BoxRec

dagosd2000 wrote:He got a few warnings,but nothing was deducted. By the time Ali caught Bonavena with a left hook,the judges had Ali way ahead.(I believe one had him ahead 10 rds.)

I was referring to the fact that Ali stood over Ringo after he knocked him down waiting to hit him again as soon as he arose, essentially doing his best Jack Dempsey impression. I am in no way trying to fault Ali, merely pointing out an example of where Ali wasn’t exactly the gentleman in the ring when his opponent was hurt.

It was in response to this earlier comment.

dagosd2000 wrote:I agree with you about Ali. He could have legally hit Foreman again on his way down,but didn't. I don't think I ever saw a referee have to struggle to pull him off on opponent when the end was just seconds away.

The Great John L wrote:

dagosd2000 wrote:He got a few warnings,but nothing was deducted. By the time Ali caught Bonavena with a left hook,the judges had Ali way ahead.(I believe one had him ahead 10 rds.)

I was referring to the fact that Ali stood over Ringo after he knocked him down waiting to hit him again as soon as he arose, essentially doing his best Jack Dempsey impression. I am in no way trying to fault Ali, merely pointing out an example of where Ali wasn’t exactly the gentleman in the ring when his opponent was hurt.

It was in response to this earlier comment.

dagosd2000 wrote:I agree with you about Ali. He could have legally hit Foreman again on his way down,but didn't. I don't think I ever saw a referee have to struggle to pull him off on opponent when the end was just seconds away.

OK John L,now I know what you were getting at. I just looked at it again on YouTube. I didn't see Ali hovering over Ringo waiting to hit him as soon as he got up. It looked more like Ali standing over Liston in Lewistown. After Ali knocks him down the first time he waits against the ropes. The ref motions Ali in,but he isn't running towards Bonavena. He drops him again and then stands over him a la Liston. The ref is between the fighters and you can see Ali's mouth going. Ali starts WALKING towards Bonavena and the ref holds Ali up. This is important. Ali is still walking and talking like he wants to get at Ringo,but the ref puts out his hand.The ref is still BETWEEN the fighters. Ali doesn't try to get through the ref's modest effort to restrain him. What Ali does is flick away at the ref's hand. It looks a little funny. Ali drops Oscar a third time,is standing over him arms raised,and the ref doesn't even start a count.

I've never thought of Ali as a Jack Dempsey. Dempsey was an animal in the ring. Ali--a showboat. Even when he had Bonavena down,Ali is doing his schtick. Ali always complained that fighters fought dirty against him. We can make our arguments about the holding,the stalling,the talking,and grabbing. But Ali a dirty fighter? Ali a chicken shit fighter? That's one of the reasons young people liked him. Ali wasn't a scary guy. With all that talk,I don't think any opponent was afraid of Ali. And when Ali beat the scary guy,it was like every boy's dream to kick the bully's ass.

Ambling Alp wrote:That you would bring up the Lyle controversy is yet another example of people try to taint Ali's wins. It has been mentioned on this forum several times. Watch the tape. The fact is that Lyle wasn't punching back. It wasn't strange at all for this fight to be stopped. If it wasn't Ali, hardly anyone would give this a second thought.

Yeah, thats another one I don't understand. You see stoppages like that all the time. Fights are stopped today for much less than what Lyle took. When you get hit with 20+ consecutive punches and show no ability to defend yourself, its sort of hard to argue that you got a raw deal.

I Feel Fine wrote:Burns was a way more dominant champion in terms of numbers, nine successful title defenses

I should correct myself here, Burns actually had eleven defenses.

dagosd2000 wrote:

The Great John L wrote:

dagosd2000 wrote:He got a few warnings,but nothing was deducted. By the time Ali caught Bonavena with a left hook,the judges had Ali way ahead.(I believe one had him ahead 10 rds.)

I was referring to the fact that Ali stood over Ringo after he knocked him down waiting to hit him again as soon as he arose, essentially doing his best Jack Dempsey impression. I am in no way trying to fault Ali, merely pointing out an example of where Ali wasn’t exactly the gentleman in the ring when his opponent was hurt.

It was in response to this earlier comment.

dagosd2000 wrote:I agree with you about Ali. He could have legally hit Foreman again on his way down,but didn't. I don't think I ever saw a referee have to struggle to pull him off on opponent when the end was just seconds away.

OK John L,now I know what you were getting at. I just looked at it again on YouTube. I didn't see Ali hovering over Ringo waiting to hit him as soon as he got up. It looked more like Ali standing over Liston in Lewistown. After Ali knocks him down the first time he waits against the ropes. The ref motions Ali in,but he isn't running towards Bonavena. He drops him again and then stands over him a la Liston. The ref is between the fighters and you can see Ali's mouth going. Ali starts WALKING towards Bonavena and the ref holds Ali up. This is important. Ali is still walking and talking like he wants to get at Ringo,but the ref puts out his hand.The ref is still BETWEEN the fighters. Ali doesn't try to get through the ref's modest effort to restrain him. What Ali does is flick away at the ref's hand. It looks a little funny. Ali drops Oscar a third time,is standing over him arms raised,and the ref doesn't even start a count.

