doco showed more balanced scenes
and was less a love in for the Ali camp.
Perhaps it should be titled "when Ali was a king" as
there is no "we" in it.
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
tyson-holmes was age against youth. ali-foreman was not. this discussion
is getting too extreme. i start to become more extreme in my opinion than
i truly am. my point is that when we were kings paints a picture of the fight
that didn't exist. it did so by putting out phrases like "age against youth". surely,
ali was older, but not that old. sure foreman was younger, but not that
young. and so forth. this is all the point i am trying to make. i do not think that
anybody here is diminishing ali's achievement.
is getting too extreme. i start to become more extreme in my opinion than
i truly am. my point is that when we were kings paints a picture of the fight
that didn't exist. it did so by putting out phrases like "age against youth". surely,
ali was older, but not that old. sure foreman was younger, but not that
young. and so forth. this is all the point i am trying to make. i do not think that
anybody here is diminishing ali's achievement.
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
you don't have to. nobody takes anything away from him. really.TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:... I will not be a party to watching Muhammad Ali's historic victory over the invincible George Foreman be taken away on a internet board...[/color]
the criticism here is about the film, not at all about ali.
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
TOIH2008
If anything I am trying to defend Foreman. I think he gets a
pretty poor deal over the 'rumble in the jungle' affair.
Beating that version of Foreman like Ali did was an incredibley
epic feat. But at times it is over celebrated as though it was
the zenith of Ali's career or all that Foreman ever amassed to.
To me that is sad. This is perpetuated by this doco, several
books and even the 'Ali' biopic.
If anything I am trying to defend Foreman. I think he gets a
pretty poor deal over the 'rumble in the jungle' affair.
Beating that version of Foreman like Ali did was an incredibley
epic feat. But at times it is over celebrated as though it was
the zenith of Ali's career or all that Foreman ever amassed to.
To me that is sad. This is perpetuated by this doco, several
books and even the 'Ali' biopic.
-
TheOneIsHere2008
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1181
- Joined: 01 Jul 2008, 12:09
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
Even Foreman admits that Muhammad Ali was his most determined opponent who fought with the belief that if he lost it would not only be a loss for himself but everybody that believed in him...
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
You could say that of a lot of people, both succesful and
unsuccesful...
unsuccesful...
-
I Feel Fine
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2097
- Joined: 10 Apr 2007, 16:48
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
I've seen that happen in a lot fights, though, where the ref says "nine" and then calls the fight over. Its something common I think, but since its Ali-Foreman it gets more attention, fairly. I guess referees shouldn't do that, but perhaps its tough when you're in the middle of such a big moment.
Edit: Jesus, reading through this thread, I'm quite astonished by all the bitching...
Ali was popular, Foreman wasn't. What should be done? Should Foreman get reparations? Should Ali be fined? What can we do to fix this injustice? Tyson was more popular than Lewis, Oscar De La Hoya is more popular than any of his opponents; the crowd will side with a fighter, sometimes for specific reasons, sometimes for no reason at all. Ali wasn't holding a gun to their heads.
And I don't recall the film depicting George as a bad guy, just as someone who wasn't particularly popular, in part because people were afraid of him. So? And often in boxing you'll get the good guy-bad guy thing, Ali was the old former champion trying to regain the title and Foreman the big scary powerful puncher, so Ali was the sentimental favorite. Whats so mysterious about that?
And, once again, while holding behind the head is illegal, its not a blatant foul, fighters almost never lose points for it and are only occasionally warned for it. Its not on par with a low blow or a kidney shot, which are fouls that Ali constantly took in his fights without his opponents being warned for or penalized. Foreman getting hit by the right hand at will and missing with wild punches in the African heat hurt him more than Ali grabbing his neck. I'm sure Foreman never fouled in his career, eh? Never wrestled an opponent, pushed an opponent, hit Frazier behind the head, none of that, right?
The fight is over celebrated? Ali was 32, hadn't been champion in seven years, and became the second man in history to regain the title by beating a top five-six all time Heavyweight who was in his prime. What more can a fighter do? Sometimes I think that if Ali at 38 had managed to have beaten Holmes that there would still be people saying "Yeah, well, it wasn't that great a win, because..."
Edit: Jesus, reading through this thread, I'm quite astonished by all the bitching...
Ali was popular, Foreman wasn't. What should be done? Should Foreman get reparations? Should Ali be fined? What can we do to fix this injustice? Tyson was more popular than Lewis, Oscar De La Hoya is more popular than any of his opponents; the crowd will side with a fighter, sometimes for specific reasons, sometimes for no reason at all. Ali wasn't holding a gun to their heads.
