BoxRec

CheckHook wrote:Baldomir Vs Judah
Robinson Vs Gatti

Hopkins Vs Trinidad (Hindsight says we should've all seen it coming, but I guess the majority must've been backing Trinidad.)

Why?

It was not like it was Tyson-Douglas orNaz-Barrera etc. Where Tyon/Naz stopped preparing how they used to, so they had a Loss waiting to happen.

Trinidad was favorite as he was KO'ing his opponents, and was expected to Retire the Old Hopkins.

Not as if Trinidad was not ready or prepared, he jus got schooled

observer1 wrote:

CheckHook wrote:Baldomir Vs Judah
Robinson Vs Gatti

Hopkins Vs Trinidad (Hindsight says we should've all seen it coming, but I guess the majority must've been backing Trinidad.)

Why?

It was not like it was Tyson-Douglas orNaz-Barrera etc. Where Tyon/Naz stopped preparing how they used to, so they had a Loss waiting to happen.

Trinidad was favorite as he was KO'ing his opponents, and was expected to Retire the Old Hopkins.

Not as if Trinidad was not ready or prepared, he jus got schooled

I was refering to the fact that Trinidad was fighting the best middleweight of the era and Hopkins was probably not acknowledged as the top fighter he was. My point being that despite Trinidad looking good against a guy like Joppy, he was and never would be on Hopkins level at 160.

Trinidad wasn't on Hopkins' level, period. If Hopkins was a Welterweight he would have beaten Tito at Welterweight. Actually, Trinidad weighed more than Hopkins in their 2001 fight.
Granberry... I usually use paragraphs, I didn't here as it was a short post... you never use paragraphs.

granberry wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He had more than that. His stamina was off the charts and his will was unbreakable.

He had no boxing ability.

Some of the 'stamina' came from what the muslims who ran him once he got the title put on his mouthpiece after 9 or 10 rounds. Ask Milt Bailey.

The Jerry Martin fight finished him. He took such a bad physical beating in that fight that he never won a fight against a good fighter the rest of his career.

Everybody in Philly considered him a "nice guy." He was good natured and didn't have any nastiness in him. I remember Wesley Mouzon saying to me, on the same night his fighter Dwight Braxton had just beaten Franklin for the second time. "He's a nice guy." I wasn't quite sure what that had to do with anything, but Mouzon repeated it several times.

I saw Franklin fight at the Spectrum against Dale Grant (more a blown up middleweight), Yaqui Lopez (their first fight), and Billy Douglas. Matt went CRASHING to the canvas against Douglas. got a long count from the ref, who later stopped the fight in Matt's favor in the very next round in a disputed ending. Poor Billy Douglas always got the short end of the stick in Philly.

Wow, it's amazing you attended so many fights without watching any of them. You clearly know nothing about Saad Muhammad. He went CRASHING to the canvas many times, and then he got up. Richie Kates face planted him.

Too say he had nothing but a punch is laughable. Obviously you're just looking to start some sort of stupid argument. So fire away with your idiotic attempts. I shouldn't expect anything meaningful or intelligent from you concerning anyone with Muhammad in their name.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

granberry wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He had more than that. His stamina was off the charts and his will was unbreakable.

He had no boxing ability.

Some of the 'stamina' came from what the muslims who ran him once he got the title put on his mouthpiece after 9 or 10 rounds. Ask Milt Bailey.

The Jerry Martin fight finished him. He took such a bad physical beating in that fight that he never won a fight against a good fighter the rest of his career.

Everybody in Philly considered him a "nice guy." He was good natured and didn't have any nastiness in him. I remember Wesley Mouzon saying to me, on the same night his fighter Dwight Braxton had just beaten Franklin for the second time. "He's a nice guy." I wasn't quite sure what that had to do with anything, but Mouzon repeated it several times.

I saw Franklin fight at the Spectrum against Dale Grant (more a blown up middleweight), Yaqui Lopez (their first fight), and Billy Douglas. Matt went CRASHING to the canvas against Douglas. got a long count from the ref, who later stopped the fight in Matt's favor in the very next round in a disputed ending. Poor Billy Douglas always got the short end of the stick in Philly.

