WHICH IS MORE EMBARRASSING ?

[granberry]

WHICH IS MORE EMBARRASSING ?

1--Ali was the first heavyweight champion in the history of boxing to lose his title to a novice who had only 7 professional fights. (Leon Spinks)

2--Larry Holmes was the first heavyweight champion in the history of boxing to lose his title to a lightheavyweight (Michael Spinks)

Not exactly records to be proud of.

Which one is more embarrassing?

1--Ali losing his title to a 7-fight novice

or

2--Holmes losing his title to a lightheavyweight

?????????????????????????????????????????????????

[Robinson]

Awesome.

Welcome back mr Gran.

[Robinson]

To answer your question,

Ali losing to Spinks, Leon.

Michael went on to be a decent LHW historically and
would only ever lose to that Tyson, who was so near
perfect.

Leon, well his record speaks for itself.

PS- I know in your heart of hearts your a Holmes fan.
We all are.

[Robinson]

Jack Dempsey also lost to a LHW too did he not ?

As did Corbett.

Dempsey lost to a MW-LHW who didnt even become a
LHW champion...

[Collins2000]

Paddy, welcome back you old crook!

Just hang around and Buzzy will be out to give your boots a good licking as soon as he hears you are back in town.

[granberry]

Sicko collins has never made a post on boxing and he never will.

His next post will display his fixation on homsexuality.

[Robinson]

Thats not true...

he has made a many a post in the Trailer Park Boxing Series.

Your abilitities to hate in words would be welomed there no doubt.

[bollox]

On any given day one fighter can beat another. So what's there to be embarrassed about?

[Robinson]

I suppose some could argue Hagler's loss to Leonard
would be something of an embarrasment...

[bollox]

The only thing Hagler needs to be ambarrassed about is the fact he willingly conceded so many advantages to Leonard

[Robinson]

Yeah all those big concessions...

nothing as big as a concession as stepping into the ring as a fmr welter
after 3 years lay off to face the current and active
MW champion.

[bollox]

That's odd, I seem to recall Leonard wanting nothing to do with Hagler til he was 34 and at the end of a long career. But if we want to look at it that way, Leonard lost to a former lightweight. Who started as a pro at about 122 pounds

[Robinson]

As close as the fight, can you concede that it was a good
fight on both men's parts.

Hagler who was clearly at the end of his career and who was
no doubt down on boxing.

Leonard who was not a MW, and who had been out of the
ring for some time.

I scored it for Leonard, just, but I am a Hagler fan as far
as watching their fights go.

[hhaehre]

Ali losing to Spinks was more embarrassing. The most embarrasing loss in hw history: Douglas going down to Holyfield. No shame in losing to Holyfield but the way he did it was shameful.

[granberry]

I see the boxing 'mentalities' present on this site are unable to focus well enough to comprehend the subject of this thread

and instead have fled to a 'discussion' of Hagler and Leonard.

Par for the course on such sites.

[Robinson]

I was just adding to your general theme.

i did answer your question however.

What about winning the title on your back ?

[BoxBuzz]

Hey grancracker,....I see you have discovered fresh and exciting facts that make an open and shut case for the feebleness of Ali and Holmes. With this new startling breakthrough information finally out on the table, you are sure to get a cornucopia of converts flocking to your reasonable and sensible conclusions. I of course suspected all along that in time, you would find just the right set of facts and explain them in just such a way, as to set this matter straight once and for all. Collins (the great homo sapien nay sayer) will profess that I'm not being sincere, that my words are a ploy, in order that you and I might develop a closer bond, but don't drink the Kool Aid ! I am in no way attempting to exploit for my own personal gain, your new found recognition and credibility. I've simply observed your work and am validating that you have applied conductive reasoning (Conductive reasoning is a straightforward constructivist eliciting of distinctions/and or dynamic constructs) and placed critical data before us that quite frankly we had all either forgotten or failed to recognize as being both significant and conclusive. What you have provided us here today is tantamount to the heavy lifting.

Now that we are all in agreement that Ali and Holmes were indeed bums and the boxing public mere patsy's of the media, you have done your job and can finally retire! I personally will miss your contributions. I must sadly report however, that Collins never liked you and will surely become bitter and angry that it was YOU that brought about this revelation of consciousness to the sporting public. He has never appreciated your diligence in the matter of reporting accuracy and will be envious and pitifully jealous as you receive proper credit for your maverick historical revelation! Be prepared as he will likely lash out with hurtful personal barbs and critical dismissiveness. But don't let folks like him take this moment away from you. You are deserving of your time in the limelight.