And I don't recall the film depicting George as a bad guy, just as someone who wasn't particularly popular, in part because people were afraid of him. So? And often in boxing you'll get the good guy-bad guy thing, Ali was the old former champion trying to regain the title and Foreman the big scary powerful puncher, so Ali was the sentimental favorite. Whats so mysterious about that?
And, once again, while holding behind the head is illegal, its not a blatant foul, fighters almost never lose points for it and are only occasionally warned for it. Its not on par with a low blow or a kidney shot, which are fouls that Ali constantly took in his fights without his opponents being warned for or penalized. Foreman getting hit by the right hand at will and missing with wild punches in the African heat hurt him more than Ali grabbing his neck. I'm sure Foreman never fouled in his career, eh? Never wrestled an opponent, pushed an opponent, hit Frazier behind the head, none of that, right?
The fight is over celebrated? Ali was 32, hadn't been champion in seven years, and became the second man in history to regain the title by beating a top five-six all time Heavyweight who was in his prime. What more can a fighter do? Sometimes I think that if Ali at 38 had managed to have beaten Holmes that there would still be people saying "Yeah, well, it wasn't that great a win, because..."
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
i never had the feeling that the ending did get a lot
of attention other than as a great victory for ali. actually
i was not aware at all that it was a fast count right at
the ending of the round until recently. it is simply not
the story being told ...
i don't understand why people cannot accept that two
things can be true at the same time. it was a great
moment for ali who deserved the win having fought
a great fight as the underdog. and it was not the fairest
of decisions to not let george continue. i have really no
idea why all this "don't take it away from ali" is coming up.
while people's feelings are hurt when one looks at this,
well, i do not think ali himself would have a hard time
discussing it. to me it was the biggest fight ever. the
hype, the tension, the sentimental champion returning
against the brutal beast ... on and on. (maybe tyson-lewis
was similar in hype, but tyson was too weak to make it
and interesting bout.)
of attention other than as a great victory for ali. actually
i was not aware at all that it was a fast count right at
the ending of the round until recently. it is simply not
the story being told ...
i don't understand why people cannot accept that two
things can be true at the same time. it was a great
moment for ali who deserved the win having fought
a great fight as the underdog. and it was not the fairest
of decisions to not let george continue. i have really no
idea why all this "don't take it away from ali" is coming up.
while people's feelings are hurt when one looks at this,
well, i do not think ali himself would have a hard time
discussing it. to me it was the biggest fight ever. the
hype, the tension, the sentimental champion returning
against the brutal beast ... on and on. (maybe tyson-lewis
was similar in hype, but tyson was too weak to make it
and interesting bout.)
Last edited by man on 27 Aug 2008, 03:42, edited 1 time in total.
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
i do not think there was any bad intention behind it. theI Feel Fine wrote:I've seen that happen in a lot fights, though, where the ref says "nine" and then calls the fight over. Its something common I think, but since its Ali-Foreman it gets more attention, fairly. I guess referees shouldn't do that, but perhaps its tough when you're in the middle of such a big moment ...
referee was quite in the same emotional stance as everybody
else. nobody intentionally worked against foreman. what
i find interesting is that i heard foreman complain about the
ropes not being tight, which i still find a strange excuse. i do
not think it would have made much difference. george pumped
himself out and the occasions where ali actually leaned back
very much were not that frequent. but i wondered why he did
not complain about the count and that he was up in time and
kind of way back to his corner. (... probably he did and i just
do not know it.)
-
TheOneIsHere2008
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1181
- Joined: 01 Jul 2008, 12:09
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
I wonder if people would have been happy if Muhammad Ali would have loaded up and hit George Foreman as hard as he could while he was still falling so he could have hit his head on the canvas and ended up like Greg Page.
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
I doubt that would have happened.
-
TheOneIsHere2008
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1181
- Joined: 01 Jul 2008, 12:09
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
George was vulnerable...Muhammad Ali showed compassion and sportsman like concern for not hitting George as he was falling... George could have hit his head on the canvas and ended up a quadriplegic...George Foreman as well as his progeny owe him their eternal gratitude...
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
Do you honestly believe this.....?TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:George was vulnerable...Muhammad Ali showed compassion and sportsman like concern for not hitting George as he was falling... George could have hit his head on the canvas and ended up a quadriplegic...George Foreman as well as his progeny owe him their eternal gratitude...