Wow, it's amazing you attended so many fights without watching any of them. You clearly know nothing about Saad Muhammad. He went CRASHING to the canvas many times, and then he got up. Richie Kates face planted him.

Too say he had nothing but a punch is laughable. Obviously you're just looking to start some sort of stupid argument. So fire away with your idiotic attempts. I shouldn't expect anything meaningful or intelligent from you concerning anyone with Muhammad in their name.

His name was Matt Franklin. I knew him for years by that name.

The black muslims he got connected with used him and then dumped him when he was no longer of use to them.

Franklin was taking a steady and awesome beating in losing his title to Dwight Braxton while stooge 'referee' Arthur Merchante stood by and did nothing, obviously going to allow Matt to be beaten to death without stopping it because Matt was the 'designated winner' in that fight.

Finally the only non muslim in Matt's corner, longtime Philly boxing cornerman Adolph Ritocco walked into the ring to stop it. The muslims in Matt's corner grabbed at Ritocco to stop him but he got loose and headed over to where Braxton was beating Matt to a pulp against the ropes with stooge Merchante standing by.

When Merchante saw Matt's cornerman in the ring approaching them he suddenly had a change of heart and made a big, histrionic show of stopping the fight, as if it was his idea.

Braxton, trained by Wesley Mouzon and at that time at his best before he started dissipating, was so superior to Matt in every aspect of boxing technically that the fight was completely one-sided.

It would be interesting to see if Matt still uses his muslim name today, after they used him and dumped him the way they did.

Yaqui Lopez (who fought Matt twice) summed up Franklin/Saad:
"He's just a great puncher. He has nothing else."

If you don't like what Yaqui said, take it up with him.

Matt Franklin was a distinctive fighter. He had guts, physical strength, endurance, and a surprising punch.
But he was a raw product compared to the well taught pros.

And as everyone around Philly said, he was a genuinely nice guy.

He deserved better than what he got from his muslim 'friends.'

Ruiz-Tua was seen as a even fight with Merchant saying before the fight that Ruiz was the best of the young heavyweights Tua Ko'd him in 19 seconds and what Ruiz has achieved since its a suprise.

hey granberry, all kidding aside, What did you think of the first Matt Franklin Eddie Gregory fight? And the second one that was canceled? Any thought on that encounter and what would have come of a second time around?

What were the odds for Holyfied -v- Tyson 1?

They must have been very long because there were some people who thought that Evander had signed a suicide note when he signed the contract to fight Tyson.

In response to Syntax...

During the commentary of the first fight, it's mentioned the odds were, "25-1" in Tyson's favour, but shrank down to a surprising 6-1 right after the weigh-in. As Bobby Czyz put it while Holyfield landed yet another crashing blow against Tyson's head, "Did someone know something we didn't?"

One fight that sticks out in my mind as really having shocked me at the time was Lloyd Honeyghan's knockout of Don Curry. I thought Curry was a potential all-timer who would shortly be relieving Marvin Hagler of the middleweight title. Still can't understand where all that talent went so quickly....

Interesting exchange re Miracle Matthew. I was always a big fan of his. Strong as an ox, big, two-handed hitter, unbelievable heart... but ultimately probably not a truly great fighter. Close. No question Dwight Braxton outclassed him utterly.

What an era of talent in that division, though. Between Bob Foster and Michael Spinks/Dwight Muhammad Qawi, you had: Jorge Ahumada, Avenemar Peralta, Victor Galindez, Richie Kates, John Conteh, Miguel Angel Cuello, Mate Parlov, Marvin Johnson, Matt Franklin/Saad Muhammad, Eddie Gregory/Mustafa Muhammad, James Scott, Yaqui Lopez, Jesse Burnett, Mike Rossman, Bobby Cassidy, Jerry The Bull Martin... some terrific fighters.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Supposedly...

Douglas 42-1 against Tyson, 1990
Ali 3-1 against Foreman, 1974
Ali 3-1 against Liston, 1965
Ali 7-1 against Liston, 1964

Spinks, I recall, was around 7-1 when he upset Ali in '78.

