BoxRec

Considering that Muhammad Ali is and was an icon in the developing world I would have to say his impact was the greatest.

Did folks in , say, Indonesia, Malaysia, Egypt, Pakistan, et cetera really know or care who Jack Dempsey was?

ThatOne wrote:Considering that Muhammad Ali is and was an icon in the developing world I would have to say his impact was the greatest.

Did folks in , say, Indonesia, Malaysia, Egypt, Pakistan, et cetera really know or care who Jack Dempsey was?

Ali was a part of the mass media age.

People didn’t have access to TV. There simply wasn’t the same kind of mass consumption back then.

It’s a totally different comparison.

Dempsey was the most famous sportsman in the world when he was active. I’d say the same for Ali. In that sense they are comparable. I’d argue that both men made boxing the world’s number 1 sport during their careers.

If you have to explain something so basic to someone as the difference in media outlets & technology, Ezz, that should be your red flag right there that the person isn't worth wasting the time on.

Honestly, how does it not occur to people!?

Goodnight, Irene wrote:If you have to explain something so basic to someone as the difference in media outlets & technology, Ezz, that should be your red flag right there that the person isn't worth wasting the time on.

Honestly, how does it not occur to people!?

Well inate infallibility is hard to come by. You think folks like yourself are a dime a dozen? It takes a very unique blend of intelligence and emotional durability to divy out just the right criticisms in such precise and proper measurement.

Irene you should never underestimate just how much sharper you are than the "folks". I'm surprised you take the time you do to share your vast richness of insight with "others".

Perhaps a belated sincere and hardy "thanks" is in order here!

Buzz,

Just give me a straight answer, without the bells & whistles, to this...

Do you or do you not consider recognising the difference in media technology & outlets between the 20's & the 70's as requiring something more than a basic level of knowledge of the world around you?

muhammad ali, period!

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Buzz,

Just give me a straight answer, without the bells & whistles, to this...

Do you or do you not consider recognising the difference in media technology & outlets between the 20's & the 70's as requiring something more than a basic level of knowledge of the world around you?

Ok, but I'm having to interpret a bit and I may not have connected all the dots.

Dempsey to me is EVERY bit as big a deal to the world of sports in his day and age as Ali is for his. The size of the aquarium may have changed, but the ratio between big fish and available environment are very similar in my estimation. Yes the "tech" thing is very relevant. But not knowing how old the contributors are that hold this notion I can't hold it against them.

My Dad born in 1916 and his dad born in the 1880's (both deceased) gave me an appreciation of what that "smaller aquarium" was like. But younger folks have no real way to get a sense of this. My dad was born before electricity and plumbing were the norm. I think some can't wrap their minds around that. I just don't think someone born in the 80's could easily be able to get a real sense of that UNLESS they did some pretty serious research. I don't think one would get that sense from the normal "pop" culture or the typical education system.

....Too many bells and whistles?

Yes or no would've sufficed.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:If you have to explain something so basic to someone as the difference in media outlets & technology, Ezz, that should be your red flag right there that the person isn't worth wasting the time on.

Honestly, how does it not occur to people!?

I read about Marshall McLuhan's "global village" and how the advent of the mass media had made our world "smaller" in a first year sociology course. Professor McLuhan coined the term some fifty years ago.

Jack Dempsey was a hero to white Europeans and their progeny. Even if folks in , say, Malyasia, China, Indonesia, Syria, India, et cetera knew who Dempsey was I doubt they would care much one way or the other.

Muhammad Ali because of his politics, his religion of which he has 1.8 billion coreligionists , and personae is and was a hero in the developing world as well as the developed world, and there are billions of people that inhabit that world.

Jack Dempsey beat a lot of people up. Muhammad Ali beat a lot of people up but he also had a profound effect on his country, the world, and his times.

To say Muhammad Ali was a mere athlete would be no more accurate than saying Albert Schewitzer merely played the piano.

I trust that clears up our little misunderstanding and the point I made becomes empirically obvious.

It should be taken into account the extent of mass communications during each boxers glory days.
When Jack Johnson became champ,that was around the same time moving pictures hit their stride.
Joe Louis was champ when radio was becoming the mass media culture in America and Europe.
Ali when the first mass communication satellites were launched and were able to beamed live sports shows all around the world in the mid-1960's.
Anyway I think it may be just part of the myth everyone in the third world knew who Muhammad Ali was.
I had read in a book somewhere that when he landed in Zaire in September 1974,few if any actual locals there knew he was even a boxer.
They were shocked when George Foreman stepped off the plane as he was diised so much even before his arrival they thought George Foreman was going to be white!