-
TheOneIsHere2008
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1181
- Joined: 01 Jul 2008, 12:09
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
I believe in physics...Robinson wrote:Do you honestly believe this.....?TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:George was vulnerable...Muhammad Ali showed compassion and sportsman like concern for not hitting George as he was falling... George could have hit his head on the canvas and ended up a quadriplegic...George Foreman as well as his progeny owe him their eternal gratitude...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=189bDFT8f0Q
He also showed mercy to Jerry Quarry in the second fight, Buster Mathis and Jimmy Ellis...
Go to the 6:00 mark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA9Uqu6k ... re=related
Go to the 5:00 mark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWNtu45P ... re=related
Go to the 3:00 mark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zXnkzhS1JY
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
I watched the Youtube video of the last round of Ali - Foreman. Foreman looks fatiqued, not hurt, when he drops. The punches that caused him to drop didn't look like much. It didn't look like Ali held back on purpose, it looked like Ali was too surprised that Foreman was falling to be able to deliver the follow up.
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
What is physics ? that a man would become a disabled
or worse should he be hit while he is falling... ?
What does showing one mercy have to do with 'physics' ??
I am sorry if I seem some what confused...but you said...
"George was vulnerable...Muhammad Ali showed compassion and sportsman like concern for not hitting George as he was falling... George could have hit his head on the canvas and ended up a quadriplegic...George Foreman as well as his progeny owe him their eternal gratitude..."
You think should Ali have hit Foreman one more time
that Foreman would have been crippled ?
Do you think, that Foreman knows this and is going to
be forever grateful ?
I am not arguing for or against Ali being a man of mercy,
with no maliciousness within him....I could perhaps make
an argument that two of my favourite fighters, Floyd Patterson
and Larry Holmes throughout their careers have shown a
great deal of restraint and compassion to an opponent...
I am un certain as to what 'physics' has to do with what your
saying ? I am not trying to be argumentative...I just would
like to know what you mean.
Thank You
Kym
or worse should he be hit while he is falling... ?
What does showing one mercy have to do with 'physics' ??
I am sorry if I seem some what confused...but you said...
"George was vulnerable...Muhammad Ali showed compassion and sportsman like concern for not hitting George as he was falling... George could have hit his head on the canvas and ended up a quadriplegic...George Foreman as well as his progeny owe him their eternal gratitude..."
You think should Ali have hit Foreman one more time
that Foreman would have been crippled ?
Do you think, that Foreman knows this and is going to
be forever grateful ?
I am not arguing for or against Ali being a man of mercy,
with no maliciousness within him....I could perhaps make
an argument that two of my favourite fighters, Floyd Patterson
and Larry Holmes throughout their careers have shown a
great deal of restraint and compassion to an opponent...
I am un certain as to what 'physics' has to do with what your
saying ? I am not trying to be argumentative...I just would
like to know what you mean.
Thank You
Kym
-
TheOneIsHere2008
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1181
- Joined: 01 Jul 2008, 12:09
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
Because George was being pulled down as much by motion as by the force of Ali's punches...If Ali would have hit him again he could have went down all that much harder and have been permanently injured...
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:Because George was being pulled down as much by motion as by the force of Ali's punches...If Ali would have hit him again he could have went down all that much harder and have been permanently injured...
My mate is the president of the Adelaide University Physics Society...
do you mind I send this to him and he may be able to determine
the laws used so we can under stand how Foreman would become a
cripple after all of this ..?
-
TheOneIsHere2008
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1181
- Joined: 01 Jul 2008, 12:09
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
The way Foreman was going down and was so open a welterweight could have hurt him...Robinson wrote:TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:Because George was being pulled down as much by motion as by the force of Ali's punches...If Ali would have hit him again he could have went down all that much harder and have been permanently injured...
My mate is the president of the Adelaide University Physics Society...
do you mind I send this to him and he may be able to determine
the laws used so we can under stand how Foreman would become a
cripple after all of this ..?
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
Have you seen Tate-Weaver. Dokes-Ruddock.
Hearns-Duran. Morrison-Mercer, etc etc ?
Those looked like nasty vicious KO's ..I dont know the physical
formulas behind them though...nor the general physics...but
I know that none of the KO'd ended up like Page.
Hearns-Duran. Morrison-Mercer, etc etc ?
Those looked like nasty vicious KO's ..I dont know the physical
formulas behind them though...nor the general physics...but
I know that none of the KO'd ended up like Page.
Re: "when we were kings" ... how wrong a view
you seem to miss each either. yes, ali showed great sportsmanship.
no, george probably would still walk on his feet to the toilet, even
if ali had not held back. the two do not contradict each other.
if anyone wants to see the opposite of ali look at tua-ruiz.
no, george probably would still walk on his feet to the toilet, even
if ali had not held back. the two do not contradict each other.
if anyone wants to see the opposite of ali look at tua-ruiz.