I've never thought of Ali as a Jack Dempsey. Dempsey was an animal in the ring. Ali--a showboat. Even when he had Bonavena down,Ali is doing his schtick. Ali always complained that fighters fought dirty against him. We can make our arguments about the holding,the stalling,the talking,and grabbing. But Ali a dirty fighter? Ali a chicken shit fighter? That's one of the reasons young people liked him. Ali wasn't a scary guy. With all that talk,I don't think any opponent was afraid of Ali. And when Ali beat the scary guy,it was like every boy's dream to kick the bully's ass.

Maybe the fact that Bonavena called Ali a "chicken" made him want to punish him...Interestingly enough after the fight Bonavena said Ali was better or tougher than Frazier...It just took us awhile to learn that...

DaveV17 wrote:I feel fine wrote about Ali, "He paid the price in the Norton fight, and had to avenge it in the rematch."

Ali never avenged anything with Norton. Ali lost the first and third fights big, the second one was closer, but Norton probably won it too. Ali and Norton both know who won the fights. Norton always says that he beat Ali all three times. The third fight is the worst decision I have seen in a championship fight.

I agree with you 100% DaveV17...Norton won all the fights...He was not popular like Ali though.

DaveV17 wrote:Ali never performed much if any better against Norton than he did in the first fight, so it is hard to make the case that conditioning was the reason he lost the first time. Ali had too much pride to face Norton the second time at anything less than 100% so I doubt the injured hand story. That story might be accepted by certain boxing people, but Ali wanted to win that fight and he wanted to win impressively. He didn't win impressively, and he probably didn't win it at all. The third fight was not even close, Norton was robbed. Ali did not want to have a 4th fight with Norton.

Norton's style was a style that troubled Ali and IMO, it always would.

I AGREE with you again Dave. Yah bless you.

elmersalsa wrote:

DaveV17 wrote:Ali never performed much if any better against Norton than he did in the first fight, so it is hard to make the case that conditioning was the reason he lost the first time. Ali had too much pride to face Norton the second time at anything less than 100% so I doubt the injured hand story. That story might be accepted by certain boxing people, but Ali wanted to win that fight and he wanted to win impressively. He didn't win impressively, and he probably didn't win it at all. The third fight was not even close, Norton was robbed. Ali did not want to have a 4th fight with Norton.

Norton's style was a style that troubled Ali and IMO, it always would.

I AGREE with you again Dave. Yah bless you.

You know, the fights were close.....and many believe that Ali did win those two fights. Including the officials on those evenings. I just took another look at the official outcome and it still hasn't changed. Did I mention that Joe Frazier thinks Norton won the third fight by a single round? Yeah I know I mention that all the time. But Joe was not that inclined to be all that generous to Ali...and he knew a little about the game. And it don't add up to robbery. It does add up to a close fight granted. And I don't mind hearin that it went the wrong way in some folks opinion. But robbery? The empirical evidence does not support the allegation.

BoxBuzz wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

DaveV17 wrote:Ali never performed much if any better against Norton than he did in the first fight, so it is hard to make the case that conditioning was the reason he lost the first time. Ali had too much pride to face Norton the second time at anything less than 100% so I doubt the injured hand story. That story might be accepted by certain boxing people, but Ali wanted to win that fight and he wanted to win impressively. He didn't win impressively, and he probably didn't win it at all. The third fight was not even close, Norton was robbed. Ali did not want to have a 4th fight with Norton.

Norton's style was a style that troubled Ali and IMO, it always would.

I AGREE with you again Dave. Yah bless you.

You know, the fights were close.....and many believe that Ali did win those two fights. Including the officials on those evenings. I just took another look at the official outcome and it still hasn't changed. Did I mention that Joe Frazier thinks Norton won the third fight by a single round? Yeah I know I mention that all the time. But Joe was not that inclined to be all that generous to Ali...and he knew a little about the game. And it don't add up to robbery. It does add up to a close fight granted. And I don't mind hearin that it went the wrong way in some folks opinion. But robbery? The empirical evidence does not support the allegation.

I shall sit down and score the whole trilogy for myself. I have read so many opinions
on these three fights and watched them ALL awhile ago. I never afterwards thought
to myself that Ali was very convincing in his wins. And what I suppose made Norton's
case less than convincing is that he never really was a high punch rate sort of fighter.

I have heard many people argue that Norton was robbed in the Holmes fight saying
citing the Ali fights...but Holmes fired back and shot a lot of shots back at Norton
whenever Norton opened up. Ali seldom did this..from memory.

