Page 8 of 8

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 16:11
by ThatOne
Collins2000 wrote:
HomicideHenry wrote:
ThatOne wrote:It was a unanimous decision over Shavers.

The only Ali Ingo stops is the dehydrated and done Ali of the Holmes fight. Ali of Spinks ll has enough left in the tank to beat Ingo. Ingo probably beats the done but not dehydrated Ali of the Spinks fight in a desultory decision.

History is on my side. Ali was stopped once in a twenty five year pro and amateur career. Ingo isn't going to be the second.
My bad, 9-6 on two cards, 9-5-1 on the third. Sorry. None the less, Shavers could have kayoed Ali in the 2nd round had he just followed it up, then we wouldnt been talking this bullshit right now---it was Shavers own doing, not some grand scheme Ali managed. Ali won on pure dumb freak luck, even he said he was unconscious from that second round onward, not remembering a damn thing.
Man, you talk some crap at times, Rufus. Not a single word about Ali's heart to weather that and still win.

There is so much revisionism about Ali. Now, he was about to be knocked out by Shavers in the second round is added to the list. I am sure Shavers rocked him. He 's one of the biggest punchers in hw history. But Ali weasn't about to go.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 16:12
by The Great John L
Collins2000 wrote:Man, you talk some crap at times, Rufus. Not a single word about Ali's heart to weather that and still win.
Actually, I think the heart he showed in Spinks I was pretty impressive as well. Leon beat the living hell out of him that night.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 16:20
by ThatOne
The Great John L wrote:
Collins2000 wrote:Man, you talk some crap at times, Rufus. Not a single word about Ali's heart to weather that and still win.
Actually, I think the heart he showed in Spinks I was pretty impressive as well. Leon beat the living hell out of him that night.

Which fight?

The second fight Ali was never in serious trouble.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 16:23
by Collins2000
ThatOne wrote:
The Great John L wrote:
Collins2000 wrote:Man, you talk some crap at times, Rufus. Not a single word about Ali's heart to weather that and still win.
Actually, I think the heart he showed in Spinks I was pretty impressive as well. Leon beat the living hell out of him that night.

Which fight?

The second fight Ali was never in serious trouble.

Er, the "I" signifies it is the first fight, mate.

I don't always agree with John L's take on certain boxers but, unlike a lot of the posters in here, I suspect he has actually watched the fights he is commenting on with a reasonably open mind.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 16:23
by ThatOne
The infamous round 2 starts at the 4:30 matk or so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGqret3Y ... re=related

Big, big round for Shavers but Ali, imho, isn't close to a ten count. Ali showed tremendous heart in that fight.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 16:26
by ThatOne
I would say that Spinks could never hurt Ali but Shavers could have killed him but Camacho-Leonard showed you don't have to be a bigpuncher to hurt a faded legend.

As an aside Ali and Shavers were close friends. I think they both knew each other very well.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 16:29
by Collins2000
ThatOne wrote:The infamous round 2 starts at the 4:30 matk or so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGqret3Y ... re=related

Big, big round for Shavers but Ali, imho, isn't close to a ten count. Ali showed tremendous heart in that fight.
According to Rufus, Ali was "unconscious" for the rest of the fight. :D

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 16:31
by The Great John L
ThatOne wrote:I would say that Spinks could never hurt Ali but Shavers could have killed him but Camacho-Leonard showed you don't have to be a bigpuncher to hurt a faded legend.

As an aside Ali and Shavers were close friends. I think they both knew each other very well.
I think the problem with the beating that Spinks put on Ali was partly due to the fact that he couldn’t punch hard enough to KO him, although Ali was very hurt a few times in the later rounds. He probably landed more punches on Ali in a single fight than anyone besides Holmes.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 16:33
by ThatOne
Collins2000 wrote:
ThatOne wrote:The infamous round 2 starts at the 4:30 matk or so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGqret3Y ... re=related

Big, big round for Shavers but Ali, imho, isn't close to a ten count. Ali showed tremendous heart in that fight.
According to Rufus, Ali was "unconscious" for the rest of the fight. :D

It was scored by rounds not by points; might have even been a 10-8 round but Ali's legs never buckled. And he certainly wasn't unconscious for the rest of the fight. But I am sure those rights hurt. He dropped a prime Larry Holmes with one of them.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 16:36
by ThatOne
The Great John L wrote:
ThatOne wrote:I would say that Spinks could never hurt Ali but Shavers could have killed him but Camacho-Leonard showed you don't have to be a bigpuncher to hurt a faded legend.

