ali over rated

[granberry]

Are you saying that Mr. T DID NOT write that Spinks took cocaine several hours before his second fight with Ali?

Bringing in B.A. Baracus to prove a point is akin to admitting defeat.

T was Spinks' "bodyguard" before the second Ali fight.

T wrote in a book that he saw Spinks take cocaine earlier on the same evening he fought Ali for the second time.

Promoter Bob Arum also said publicly that Spinks was taking drugs before the fight.

Spinks never sued either one.

Spinks left for the ring without his low blow protector.

Spinks' cornerman Georgie Benton walked out of the ring and left the arena after the 7th round.

It is unheard of for a trainer to leave in the middle of a fight.

Wouter, I will leave you to "thrill" to Ali's "victory" over a drugged Leon Spinks.

I am sure you are very excited that Ali "won the title for a third time" in this epic pugilistic battle.

Of course Ali had to lose to 7-fight novice Spinks in their first fight in order to then achieve this magnificent victoory.

LOL

[granberry]

BoxBuzz wrote, "Help me as I gain new critical thinking skills Irish......Wouldnt the very fact that Peter Jackson did not fight John Sullivan make him better than Sullivan beyond a shadow of a doubt?"

No, that fact wouldn't indicate that Jackson was better than Sullivan.

But the fact that Jackson wanted to fight Sullivan and Sullivan didn't want to fight Jackson indicates that Sullivan thought that Jackson was better.

Exactly, Dave.

And the fact that Jack Johnson refused to defend his title against Sam Langford is a duplication of that.

[KOJOE90]

Spinks never sued either one.

According to Leon Spinks he never got paid for the Ali rematch. Maybe that is why he didn't sue?

[granberry]

I didn't say Sullivan 'fought them all' Granberry, I said 'fought all the POLICE GAZETTE could throw at Sullivan'.

The Police Gazette lined up the Mitchell fights, Slade fights, and the Kilrain bout. And really, outside of Jem Mace and Peter Jackson, who else was there that Sullivan hadn't fought?

Rufus,

HOW MANY TIMES can you put your foot in your mouth?

Jem Mace was born in 1831.

Jem Mace was 51 years old when John L Sullivan won the title in 1882.

Do you have a VERY CONFUSED time sense, Rufus?

[evndrbsn]

I didn't say Sullivan 'fought them all' Granberry, I said 'fought all the POLICE GAZETTE could throw at Sullivan'.

The Police Gazette lined up the Mitchell fights, Slade fights, and the Kilrain bout. And really, outside of Jem Mace and Peter Jackson, who else was there that Sullivan hadn't fought?

Rufus,

HOW MANY TIMES can you put your foot in your mouth?

Jem Mace was born in 1831.

Jem Mace was 51 years old when John L Sullivan won the title in 1882.

Do you have a VERY CONFUSED time sense, Rufus?

Another winner from granberry.

Jem Mace fought until he was almost in his mid-70s and contested for "The Heavyweight Championship of England" in 1890 against Charley Mitchell. Even though it was more of a promotional ploy, he was still facing quite a challenge in Mitchell. Mace was also very active in the year you so dubiously pointed out, 1882.

Check out http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/mace-j.htm for more information on his career or just go pick up a book, you could seriously use a history lesson.

Get your facts straight or choose a new sport.

[m1kee50]

I assume you would have ali at the bottom of that list granberry....otherwise there wouldn't be enough drama in your contribution.

Evndrbsn offered up some facts.....but I suppose you reject them as "opinion" or "hype"...or "happenstance" or contrivances manipulated by the thought police.........is this going to earn me more of your barbs? Cuz I'm just askin here. And why have you left out Trevor Berbick? Do I have to do all your research for you? OH and let's not forget Larry Holmes.....


Nope your on the right track here....there has been a cover up conspiracy, subtrefuge by the elite media, obfiscation on a massive scale, and YOU have discovered it. Damn good bit of research. Is it Miller time yet?

What have you got on Wayne Gretzky?
and when will you release your finding on Michael Jordan? Babe Ruth? Pele? I'm waiting for your book release...."Everything you know is wrong"!

there is already a book called that. its very good, but it does not touch on sport im afraid. I myself have nothing to offer on granberrys thinking, just his manners. but i have long learnt that your countrymen come in two versions, polite and impolite

[granberry]

I didn't say Sullivan 'fought them all' Granberry, I said 'fought all the POLICE GAZETTE could throw at Sullivan'.

The Police Gazette lined up the Mitchell fights, Slade fights, and the Kilrain bout. And really, outside of Jem Mace and Peter Jackson, who else was there that Sullivan hadn't fought?

Rufus,

HOW MANY TIMES can you put your foot in your mouth?

Jem Mace was born in 1831.

Jem Mace was 51 years old when John L Sullivan won the title in 1882.

