evrenb wrote:
The replay is obviously part of the 1984 production. How thick and stupid can one human get!!!!!!!!!!!!
Okay,then you admit now that that particular footage in the BBC 1984 programme THE FIGHT
then is indeed not really "original and unedited footage"
as you had previously claimed before you had posted it?
It has been altered.
Last edited by Caractacus on 26 Aug 2015, 19:31, edited 1 time in total.
I tried a quick Google News search and didn't find any 1963 post-fight Clay-Cooper reports (which seems strange, but I didn't look that long). I did find the Sports Illustrated report of the fight on SIVault. No mention of a long rest in that article. http://www.si.com/vault/1963/07/01/5950 ... -and-e-did
sweetsci wrote:I tried a quick Google News search and didn't find any 1963 post-fight Clay-Cooper reports (which seems strange, but I didn't look that long). I did find the Sports Illustrated report of the fight on SIVault. No mention of a long rest in that article. http://www.si.com/vault/1963/07/01/5950 ... -and-e-did
The problem there is of course is that SPORTS ILLUSTRATED is an American publican and as a result may have been (even unconciously) biased
against anything that was not American(such as Henry Cooper)as well as a possible resentment felt while there.
"Overpaid,Oversexed and Over here"
is what the average Englishman use to say about Americans in Britain back in the 1960's.
Caractus....if the unedited version of the sequence of events that you dispute have been downloaded, what is the problem? How is the ring walk going to help make your point?
You say there was a "delay" in the moments after the knockdown. That's all you need. He actually dealt with the issue that you say was at the crux of your concern.
If you keep on belly achin, whinin' and complainin in the wake of this gift, what sort are you?
Troll? Attention seeker? Wine-O?
Get back on the medication, get right with the lord, seek counseling, lay off the bottle and behave.
By the way, thanks evenrb, that was enlightening to anyone who can see it for what it is.
Jeez this still going on!!!! Whether the footage posted by evrenb has had the slo-mo replay added afterwards is irrelevant. The alleged torn glove incident was meant to happen late into the break, not at the start when the slo-mo was shown. Carpenters commentary was unbroken as was the further footage of Ali in the corner. In that video after the fight Carpenter even addresses the delay and confirms there was no long delay. Carpenter was there so conspiracy over.
Controversial wrote:Jeez this still going on!!!! Whether the footage posted by evrenb has had the slo-mo replay added afterwards is irrelevant. The alleged torn glove incident was meant to happen late into the break, not at the start when the slo-mo was shown. Carpenters commentary was unbroken as was the further footage of Ali in the corner. In that video after the fight Carpenter even addresses the delay and confirms there was no long delay. Carpenter was there so conspiracy over.
BoxBuzz wrote:Caractus....if the unedited version of the sequence of events that you dispute have been downloaded, what is the problem? How is the ring walk going to help make your point?
You say there was a "delay" in the moments after the knockdown. That's all you need. He actually dealt with the issue that you say was at the crux of your concern.
If you keep on belly achin, whinin' and complainin in the wake of this gift, what sort are you?
Troll? Attention seeker? Wine-O?
Get back on the medication, get right with the lord, seek counseling, lay off the bottle and behave.
By the way, thanks evenrb, that was enlightening to anyone who can see it for what it is.
You are welcome and 'ditto' to everything you said. . .
That replay was indeed added for that special but the commentary is unchanged and continues unbroken. My copy of the original unedited broadcast doesn't have that replay, instead the camera is focused on Ali's corner. The commentary though is unbroken. Sorry to disappoint you Brutu. Even if you don't believe the commentary is unbroken there the glove controversy didn't start until AFTER that point and you can see from the film that once the glove controversy started there was no break and the glove was not replaced. Period.
klompton wrote:Good lord, how can one man be so willingly blind?
That replay was indeed added for that special but the commentary is unchanged and continues unbroken. My copy of the original unedited broadcast doesn't have that replay, instead the camera is focused on Ali's corner. The commentary though is unbroken. Sorry to disappoint you Brutu. Even if you don't believe the commentary is unbroken there the glove controversy didn't start until AFTER that point and you can see from the film that once the glove controversy started there was no break and the glove was not replaced. Period.