As an aside Ali and Shavers were close friends. I think they both knew each other very well.
I think the problem with the beating that Spinks put on Ali was partly due to the fact that he couldn’t punch hard enough to KO him, although Ali was very hurt a few times in the later rounds. He probably landed more punches on Ali in a single fight than anyone besides Holmes.
Spinks was so much smaller than Ali. He was really a cruiserweight. He caught Ali at the right time but even a faded but in shape and motivated Ali easily beat him in the rematch. Now, the revisionists say Ali lost that fight too. That's what thirty one years of time can do to events. The second fight was not particularly close.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 16:39
by The Great John L
ThatOne wrote:Spinks was so much smaller than Ali. He was really a cruiserweight. He caught Ali at the right time but even a faded but in shape and motivated Ali easily beat him in the rematch. Now, the revisionists say Ali lost that fight too. That's what thirty one years of time can do to events. The second fight was not particularly close.
Neither was the first. BTW, I was just commenting on the amount of punishment that Ali took in Spinks I, not making any comment on anyones' capabilities for a particular fight.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 16:42
by ThatOne
The Great John L wrote:
ThatOne wrote:Spinks was so much smaller than Ali. He was really a cruiserweight. He caught Ali at the right time but even a faded but in shape and motivated Ali easily beat him in the rematch. Now, the revisionists say Ali lost that fight too. That's what thirty one years of time can do to events. The second fight was not particularly close.
Neither was the first. BTW, I was just commenting on the amount of punishment that Ali took in Spinks I, not making any comment on anyones' capabilities for a particular fight.

I wasn't including you among the revisionists. I was just reciting their arguments. Now I am reading that Ali wanted Dundee to cut the gloves off in Manilla and that if Frazuier's corner didn't throw in the towel, Ali's corner was. That Frazier was in fine shape after The Thrilla and Ali went to the hospital when in fact Frazier went back to his hotel room, nearly blinded, and Ali went to the Malacañang Palace for a dinner in the winner's honor. I am not saying Ali wasn't hurt. Mark Kram said he could barely lift his fork but he went.

You can't make this stuff up.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 09 Dec 2009, 19:26
by raylawpc
ThatOne wrote:I have a question.

According to all the witnesses Ali embarrassed Ingo. The only one who disagrees was Ingo. Harold Conrad, the famed promoter and writer was there as well as SI reporter, Gil Rogin. What are we to conclude?

a) they are all lying

b) Ingo wasn't really trying

c) Ingo had no answer for Ali's style. It wasn't a style he was accustomed to

d) other
Other. The result of a sparring session is meaningless.

Let me give you an example: In 1971, when Brian Kelly was preparing for his title fight with Bob Foster, we brought in a journeyman light-heavyweight named Frankie Evans as a sparring partner. In the gym, Frankie Evans used to kick Kelly's you-know-what. But Kelly and Frank fought in a ten-rounder the year before and Kelly soundly defeated him. And in a real fight, I think Kelly would always beat Evans. But Kelly was not a gym fighter. In the ring, in an actual fight, he went all out.

Rick Farris, who knew and sparred with Ruben Olivares, will tell you the same thing about Olivares.

Its my understanding that Ingo never looked good sparring, and for the first Patterson fight, his camp eventually quit having public sparring sessions because he looked so bad.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 10 Dec 2009, 05:28
by HomicideHenry
Collins2000 wrote:
ThatOne wrote:The infamous round 2 starts at the 4:30 matk or so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGqret3Y ... re=related

Big, big round for Shavers but Ali, imho, isn't close to a ten count. Ali showed tremendous heart in that fight.
According to Rufus, Ali was "unconscious" for the rest of the fight. :D
According to the Ali nuthuggers documentary 'Ali's Dozen', Stallone and others said that Ali told them he was on 'automatic pilot mode' that he was 'talking to the angels' in his corner and couldnt remember a damn thing following round one. Its not just me saying this.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 10 Dec 2009, 05:29
by HomicideHenry
And btw, dont care what ThatOne says, one more right hand and Ali would have been KTFO. Shavers was just too damn stupid to not follow up that right hand.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 10 Dec 2009, 15:43
by Collins2000
HomicideHenry wrote:And btw, dont care what ThatOne says, one more right hand and Ali would have been KTFO. Shavers was just too damn stupid to not follow up that right hand.
Rufus, you know nothing at all about boxing.