Brutu wrote:It should be taken into account the extent of mass communications during each boxers glory days.
When Jack Johnson became champ,that was around the same time moving pictures hit their stride.
Joe Louis was champ when radio was becoming the mass media culture in America and Europe.
Ali when the first mass communication satellites were launched and were able to beamed live sports shows all around the world in the mid-1960's.
Anyway I think it may be just part of the myth everyone in the third world knew who Muhammad Ali was.
I had read in a book somewhere that when he landed in Zaire in September 1974,few if any actual locals there knew he was even a boxer.
They were shocked when George Foreman stepped off the plane as he was diised so much even before his arrival they thought George Foreman was going to be white!

That's interesting as Muhammad Ali had visited Africa and was already well known in parts of it in 1964:

Looking like a slice of Old Testament Ham, the man in the d�collet� shower curtain was none other than Muhammad Ali, boxer, social philosopher and world heavyweight champion, come "home" to Ghana and gone native. Celebrating his victory over Sonny Liston, Black Muslim Ali—sometimes known as Cassius Clay—was mobbed by delirious Africans wherever he went. He shouted happily, "Who's the king?" "You!" the response came. Then, like a politician running for his life, Ali sampled local food and customs, kissed kids, visited a hospital, put on a sparring match before 40,000 Ashanti with his brother and then flounced off to visit Ghana's despotic President Kwame Nkrumah, whom he pronounced a "great guy." With that, Ali turned pensive and lectured, with some exaggeration, on the harsh realities of life back home. "In America," he said, "everything is white—Jesus, Moses and the angels. I'm glad to be here with my true people."


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm

Western magazine writers and the 1960's jet set visiting and living in Egypt and in Africa should not be counted.
The media can make u believe anything.

Brutu wrote:Western magazine writers and the 1960's jet set visiting and living in Egypt and in Africa should not be counted.
The media can make u believe anything.

It was a contemporaneous account. Actual film exists of him being mobbed in Africa in 1964. Islam has nearly two billion adherants and Muhammad Ali is arguably it's most famous.

With all due respect to Dempsey, Tunney, and the rest I would argue if they were alive today people in the developing world wouldn't care who they were.

Muhammad Ali was a revolutionary figure, part of the nascent pan-African and black nationalist movement, and is one of three or four of the most famous African Americans ever to live.

Brutu wrote:It should be taken into account the extent of mass communications during each boxers glory days.
When Jack Johnson became champ,that was around the same time moving pictures hit their stride.
Joe Louis was champ when radio was becoming the mass media culture in America and Europe.
Ali when the first mass communication satellites were launched and were able to beamed live sports shows all around the world in the mid-1960's.
Anyway I think it may be just part of the myth everyone in the third world knew who Muhammad Ali was.
I had read in a book somewhere that when he landed in Zaire in September 1974,few if any actual locals there knew he was even a boxer.
They were shocked when George Foreman stepped off the plane as he was diised so much even before his arrival they thought George Foreman was going to be white!

Muhammad Ali soon settled into Africa. He was recognized in even the remotest part of the country. He soon learned the phrase that would become his manta., Ali "Boma Aye" which literally translated into Ali. "Kill him."...


http://www.boxing-memorabilia.com/bioforeman.htm





You can also watch the documentary "When We Were Kings" and see him being mobbed at the airport.

The way the question is asked, it seems to be directed at who influenced the sport worldwide and yet suprise, suprise 80-90% of answers are given as if the question were directed at the U.S.

dom74 wrote:The way the question is asked, it seems to be directed at who influenced the sport worldwide and yet suprise, suprise 80-90% of answers are given as if the question were directed at the U.S.

How so? Certainly any HW champion of the 20th century had recognition far beyond US shores, and most discussion seems to revolve around Ali. Even John L was celebrated in Europe as well the US.

dom74 wrote:The way the question is asked, it seems to be directed at who influenced the sport worldwide and yet suprise, suprise 80-90% of answers are given as if the question were directed at the U.S.

Somebody gets the point. And with all respect to Jack Dempsey and John L. Sullivan if they were alive today few people beside white Europeans and their progeny would care about their exploits.


Ali was truly a global figure in every sense of the word.

Well if you didn't live through the period, it's probably difficult to understand. While I too am skeptical of any 90% claim, Ali was very well known throughout the third world, due a great deal to his acceptance of the Muslim faith. Clearly by the early 70's he was easily the most recognized public figure on the globe.