BTW I dont think the instant replay was inserted in 1984 but actually earlier just after the kinescope was originally developed.
How do you know for sure that the commentery was unbroken before they had inserted the instant replay later?
BTW So where is the entire broadcast with the ring walks,and the ring announcer introducing the fighters?
Does your copy also have all the rest periods between rounds?
What is wrong with someone wanting to see the entire fight,if only to feel the flavour of the time?
klompton wrote:Good lord, how can one man be so willingly blind?
That replay was indeed added for that special but the commentary is unchanged and continues unbroken. My copy of the original unedited broadcast doesn't have that replay, instead the camera is focused on Ali's corner. The commentary though is unbroken. Sorry to disappoint you Brutu. Even if you don't believe the commentary is unbroken there the glove controversy didn't start until AFTER that point and you can see from the film that once the glove controversy started there was no break and the glove was not replaced. Period.
BTW I dont think the instant replay was inserted in 1984 but actually earlier just after the kinescope was originally developed.
How do you know for sure that the commentery was unbroken before they had inserted the instant replay later?
Because the copy I have isn't from 1984, its from 1963 and has no breaks. Just admit it you've been proven wrong, or not, it doesn't matter, anyone reading this can tell you are a moron.
As for the full fight, you disputed the length of the rest period immediately after the knockdown. This was shown, with the guy who was actually there and with him saying he timed it and it wasn't overly long. That's all you get. Nobody is here to give you a freebie. The only reason anyone is responding to you is to educate people who might believe your ignorant ramblings. Weve given up hope on educating you, that's impossible. We have faith in the common sense of others who might otherwise read your comments and think they have merit.
klompton wrote:Good lord, how can one man be so willingly blind?
That replay was indeed added for that special but the commentary is unchanged and continues unbroken. My copy of the original unedited broadcast doesn't have that replay, instead the camera is focused on Ali's corner. The commentary though is unbroken. Sorry to disappoint you Brutu. Even if you don't believe the commentary is unbroken there the glove controversy didn't start until AFTER that point and you can see from the film that once the glove controversy started there was no break and the glove was not replaced. Period.
BTW I dont think the instant replay was inserted in 1984 but actually earlier just after the kinescope was originally developed.
How do you know for sure that the commentery was unbroken before they had inserted the instant replay later?
Because the copy I have isn't from 1984, its from 1963 and has no breaks. Just admit it you've been proven wrong, or not, it doesn't matter, anyone reading this can tell you are a moron.
As for the full fight, you disputed the length of the rest period immediately after the knockdown. This was shown, with the guy who was actually there and with him saying he timed it and it wasn't overly long. That's all you get. Nobody is here to give you a freebie. The only reason anyone is responding to you is to educate people who might believe your ignorant ramblings. Weve given up hope on educating you, that's impossible. We have faith in the common sense of others who might otherwise read your comments and think they have merit.
What's more bizarre, and still unexplained, is why would anyone think the world media would cover up something as insignificant as an extended one minute break between rounds? Especially the British media when it involved a much loved British fighter and even more bizarrely Harry Carpenter?
At the time Ali fought Cooper he was just 18-0, so still a relative novice, and just 21 years old. He hadn't yet converted to Islam and he wasn't champ. Also he wasn't liked by many as he was seen as too flash and arrogant. He also wasn't given much hope of beating Liston even after beating Cooper so there was nothing to suggest Ali would go on to accomplish what he did. So why the press would bother to impose a worldwide news blackout under those circumstances is beyond me. What would they hope to achieve and what would be the point at that stage of Ali's career?
Controversial wrote:What's more bizarre, and still unexplained, is why would anyone think the world media would cover up something as insignificant as an extended one minute break between rounds? Especially the British media when it involved a much loved British fighter and even more bizarrely Harry Carpenter?
At the time Ali fought Cooper he was just 18-0, so still a relative novice, and just 21 years old. He hadn't yet converted to Islam and he wasn't champ. Also he wasn't liked by many as he was seen as too flash and arrogant. He also wasn't given much hope of beating Liston even after beating Cooper so there was nothing to suggest Ali would go on to accomplish what he did. So why the press would bother to impose a worldwide news blackout under those circumstances is beyond me. What would they hope to achieve and what would be the point at that stage of Ali's career?