Ali indeed was a 7-1 dog against Liston in '64, but.....

3-1 for the second Liston fight seems high to me. I'm thinking Liston was a smaller favorite than that.

Foreman was something like a 4-1 dog against Frazier in '73, if I remember correctly.

Okay. I'm taking 3-1 for the Ali-Liston return off a newspaper headline featured in the Boxing's Best series (also where I saw the Foreman-Ali odds), so, if you can find a better source, I'll yield.

The talk was Liston was a reasonably heavy favourite because of the ambiguity of the first defeat. It was said those who fixed the first fight got away with the same dog-&-pony show twice, because no one really understand what had happened in the initial match. I've seen the line for Frazier-Foreman I listed at both 3-1 & 4-1, obviously, in Frazier's favour.

Interestingly, Lyle was a 5-1 'dog against Foreman.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Okay. I'm taking 3-1 for the Ali-Liston return off a newspaper headline featured in the Boxing's Best series (also where I saw the Foreman-Ali odds), so, if you can find a better source, I'll yield.

The talk was Liston was a reasonably heavy favourite because of the ambiguity of the first defeat. It was said those who fixed the first fight got away with the same dog-&-pony show twice, because no one really understand what had happened in the initial match. I've seen the line for Frazier-Foreman I listed at both 3-1 & 4-1, obviously, in Frazier's favour.

Interestingly, Lyle was a 5-1 'dog against Foreman.

Well, maybe it was 3-1 Liston for the second Ali fight, I'm not sure. I just think 3-1 is out of line, given a younger fighter on the uptick coming off a win against an older fighter who is getting even older.

If I had been betting back then, I would have jumped off over Ali getting 3-1.

People despised Ali, which often figures in betting. Almost everyone seemed to agree Liston was set to clobber him in their first fight, & it's not as if he, himself, was destroyed by Ali. Rather, the public were informed he busted his shoulder. I guess, in part, people perhaps thought that was a freak thing, from a less-than-motivated Liston, who would return, in-shape, & not suffer a fluke injury.

I can see why, removing hindsight, Liston would be favoured.

yancey wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Okay. I'm taking 3-1 for the Ali-Liston return off a newspaper headline featured in the Boxing's Best series (also where I saw the Foreman-Ali odds), so, if you can find a better source, I'll yield.

The talk was Liston was a reasonably heavy favourite because of the ambiguity of the first defeat. It was said those who fixed the first fight got away with the same dog-&-pony show twice, because no one really understand what had happened in the initial match. I've seen the line for Frazier-Foreman I listed at both 3-1 & 4-1, obviously, in Frazier's favour.

Interestingly, Lyle was a 5-1 'dog against Foreman.

Well, maybe it was 3-1 Liston for the second Ali fight, I'm not sure. I just think 3-1 is out of line, given a younger fighter on the uptick coming off a win against an older fighter who is getting even older.

If I had been betting back then, I would have jumped off over Ali getting 3-1.

It was 6-5 Liston in the rematch. You can find that quoted in both S.I. and Time who both covered the fight.

Collins2000 wrote:

yancey wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Okay. I'm taking 3-1 for the Ali-Liston return off a newspaper headline featured in the Boxing's Best series (also where I saw the Foreman-Ali odds), so, if you can find a better source, I'll yield.

The talk was Liston was a reasonably heavy favourite because of the ambiguity of the first defeat. It was said those who fixed the first fight got away with the same dog-&-pony show twice, because no one really understand what had happened in the initial match. I've seen the line for Frazier-Foreman I listed at both 3-1 & 4-1, obviously, in Frazier's favour.

Interestingly, Lyle was a 5-1 'dog against Foreman.

Well, maybe it was 3-1 Liston for the second Ali fight, I'm not sure. I just think 3-1 is out of line, given a younger fighter on the uptick coming off a win against an older fighter who is getting even older.

If I had been betting back then, I would have jumped off over Ali getting 3-1.

It was 6-5 Liston in the rematch. You can find that quoted in both S.I. and Time who both covered the fight.

6-5 is MUCH more like it should have been, the point I was trying to make in an earlier post.