Ali did not had that "victory face" in his fights with Norton....He always had that "I LOST THE FIGHT" look in those 3 fights. The same thing Dave and I saw.

Ali said he thought he won the second fight. He admitted that he thought he lost the third fight. If you want to call Ali a liar that your prerogative; but he still won the fight in the eyes of most people who actually know how to score a match. And let us never forget that you had Norton winning the second fight before you actually saw it. You're trying to create a false controversy over a mostly uncontroversial fight.

Frazier felt he won the second fight against Ali, I disagree
that does not mean I am calling him a liar it means I like
all others have my own opinion.

Im going to have a sit down, a cup of tea, get the pen and
paper out and make up my own mind... :)

i thought ali was brilliant yes

but he aint the greatest of all time

i honestly thought

louis
marciano
tyson
liston

they were better then ali

Robinson wrote:Frazier felt he won the second fight against Ali, I disagree
that does not mean I am calling him a liar it means I like
all others have my own opinion.

Im going to have a sit down, a cup of tea, get the pen and
paper out and make up my own mind... :)

Frazier thinks he won all three fights but if I remember correctly Ali wasn't the fighter sitting on the stool in Quezon City in 1975...

I keep seeing the argument that Frazier is somehow Ali's better because he knocked him down in the fifteenth round of their first fight despite losing the next two and being owned by the boxer (Foreman) who Ali owned...

Look, Joe Frazier was a skilled and courageous fighter but Muhammad Ali was his better...

As for Norton all three of his fights with Ali were close but he never had him in trouble in any of them...

lukesfc wrote:i thought ali was brilliant yes

but he aint the greatest of all time

i honestly thought

louis
marciano
tyson
liston

they were better then ali

care to explain why this is?

p4p1 wrote:

lukesfc wrote:i thought ali was brilliant yes

but he aint the greatest of all time

i honestly thought

louis
marciano
tyson
liston

they were better then ali

care to explain why this is?

tyson my all time favourite, louis common sense really, marciano undefeated would have destroyed ali if it happend , liston simply because ali thought him when he was washed up
and i beleive prime vs prime liston would have won the bout.

lukesfc wrote:

p4p1 wrote:

lukesfc wrote:i thought ali was brilliant yes

but he aint the greatest of all time

i honestly thought

louis
marciano
tyson
liston

they were better then ali

care to explain why this is?

tyson my all time favourite, louis common sense really, marciano undefeated would have destroyed ali if it happend , liston simply because ali thought him when he was washed up
and i beleive prime vs prime liston would have won the bout.

tyson couldnt get inside ali long enough and hit no harder than foreman of frazier and would have ali's jab in his face all night long,

why is louis common sense?

marciano undefeated but was taken the distance by old fighters and would of had been cut to ribbons by ali

liston was still champ when a 22yr old ali fought him imagine what a prime ali would of done

p4p1 wrote:

lukesfc wrote:i thought ali was brilliant yes

but he aint the greatest of all time

i honestly thought

louis
marciano
tyson
liston

they were better then ali

care to explain why this is?

Maybe he missed the two fights where Clay (Ali) knocked out Liston...IMHO, Foreman, Frazier, and perhaps Holy and Lenox beat Liston...It's ironic that Liston was Tyson's idol...Both were "sunshine" fighters...They looked great when things were going good but couldn't deal with adversity in their professional or personal life...

lukesfc wrote:

p4p1 wrote:

lukesfc wrote:i thought ali was brilliant yes

but he aint the greatest of all time

i honestly thought

louis
marciano
tyson
liston

they were better then ali

care to explain why this is?

tyson my all time favourite, louis common sense really, marciano undefeated would have destroyed ali if it happend , liston simply because ali thought him when he was washed up
and i beleive prime vs prime liston would have won the bout.

The thing is Ali would have hurt Marciano bad because Marciano was too courageous and would have lacked the sense to go down similar to the fictional Rocky against Apollo Creed...

5'9 190 pound Rocky is not going to beat a 6'3 1/2 220 pound man wiith ten times the hand ,foot speed and lateral movement...Simple physics...

quote]

The thing is Ali would have hurt Marciano bad because Marciano was too courageous and would have lacked the sense to go down similar to the fictional Rocky against Apollo Creed...

5'9 190 pound Rocky is not going to beat a 6'3 1/2 220 pound man wiith ten times the hand ,foot speed and lateral movement...Simple physics...[/quote]exactly

but i do thing ali louis would be interesting but i think the movement ali had would give louis to much trouble

p4p1 wrote:quote]

The thing is Ali would have hurt Marciano bad because Marciano was too courageous and would have lacked the sense to go down similar to the fictional Rocky against Apollo Creed...