I think you may have just answered your very own questions.
It was considered "insignificant" in the year of 1963 for the very reasons that you state.
and I think Harry Carpenter wasnt sure either until he was convinced by the film footage.The trouble is that Harry Carpentier didnt realize that
he was watching post-production edited footage during the taping of the 1984 BBC show.
klompton wrote:Good lord, how can one man be so willingly blind?
That replay was indeed added for that special but the commentary is unchanged and continues unbroken. My copy of the original unedited broadcast doesn't have that replay, instead the camera is focused on Ali's corner. The commentary though is unbroken. Sorry to disappoint you Brutu. Even if you don't believe the commentary is unbroken there the glove controversy didn't start until AFTER that point and you can see from the film that once the glove controversy started there was no break and the glove was not replaced. Period.
BTW I dont think the instant replay was inserted in 1984 but actually earlier just after the kinescope was originally developed.
How do you know for sure that the commentery was unbroken before they had inserted the instant replay later?
Because the copy I have isn't from 1984, its from 1963 and has no breaks. Just admit it you've been proven wrong, or not, it doesn't matter, anyone reading this can tell you are a moron.
As for the full fight, you disputed the length of the rest period immediately after the knockdown. This was shown, with the guy who was actually there and with him saying he timed it and it wasn't overly long. That's all you get. Nobody is here to give you a freebie. The only reason anyone is responding to you is to educate people who might believe your ignorant ramblings. Weve given up hope on educating you, that's impossible. We have faith in the common sense of others who might otherwise read your comments and think they have merit.
Let me guess here.Your 1963 film footage that you have is the same one that is courtesy of BigFights Inc.
The very same footage seen earlier on youtube with the sound out of synch and the colour change in film stock before the bell rings for round five?
Controversial wrote:What's more bizarre, and still unexplained, is why would anyone think the world media would cover up something as insignificant as an extended one minute break between rounds? Especially the British media when it involved a much loved British fighter and even more bizarrely Harry Carpenter?
At the time Ali fought Cooper he was just 18-0, so still a relative novice, and just 21 years old. He hadn't yet converted to Islam and he wasn't champ. Also he wasn't liked by many as he was seen as too flash and arrogant. He also wasn't given much hope of beating Liston even after beating Cooper so there was nothing to suggest Ali would go on to accomplish what he did. So why the press would bother to impose a worldwide news blackout under those circumstances is beyond me. What would they hope to achieve and what would be the point at that stage of Ali's career?
I think you may have just answered your very own questions.
It was considered "insignificant" in the year of 1963 for the very reasons that you state.
and I think Harry Carpenter wasnt sure either until he was convinced by the film footage.The trouble is that Harry Carpentier didnt realize that
he was watching post-production edited footage during the taping of the 1984 BBC show.
So if you agree Ali was insignificant at that stage of his career why did the press not report it? One thing is for certain, a British fighter, fighting in England against a hyped up unbeaten American, if there were any signs of foul play, or chance that Cooper was somehow cheated or lost his chance to win, that would have been splashed all over the press and a huge deal would've been made of it at the time. Long delays in fighters coming out for the next round are rare so if it did happen that would certainly have been mentioned in news reports, the fact that it wasn't speaks volumes.
Last edited by Controversial on 28 Aug 2015, 02:50, edited 2 times in total.
Controversial wrote:What's more bizarre, and still unexplained, is why would anyone think the world media would cover up something as insignificant as an extended one minute break between rounds? Especially the British media when it involved a much loved British fighter and even more bizarrely Harry Carpenter?
At the time Ali fought Cooper he was just 18-0, so still a relative novice, and just 21 years old. He hadn't yet converted to Islam and he wasn't champ. Also he wasn't liked by many as he was seen as too flash and arrogant. He also wasn't given much hope of beating Liston even after beating Cooper so there was nothing to suggest Ali would go on to accomplish what he did. So why the press would bother to impose a worldwide news blackout under those circumstances is beyond me. What would they hope to achieve and what would be the point at that stage of Ali's career?