Why don't you fekk off back to the other forum and talk more crap about your "career".

:D

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 10 Dec 2009, 15:44
by Collins2000
HomicideHenry wrote:
Collins2000 wrote:
ThatOne wrote:The infamous round 2 starts at the 4:30 matk or so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGqret3Y ... re=related

Big, big round for Shavers but Ali, imho, isn't close to a ten count. Ali showed tremendous heart in that fight.
According to Rufus, Ali was "unconscious" for the rest of the fight. :D
According to the Ali nuthuggers documentary 'Ali's Dozen', Stallone and others said that Ali told them he was on 'automatic pilot mode' that he was 'talking to the angels' in his corner and couldnt remember a damn thing following round one. Its not just me saying this.

You need to get some help, mate. You actually seem to believe some of the crap you post.

:D

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 10 Dec 2009, 15:52
by HomicideHenry
Collins, keep personal vendettas out of discussions. I am only agreeing with the statements Stallone and others made, and from what footage I have seen---and mind you, I do know how great Ali truly was, because believe it or not I am a fan of his---Ali could very well have been kayoed for the first time in his career against Shavers, had 'The Acorn' (as Ali so lovingly called him) followed up the attack. Of course he didnt, as Ali did the 'chicken dance' and made Shavers believe he wasnt hurt. Still, an amazing achievement by Ali to go 15 rounds with the worlds most dangerous puncher---however Shavers had his issues, he had a questionable chin, his stamina was a liability.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 10 Dec 2009, 16:00
by Collins2000
HomicideHenry wrote:Collins, keep personal vendettas out of discussions. I am only agreeing with the statements Stallone and others made, and from what footage I have seen---and mind you, I do know how great Ali truly was, because believe it or not I am a fan of his---Ali could very well have been kayoed for the first time in his career against Shavers, had 'The Acorn' (as Ali so lovingly called him) followed up the attack. Of course he didnt, as Ali did the 'chicken dance' and made Shavers believe he wasnt hurt. Still, an amazing achievement by Ali to go 15 rounds with the worlds most dangerous puncher---however Shavers had his issues, he had a questionable chin, his stamina was a liability.
Making fun of your incredible stupidity isn't a vendetta, son. It's a hobby. And every man has to have a hobby, Rufus.

Yours is talking crap about your boxing "career", isn't it?

:D

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 10 Dec 2009, 16:07
by HomicideHenry
I have no career Collins, never claimed to have one. Someday I hope to enter the ring, but I claim nothing otherwise.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 10 Dec 2009, 16:11
by ThatOne
HomicideHenry wrote:I have no career Collins, never claimed to have one. Someday I hope to enter the ring, but I claim nothing otherwise.

Do you want to box?

My uncle boxed professionally and my dad boxed in The Golden Gloves. I would suspect if you want to be a boxer you should have started in your teens. There are easier ways to make a living.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 10 Dec 2009, 20:41
by Goodnight, Irene
If BJermaine has earned a one-month suspension, the detestable --- & increasingly deranged --- Collins deserves at least that. At least.

Re: Rating the Heavyweights of the 1960s

Posted: 11 Dec 2009, 03:16
by HomicideHenry
ThatOne wrote:
HomicideHenry wrote:I have no career Collins, never claimed to have one. Someday I hope to enter the ring, but I claim nothing otherwise.

Do you want to box?

My uncle boxed professionally and my dad boxed in The Golden Gloves. I would suspect if you want to be a boxer you should have started in your teens. There are easier ways to make a living.
I have no aspirations, false hopes, of being a success in the toughest business in the world. I will consider myself a success if I can have one match; thats more than most ever do in their life time, for many never go after their dreams.