5'9 190 pound Rocky is not going to beat a 6'3 1/2 220 pound man wiith ten times the hand ,foot speed and lateral movement...Simple physics...

exactly

but i do thing ali louis would be interesting but i think the movement ali had would give louis to much trouble

A good big man always beats a good little man...Now a smaller boxer can beat the bigger boxer, (say Leonard v Hearns #1) , when he has something to compensate for the lack of size such as speed...

Rocky fans would say he would compensate for his lack of size by hitting Ali so hard...Well, Foreman and Earnie Shavers hit hard too and Ali was able to dispose of them...

We will leave the Brown Bomber for another day...

PEACE

Robinson wrote:Frazier felt he won the second fight against Ali, I disagree
that does not mean I am calling him a liar it means I like
all others have my own opinion.

One has nothing to do with the other. I'm sure that Frazier believed what he said. Elmer is claiming that Ali didn't believe what he said; claiming that Ali thought he lost the second fight because of his body language after the match. I'm sure Ali was worried about the decision, but I believe him when he said that he thought he won the second fight, because he was later able to admit that he thought he lost the third fight. I can't think of many fighters who have actually admitted that they thought they lost a fight where the decision actually went their way.

Ali-Norton III is a controversial fight. Ali-Norton II is a relatively clear win (no less clear than Holmes-Norton) that Ali's haters are trying to muddy. That is the difference.

I Feel Fine wrote:

Robinson wrote:Frazier felt he won the second fight against Ali, I disagree
that does not mean I am calling him a liar it means I like
all others have my own opinion.

One has nothing to do with the other. I'm sure that Frazier believed what he said. Elmer is claiming that Ali didn't believe what he said; claiming that Ali thought he lost the second fight because of his body language after the match. I'm sure Ali was worried about the decision, but I believe him when he said that he thought he won the second fight, because he was later able to admit that he thought he lost the third fight. I can't think of many fighters who have actually admitted that they thought they lost a fight where the decision actually went their way.

Ali-Norton III is a controversial fight. Ali-Norton II is a relatively clear win (no less clear than Holmes-Norton) that Ali's haters are trying to muddy. That is the difference.

We are confusing fights...Ali-Frazier ll was not all that close...As for the Ali-Norton trilogy it was so close that it ultimately came down to who you like...

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote: We are confusing fights...Ali-Frazier ll was not all that close...As for the Ali-Norton trilogy it was so close that it ultimately came down to who you like...

"We" are not confusing anything. I didn't say anything about Ali-Frazier II, which I thought Ali won, I was responding to robinson not understanding what I was saying to elmer. And the Ali-Norton trilogy was close, which I never disputed. I thought they split the first two fights, and I thought Norton won the third, primarily because Ali was old by then. If Ali had been in his prime he would have won more clearly.

I Feel Fine wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote: We are confusing fights...Ali-Frazier ll was not all that close...As for the Ali-Norton trilogy it was so close that it ultimately came down to who you like...

"We" are not confusing anything. I didn't say anything about Ali-Frazier II, which I thought Ali won, I was responding to robinson not understanding what I was saying to elmer. And the Ali-Norton trilogy was close, which I never disputed. I thought they split the first two fights, and I thought Norton won the third, primarily because Ali was old by then. If Ali had been in his prime he would have won more clearly.

It's hard to follow what is in quotes and what is directly responded to.When you look at the quote and the response the subject appears to be Frazier...Ali won the second and third fights against Frazier convincingly... There can be no doubt about the outcome of the third one...I thought the first one was closer than some experts.

I think Ali is argubly the greatest boxer of all time...That being said I do think 64-67 Ali does better against some fighters and 72-75 Ali does better against other fighters...I'll cal the 70-71 era the transition era... "Ali outboxed Sonny Liston...He outfought Frazier and Foreman."

Even though pre layoff Ali was infinitely quicker and could dance longer I am not convinced the pre lay off Ali was better...He burnished his reputation in Kinshasha and Manilla...He begain it in Miami Beach and Lewiston...

As for the Norton trilogy I thought the judges and refs had it right...

No worries

PEACE

I Feel Fine wrote:Ali said he thought he won the second fight. He admitted that he thought he lost the third fight. If you want to call Ali a liar that your prerogative; but he still won the fight in the eyes of most people who actually know how to score a match. And let us never forget that you had Norton winning the second fight before you actually saw it. You're trying to create a false controversy over a mostly uncontroversial fight.

I said that I would not be surprised if Norton won the second fight, which he clearly did. Norton could not sell tickets and it would have been a catastrophic sight to see Ali lose again to the same man.

Second, Ali was the ticket, THE BIG TICKET, how can he sell if he lose TWICE IN A ROW? It could not happened, so he had to win for the sake of the dollar signs $$$$$$$$...Millions of dollars would have gone to waste.

There is not TRUE SPORTSMANSHIP in boxing since then.