Do you have a VERY CONFUSED time sense, Rufus?

Another winner from granberry.

Jem Mace fought until he was almost in his mid-70s and contested for "The Heavyweight Championship of England" in 1890 against Charley Mitchell. Even though it was more of a promotional ploy, he was still facing quite a challenge in Mitchell. Mace was also very active in the year you so dubiously pointed out, 1882.

Check out http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/mace-j.htm for more information on his career or just go pick up a book, you could seriously use a history lesson.

Get your facts straight or choose a new sport.

Jem Mace was born in 1831.

Jem Mace was 51 years old when Sullivan won the title in 1882.

That is a fact, whether you like it or not, ev.

[BoxBuzz]

granberry....I don't mean to offend and yet it may be impossible for me not to with this statement....but you strike me as the sort who very likely knows the price of everything but no clue as to it's value.

[granberry]

I myself have nothing to offer on granberrys thinking, just his manners.

Mikee,

I see that you are quite SELECTIVE.

It appears that you have somehow missed the following statements posted here by buzz.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

granberry, I would consider you perhaps the greatest flyweight thinker of all time.

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 6:52 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


put down the crack

Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:25 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Would you care to comment on these posts by buzz, Mikee?
.

[Collins2000]

Cranberry, what did you think of Ali's victory over George Foreman?

[BoxBuzz]

I myself have nothing to offer on granberrys thinking, just his manners.

Mikee,

I see that you are quite SELECTIVE.

It appears that you have somehow missed the following statements posted here by buzz.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

granberry, I would consider you perhaps the greatest flyweight thinker of all time.

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 6:52 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


put down the crack

Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:25 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Would you care to comment on these posts by buzz, Mikee?
.

granberry I apologize for any insensitivity.....I probably could have been more respectful....I actually thought I was sort of "playing to the room" and that you had "set the tone" and would likely not take any real issue with my style.

So I'll walk a bit more straight and narrow if that will help return to peace here. Your opinions and style simply set me aback and I perhaps was overanimated in my reaction.

[DaveV17]

edit

[BoxBuzz]

The question was not for me, but I want to comment on the Ali - Foreman fight. IMO, the result would not have surprised anyone who saw Foreman vs. Peralta. Peralta had Foreman staggering and ready to go late in that fight. Peralta was a good fighter, but not an elite fighter.

If that fight had happened in the modern era, since boxing fans have more access to information, (Boxing Message Boards, U Tube, etc.) Foreman would have been considered a badly flawed fighter regardless of the blow outs over Frazier and Norton. Fans would have known that George lacked stamina, was slow, and didn't have great boxing skills.

In addition, Ali was just as big as Foreman, quicker, more experienced, and had much better stamina. In today's information age, Foreman would probably not be the favorite in the fight. Ali probably saw the Peralta fight, knew that Foreman was limited, saw that Foreman threw wide looping shots and knew it would be an easy fight. After the fight, Ali said something similar to, "Foreman punched like a girl."

Ali layed on the ropes, suckered Foreman in, let Foreman throw the wide, looping shots, stepped inside of Foreman's power and landed a few quick shots or grabbed Foreman and made the ref. separate them. Foreman looked impressive against Frazier and Norton and most people had only seen those two fights, if more people had seen the Peralta fight, they wouldn't have been surprised by the outcome.

I was one who paid to see the Peralta fight and I have to say I share your opinion on this. It is indeed a "styles make fights" thing. I honestly think Ali was VERY surprised and in near shock that Foreman got past Kenny Norton's boxing skills and thought it was a fluke AND a gift. A gift he recognized as one of the most exploitable promotion opportunities of all time.

Nevertheless. Foreman could stop just about anyone he could get a bead on. And it takes nothing away from Ali's masterful body of work in boxing.

[Controversial]

Are you saying that Mr. T DID NOT write that Spinks took cocaine several hours before his second fight with Ali?

Bringing in B.A. Baracus to prove a point is akin to admitting defeat.

T was Spinks' "bodyguard" before the second Ali fight.

T wrote in a book that he saw Spinks take cocaine earlier on the same evening he fought Ali for the second time.

Promoter Bob Arum also said publicly that Spinks was taking drugs before the fight.

Spinks never sued either one.

Spinks left for the ring without his low blow protector.

Spinks' cornerman Georgie Benton walked out of the ring and left the arena after the 7th round.

It is unheard of for a trainer to leave in the middle of a fight.

Wouter, I will leave you to "thrill" to Ali's "victory" over a drugged Leon Spinks.

I am sure you are very excited that Ali "won the title for a third time" in this epic pugilistic battle.

Of course Ali had to lose to 7-fight novice Spinks in their first fight in order to then achieve this magnificent victoory.

