BoxBuzz wrote:That film on youtube is all you need to settle the debate. Not that there ever was a debate.
Unless you really think the moment where the shading changes (a number of reasons could account for this) is where the "mystery" is hidden.....
Director screams "Ok everybody CUT!!!!" (waits for 5 minutes for Clay to back into shape)
Director again screams (Places everyone...right back where you were) filming begins again.....secret kept!
Someone over at the cyberboxing zone said he was working at one of the networks
back in 1966 and when the film package was delievered the film was in several pieces and he had to splice them together.
Notice the audio is out of sync too.
The crown roars a second before Cooper even lands the left hook.
Brutu wrote:Maybe the BBC obtained their copy from the archives of BIG FIGHTS INC.?
(just like they had to purchase back prints of DOCTOR WHO from across the world).
Purchase back prints of Dr Who?
Man, you crack me up.
(Yes, we know the real story and no 'purchasing' was involved so a simple "Sorry, I was taking out of my arris again" will suffice.)
BoxBuzz wrote:That film on youtube is all you need to settle the debate. Not that there ever was a debate.
Unless you really think the moment where the shading changes (a number of reasons could account for this) is where the "mystery" is hidden.....
Director screams "Ok everybody CUT!!!!" (waits for 5 minutes for Clay to back into shape)
Director again screams (Places everyone...right back where you were) filming begins again.....secret kept!
Someone over at the cyberboxing zone said he was working at one of the networks
back in 1966 and when the film package was delievered the film was in several pieces and he had to splice them together.
Notice the audio is out of sync too.
The crown roars a second before Cooper even lands the left hook.
So you believe an anonymous poster on a forum even though there is no evidence to back it up? The bit where the film flickers doesn't mean anything, the cornermen were in the same position after the flicker as they were before, if they suddenly reappeared in a totally different place then I could see the point.
It goes back to the original point, why would the British press edit the film? Cooper was a national hero and if there was any truth to the long delay the UK press would have been all over the story like a rash.
Seems to me most of the people who are quoted as saying that there was no delay,
were either not present at Wembley that evening or even born at the time.
This looks like it is from a kinescope to me.
Hey evenb,could you find out there from the British papers
if it was also a closed-circuit showing perhaps just in London?
And some people like a good fairytale rather than a solid fact. The film is readily available if you dont want to believe what is before your eyes thats on you.
This looks like it is from a kinescope to me.
Hey evenb,could you find out there from the British papers
if it was also a closed-circuit showing perhaps just in London?
When I get back I will check....To let you know that back in 1963 there were only two tv stations on british tele - there was no other tv....it was almost certainly shown on BBC as a live broadcast...
Brutu....quite often you are on the right track. Quite often you display sensibility. Quite often you use logic, linear thinking, and good judgment. On many occasions you've shown reasonable and deliberate problem solving skills.
But that's just my opinion. I can't prove it. At least not in this thread.
I was thinking of people still around who were actually at Wembley stadium that June evening of 1963.
Or were watching it live on the telly in Britain.
Growing up in the 1970's I had always heard and read about the torn glove
and (some kind of) delay,
but then about 15 years ago people starting to say it was
highly exaggerrated.
Brutu wrote:I was thinking of people still around who were actually at Wembley stadium that June evening of 1963.
Or were watching it live on the telly in Britain.
Growing up in the 1970's I had always heard and read about the torn glove
and (some kind of) delay,
but then about 15 years ago people starting to say it was
highly exaggerrated.
I think you are reading too much into it all. The "faked" moon landings have grown momentum over the years, even recent documentaries are questioning the validity of the photos taken. There is absolutely no reason for the fight to be "covered up" and the reason you cannot find much about it is because it was so insignificant it just wasn't reported in any great detail, or even mentioned.
The below is a link to the BBC World Service which also talks about the "delay", move the slider to 5min 30s where it starts.
I never said that ,you said that.
There was more then one moon landing of course.
I just mentioned the "lost"BBC coverage earlier because someone said that the BBC had all the boxing matches that they had ever shown on video-tape still.
If they taped over the mankind historical moon landing with horse racing,
what did they do with the boxing video-tapes they had?
Brutu wrote:I never said that ,you said that.
There was more then one moon landing of course.
I just mentioned the "lost"BBC coverage earlier because someone said that the BBC had all the boxing matches that they had ever shown on video-tape still.
If they taped over the mankind historical moon landing with horse racing,
what did they do with the boxing video-tapes they had?
Still not getting your point. I mentioned the moon landing as its a conspiracy theory, far bigger of course but on the same lines as you obviously think the Clay fight was somehow faked. If you think the Cooper fight was covered up in some way I'm not sure you would be happy with any evidence you are shown, as surely the mind of a conspiracy theorist will always doubt how "real" the evidence was.
Brutu wrote:I never said that ,you said that.
There was more then one moon landing of course.
I just mentioned the "lost"BBC coverage earlier because someone said that the BBC had all the boxing matches that they had ever shown on video-tape still.
If they taped over the mankind historical moon landing with horse racing,
what did they do with the boxing video-tapes they had?
You misquoted me to use against the arguments...i never said bbc have everything they ever shown...i know what bbc have....and the point is irrelevant to the argument.
That was my point, then how do you know if the copy of Clay vrs Cooper that you have isnt the abridged copy
that the BBC perhaps had to purchase back from another source(Big Fights Inc)?
Brutu wrote:That was my point, then how do you know if the copy of Clay vrs Cooper that you have isnt the abridged copy
that the BBC perhaps had to purchase back from another source(Big Fights Inc)?
"It was this fight which persuaded the British Board Control to change their rules,
to ensure that two spare pairs of gloves were always kept at ringside in the future".
Brutu wrote:That was my point, then how do you know if the copy of Clay vrs Cooper that you have isnt the abridged copy
that the BBC perhaps had to purchase back from another source(Big Fights Inc)?
Well if you know more than tony fosco did about fight film then your a legend too...you are being deliberately cynical, objectionate, cantankerous and as I have told you how much time and money tony and I have spent on this, totally disrespectful...i was going to go to the effort of loading the film up for you but it is very clear to.me you are not interested in the truth but rather inciting argument for argument sake...you are annoying and I will not have any further contact with you..im sure you dont mind anyway...eb
Brutu wrote:That was my point, then how do you know if the copy of Clay vrs Cooper that you have isnt the abridged copy
that the BBC perhaps had to purchase back from another source(Big Fights Inc)?
Well if you know more than tony fosco did about fight film then your a legend too...you are being deliberately cynical, objectionate, cantankerous and as I have told you how much time and money tony and I have spent on this, totally disrespectful...i was going to go to the effort of loading the film up for you but it is very clear to.me you are not interested in the truth but rather inciting argument for argument sake...you are annoying and I will not have any further contact with you..im sure you dont mind anyway...eb