Thanks again for exposing such fraud and incompetence in such a definitive manner.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Ali was appreciably more past-it than was Holmes when they respectively fought the Spinks bros, but there is an even bigger gulf between Michael in 1985 & Leon in 1978.

By a considerable margin, Ali's loss ranks as the worse of the two, in spite of the fact that, as I stated above, Holmes had more left, & therefore less of an excuse from his end --- but only in theory. Reality is Ali should be more embarressed, between the two.

What a return, Gran

[Syntax Error]

WHICH IS MORE EMBARRASSING ?

1--Ali was the first heavyweight champion in the history of boxing to lose his title to a novice who had only 7 professional fights. (Leon Spinks)

2--Larry Holmes was the first heavyweight champion in the history of boxing to lose his title to a lightheavyweight (Michael Spinks)

Not exactly records to be proud of.

Which one is more embarrassing?

1--Ali losing his title to a 7-fight novice

or

2--Holmes losing his title to a lightheavyweight

?????????????????????????????????????????????????

It's hard to quantify this one.

Ali's was technically the most embarrassing, but when you take into account that he was probably in the early stages of Parkinson's syndrome, then it's not so bad.

Holmes was shopworn when he fought M Spinks, but he didn't lose by that much & would probably have won if he'd prepared properly.

[harrygreb]

i dont think embarrassment comes into it. ali's loss was the least expected but add up the facts about his condition then throw in the other fact that leon was young, strong and totally unfazed by the situation. no embarrassment on either side.

[Goodnight, Irene]

i dont think embarrassment comes into it. ali's loss was the least expected but add up the facts about his condition then throw in the other fact that leon was young, strong and totally unfazed by the situation. no embarrassment on either side.

That's retrospective thinking. Realities were Spinks was a rookie fighter with extremely-limited talent, anyway. You can't even say of him, "Yes, he was shockingly green, but he did turn out to have the natural instincts of a great fighter, which he fulfilled."

Spinks suffers the double-whammy of being a lousy fighter who was also shockingly inexperienced. As wasted as he was, Ali has no real excuse, outside of complacency. He wouldn't be diagnosed for six full years after losing to Spinks. Not to say he didn't have the beginnings of the syndrome, but it's laughable to suggest it played some serious part in his downfall. You can't put a price on the gulf in in-ring experience between the two, either. It's perhaps the biggest margin in that department in which the greener fighter won, ever.

It was an embarressing loss. Very much so. Ali's badly shop-worn state reduces the embarressment, but, given Spinks' seven-fight history & eventual lacklustre career, not by much.

[Zelley]

I don't think Ali's loss to Spinks is an embarrassing case.

For those that had followed Ali since pre-1960, it was
a given that he was just a shell and a shadow.

Leon Spinks was much better than some folks would care to admit.
It was no great shock that Spinks won.

[klompton]

The only thing that really makes this a comparison is that Holmes was still a damn fine fighter when he lost to Spinks that being said Spinks was a great fighter as well so I dont think its much of an embarrassment. Ali was a shell of his former self already suffering from Parkinsons but Spinks was awful and not many people outside of the amateurs had any business losing to Spinks IMO.

[Goodnight, Irene]

"...It was no great shock that Spinks won." - Zelley

Astonishing. It is simply astonishing the level of denial to which Muhammad Ali's fanbase will go to soothe themselves in the face of any criticism.

My friend, this was ONE OF THE MOST MONUMENTAL UPSETS OF ALL-TIME. Spinks was garbage, with experience. He didn't even have that when he met Ali.

...& people wonder why Ali receives so much criticism. When you have delusional statements like this rolling around (& there are plenty), it's gonna happen.

"It was no great shock that Spinks won" is not just an all-time classic for Ali-sheltering revisionist propaganda. It's a flat-out lie. People were frankly stunned by the result.

[turn2stone]

easy ali losing to spinks. at least in holme's case he was fighting another all time great. and holmes-spinks was close with everyone on edge waiting for the decision to be read. but to have ali losing by a split decision takes some very interesting scoring of the rounds.