Caractacus wrote:
Let me guess here.Your 1963 film footage that you have is the same one that is courtesy of BigFights Inc.
The very same footage seen earlier on youtube with the sound out of synch and the colour change in film stock before the bell rings for round five?
Youve said this before and Ive answered before. Let me repeat myself. My copy of this fight, complete and unedited, did not come from bigfights. I realize your head would explode before you would admit you are wrong but YOU ARE WRONG, and your pathetic wiggling and trying to create some grand conspiracy as to why everyone who disagrees with you is mistaken is just comical at this point. Sad but comical.
I, your friendly Moderator Buzz (a very credible source) had actually reported the real story years ago.)
The factual story, the real story, the one that has MY NAME attributed to it.
The one that correctly relays the fact of the matter. Once floored CC was allowed to go to his hotel room for the evening to relax and get over the trauma.
Cooper was forced to stay up all night (as punishment for hitting too hard), waiting for CC to return.
By that time, CC was refreshed, Cooper was tired and worn out....and the bout proceeded. With the outcome we all are aware of today.
I simply don't understand why you don't accept this.
I've shared with you the truth at great personal risk.
It's every bit as good a story as the one you have adopted. And you have my word on it, to boot.
BoxBuzz wrote:caractus, here is what I don't understand.
I, your friendly Moderator Buzz (a very credible source) had actually reported the real story years ago.)
The factual story, the real story, the one that has MY NAME attributed to it.
The one that correctly relays the fact of the matter. Once floored CC was allowed to go to his hotel room for the evening to relax and get over the trauma.
Cooper was forced to stay up all night (as punishment for hitting too hard), waiting for CC to return.
By that time, CC was refreshed, Cooper was tired and worn out....and the bout proceeded. With the outcome we all are aware of today.
I simply don't understand why you don't accept this.
I've shared with you the truth at great personal risk.
It's every bit as good a story as the one you have adopted. And you have my word on it, to boot.
Go big, or go home.
Pretty much as I recall it, except I was thinking Ali got two weeks, not just one night.
But I'll cede (one time only) to Buzz's memory on this one out of respect for my elders.
Caractacus wrote:
Let me guess here.Your 1963 film footage that you have is the same one that is courtesy of BigFights Inc.
The very same footage seen earlier on youtube with the sound out of synch and the colour change in film stock before the bell rings for round five?
Youve said this before and Ive answered before. Let me repeat myself. My copy of this fight, complete and unedited, did not come from bigfights. I realize your head would explode before you would admit you are wrong but YOU ARE WRONG, and your pathetic wiggling and trying to create some grand conspiracy as to why everyone who disagrees with you is mistaken is just comical at this point. Sad but comical.
So where and when did you originally obtain your copy of it then?
Also just out of curiousity,
what is the first image on it and the first words by the announcer?
Caractacus wrote:
So where and when did you originally obtain your copy of it then?
Also just out of curiousity,
what is the first image on it and the first words by the announcer?
Who gives a shit when i got it or what the first spoken word was or what color underwear Cooper wore. It doesnt matter. Get your head around the fact that the only thing important is the fact that rest period between rounds on the film i have is unedited.
Caractacus wrote:
Let me guess here.Your 1963 film footage that you have is the same one that is courtesy of BigFights Inc.
The very same footage seen earlier on youtube with the sound out of synch and the colour change in film stock before the bell rings for round five?
Youve said this before and Ive answered before. Let me repeat myself. My copy of this fight, complete and unedited, did not come from bigfights. I realize your head would explode before you would admit you are wrong but YOU ARE WRONG, and your pathetic wiggling and trying to create some grand conspiracy as to why everyone who disagrees with you is mistaken is just comical at this point. Sad but comical.
So where and when did you originally obtain your copy of it then?
Also just out of curiousity,
what is the first image on it and the first words by the announcer?
What a curious human. You are trying to establish that if our copy hasn't got the ring walks or introduction it can't be complete. I have literally hundreds of complete fights that start at the opening bell. Many were broadcast that way. Keep on being a joker...