LOL

How can Ali be blamed for anything Spinks and his corner done? If Spinks took drugs or his team were unprepared that's their problem, no one elses.

[BoxBuzz]

Bringing in B.A. Baracus to prove a point is akin to admitting defeat.

T was Spinks' "bodyguard" before the second Ali fight.

T wrote in a book that he saw Spinks take cocaine earlier on the same evening he fought Ali for the second time.

Promoter Bob Arum also said publicly that Spinks was taking drugs before the fight.

Spinks never sued either one.

Spinks left for the ring without his low blow protector.

Spinks' cornerman Georgie Benton walked out of the ring and left the arena after the 7th round.

It is unheard of for a trainer to leave in the middle of a fight.

Wouter, I will leave you to "thrill" to Ali's "victory" over a drugged Leon Spinks.

I am sure you are very excited that Ali "won the title for a third time" in this epic pugilistic battle.

Of course Ali had to lose to 7-fight novice Spinks in their first fight in order to then achieve this magnificent victoory.

LOL

How can Ali be blamed for anything Spinks and his corner done? If Spinks took drugs or his team were unprepared that's their problem, no one elses.

I think the point is that it was simply another "compromised opponent" Something that mysteriously happened every time Ali walked into the ring..... somehow the forces of man and nature would conspire against all of his opponents....over and over again. Except for 5 out of 56 occasions.

[Controversial]

The question was not for me, but I want to comment on the Ali - Foreman fight. IMO, the result would not have surprised anyone who saw Foreman vs. Peralta. Peralta had Foreman staggering and ready to go late in that fight. Peralta was a good fighter, but not an elite fighter.

If that fight had happened in the modern era, since boxing fans have more access to information, (Boxing Message Boards, U Tube, etc.) Foreman would have been considered a badly flawed fighter regardless of the blow outs over Frazier and Norton. Fans would have known that George lacked stamina, was slow, and didn't have great boxing skills.

In addition, Ali was just as big as Foreman, quicker, more experienced, and had much better stamina. In today's information age, Foreman would probably not be the favorite in the fight. Ali probably saw the Peralta fight, knew that Foreman was limited, saw that Foreman threw wide looping shots and knew it would be an easy fight. After the fight, Ali said something similar to, "Foreman punched like a girl."

Ali layed on the ropes, suckered Foreman in, let Foreman throw the wide, looping shots, stepped inside of Foreman's power and landed a few quick shots or grabbed Foreman and made the ref. separate them. Foreman looked impressive against Frazier and Norton and most people had only seen those two fights, if more people had seen the Peralta fight, they wouldn't have been surprised by the outcome.

I agree, I made similar comments when discussing why the old time fighters are normally thought of as being better than todays. The main problem with the older fights is many were not televised. Today fights are played across the globe, filmed in different angles, played in slow-mo and analysed by the fight 'experts'. The fights are then scrutinised in forums like these, written about in papers and magazines and are available on other sites to watch again and again. Its therefore very easy to find flaws and pick holes in fighters, a luxory we don't have with many of the old time 'greats'. And of course sites like this give us a huge database to search and scrutinise records, again something not available years ago.

[Expug]

Well let me chime in here on one point.
Fighters always have something wrong going into a fight .
Why?
Because the poundings in the gym , constant colds, dehydration from trying to make weight, bad hands, problems with the old lady, famine, locust swarm etc etc.
Its a rough sport .
You always feel like shit. Even when in shape , somethings not right.

[granberry]

Mikee,

HAS THE CAT GOT YOUR TONGUE?

I asked your opinion of the 'manners' on display in these posts by buzz:
__________________________________________________________

I myself have nothing to offer on granberrys thinking, just his manners.

Mikee,

I see that you are quite SELECTIVE.

It appears that you have somehow missed the following statements posted here by buzz.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

granberry, I would consider you perhaps the greatest flyweight thinker of all time.

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 6:52 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


put down the crack

Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:25 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Would you care to comment on these posts by buzz, Mikee?
.

[granberry]

MIKEE,

Since you have appointed yourself the arbitor of "manners " on this site,

give us all your expert assessment of the manners on display in the following posts:

___________________________________________________

ringsider
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 2:16 am

granberry=dingleberry

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 9&start=75
_______________________________________________________

Terence
Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:41 am

Granberry, how did you find out Hagler was banging your missus? Did you catch them in the act?

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 9&start=75
________________________________________________________

Thanks in advance for your expert assessment of the "manners" on display in these two posts by terence and ringsider, Mikee.

I myself have nothing to offer on granberrys thinking, just his manners.

[wouter]

Wouter, I will leave you to "thrill" to Ali's "victory" over a drugged Leon Spinks.

Nah... I don't "thrill" that much. What do you make of a fight between the drugged Leon Spinks and a clean Mr. T?

[BoxBuzz]

MIKEE,

Since you have appointed yourself the arbitor of "manners " on this site,

give us all your expert assessment of the manners on display in the following posts:

___________________________________________________

ringsider
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 2:16 am

granberry=dingleberry

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 9&start=75
_______________________________________________________

Terence
Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:41 am

Granberry, how did you find out Hagler was banging your missus? Did you catch them in the act?

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 9&start=75
________________________________________________________

Thanks in advance for your expert assessment of the "manners" on display in these two posts by terence and ringsider, Mikee.

I myself have nothing to offer on granberrys thinking, just his manners.

granberry....just how many apologies would you like? Please read my earlier post where I take responsibility for not being perfectly cricket.

[granberry]

MIKEE,

Since you have appointed yourself the arbitor of "manners " on this site,

give us all your expert assessment of the manners on display in the following posts:

___________________________________________________

ringsider
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 2:16 am

granberry=dingleberry

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 9&start=75
_______________________________________________________

Terence
Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:41 am

Granberry, how did you find out Hagler was banging your missus? Did you catch them in the act?

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 9&start=75
________________________________________________________

Thanks in advance for your expert assessment of the "manners" on display in these two posts by terence and ringsider, Mikee.

I myself have nothing to offer on granberrys thinking, just his manners.

granberry....just how many apologies would you like? Please read my earlier post where I take responsibility for not being perfectly cricket.

buzz,

the post was addressed to Mikee--not you.

Or ARE YOU Mikee?

Still waiting for Mikee's response.

[KOJOE90]

Well let me chime in here on one point.
Fighters always have something wrong going into a fight .
Why?
Because the poundings in the gym , constant colds, dehydration from trying to make weight, bad hands, problems with the old lady, famine, locust swarm etc etc.
Its a rough sport .
You always feel like shit. Even when in shape , somethings not right.

Strange you should say that mate, over here in the UK there is a sports channel called Eurosport UK. The longtime Boxing commentator is an ex-pro called Steve Holdsworth (great guy by all accounts). Here is his record.

http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=82311

Anyway, he has said many times on TV the same thing as yourself. He is a very "say it as it is" type and I remember him once saying with reference to fighters using sore/busted up hands as an excuse, "I broke my hand in every pro' fight I had, but you just have to get on with it, this aint tennis" or words to that effect.

When I was training hard and in top shape (not Boxing) I always felt as stong as an ox, but I always at the same time had a pain somewhere, usually my right shoulder or knee.

[m1kee50]

MIKEE,

Since you have appointed yourself the arbitor of "manners " on this site,

give us all your expert assessment of the manners on display in the following posts:

___________________________________________________

ringsider
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 2:16 am

granberry=dingleberry

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 9&start=75
_______________________________________________________

Terence
Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:41 am

Granberry, how did you find out Hagler was banging your missus? Did you catch them in the act?

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 9&start=75
________________________________________________________

Thanks in advance for your expert assessment of the "manners" on display in these two posts by terence and ringsider, Mikee.

granberry....just how many apologies would you like? Please read my earlier post where I take responsibility for not being perfectly cricket.

buzz,

the post was addressed to Mikee--not you.

Or ARE YOU Mikee?

Still waiting for Mikee's response.

I've been out earning a crust pal, you seem a little tense, all these posts anxious for responses.... slow day at the office is it?.

If it makes you happy, I hereby view negatively all the bad manners expressed by one person to another person on this site. I will make no exclusions or extenuating circumstances, I leave that for individual users to sort out amongst themselves.

Oh, by the way granberry, I also moonlight as the ARBITER of spelling...

[Expug]

Well let me chime in here on one point.
Fighters always have something wrong going into a fight .
Why?
Because the poundings in the gym , constant colds, dehydration from trying to make weight, bad hands, problems with the old lady, famine, locust swarm etc etc.
Its a rough sport .
You always feel like shit. Even when in shape , somethings not right.

Strange you should say that mate, over here in the UK there is a sports channel called Eurosport UK. The longtime Boxing commentator is an ex-pro called Steve Holdsworth (great guy by all accounts). Here is his record.

http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=82311

Anyway, he has said many times on TV the same thing as yourself. He is a very "say it as it is" type and I remember him once saying with reference to fighters using sore/busted up hands as an excuse, "I broke my hand in every pro' fight I had, but you just have to get on with it, this aint tennis" or words to that effect.

When I was training hard and in top shape (not Boxing) I always felt as stong as an ox, but I always at the same time had a pain somewhere, usually my right shoulder or knee.

Hello KO.
Mr. Holdworth is right. There is always someting wrong.
The constant hard training will beat a guy up.
But the good thing is for a boxer in prime condition, physicaly as well as mentaly, can put the problem aside come fight time.
This guy broke one of my ribs before a fight when we were sparring.
http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=18271
It didnt really hurt too much until after.