Believe it or not, many people had access to news outlets outside of the West by the 60's. Pretty much all major urban areas had at least limited access to TV, and radio was quite prevelant.

ThatOne wrote:

dom74 wrote:The way the question is asked, it seems to be directed at who influenced the sport worldwide and yet suprise, suprise 80-90% of answers are given as if the question were directed at the U.S.

Somebody gets the point. And with all respect to Jack Dempsey and John L. Sullivan if they were alive today few people beside white Europeans and their progeny would care about their exploits.


Ali was truly a global figure in every sense of the word.

I totally agree, because so very few people follow boxing anymore. It's a very small percentage who know who the Klitschko's are.

The Great John L wrote:

ThatOne wrote:

dom74 wrote:The way the question is asked, it seems to be directed at who influenced the sport worldwide and yet suprise, suprise 80-90% of answers are given as if the question were directed at the U.S.

Somebody gets the point. And with all respect to Jack Dempsey and John L. Sullivan if they were alive today few people beside white Europeans and their progeny would care about their exploits.


Ali was truly a global figure in every sense of the word.

I totally agree, because so very few people follow boxing anymore. It's a very small percentage who know who the Klitschko's are.

I am not disrespecting the other greats or even saying they were or weren't Ali's betters. My point is that Ali was truly a global figure. His prominence coincided with the black power movement in the United States and the pan-African movement in the world. Throw in the fact he embraced a religion that has nearly two billion adherants and you have the making of a global figure.

But wouldent it be fair to say that Alis ''larger than life persona'' and political concience etc could have over shadowed the boxing a bit? rather than someone who ''just'' produces spectacular fights over and over (Tyson for instance) and did turn alot of kids on to boxing (i am not saying Ali didnt do these things,but there was so much other than the boxing about the man)

ThatOne wrote:I am not disrespecting the other greats or even saying they were or weren't Ali's betters. My point is that Ali was truly a global figure. His prominence coencided with the black power movement in the United States and the pan-African movement in the world. Throw in the fact he embraced a religion that has nearly two billion adherants and you have the making of a global figure.

I agree with you 100%. I mentioned Sullivan earlier, because he raised boxing out of the gutter and also spread the populairty of the sport through his many exhibition tours. It's very possible that without the massive growth in public awareness that Sullivan nurtured during his reign we may have never had a Jack Dempsey or a Muhammed Ali.

Of course if we look at it another way, would you say that boxing was more popular 20 years after Ali than it was during his era? No doubt he was the most popular and most influential, I don't think his appearance has kept the sport from a massive decline in popularity over the past 30-40 years.

BoxBuzz wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:If you have to explain something so basic to someone as the difference in media outlets & technology, Ezz, that should be your red flag right there that the person isn't worth wasting the time on.

Honestly, how does it not occur to people!?

Well inate infallibility is hard to come by. You think folks like yourself are a dime a dozen? It takes a very unique blend of intelligence and emotional durability to divy out just the right criticisms in such precise and proper measurement.

Irene you should never underestimate just how much sharper you are than the "folks". I'm surprised you take the time you do to share your vast richness of insight with "others".

Perhaps a belated sincere and hardy "thanks" is in order here!

Panzerfaust wrote:But wouldent it be fair to say that Alis ''larger than life persona'' and political concience etc could have over shadowed the boxing a bit? rather than someone who ''just'' produces spectacular fights over and over (Tyson for instance) and did turn alot of kids on to boxing (i am not saying Ali didnt do these things,but there was so much other than the boxing about the man)

I will readily agree that Ali is as famous for what he did outside the ring as for what he did in it but if he wasn't as successful in the ring as he was his activism would have went for naught.

And Ali did spawn a lot of imitators from Sugar Ray Leonard to Roy Jones.

The Great John L wrote:

ThatOne wrote:I am not disrespecting the other greats or even saying they were or weren't Ali's betters. My point is that Ali was truly a global figure. His prominence coencided with the black power movement in the United States and the pan-African movement in the world. Throw in the fact he embraced a religion that has nearly two billion adherants and you have the making of a global figure.

I agree with you 100%. I mentioned Sullivan earlier, because he raised boxing out of the gutter and also spread the populairty of the sport through his many exhibition tours. It's very possible that without the massive growth in public awareness that Sullivan nurtured during his reign we may have never had a Jack Dempsey or a Muhammed Ali.

Of course if we look at it another way, would you say that boxing was more popular 20 years after Ali than it was during his era? No doubt he was the most popular and most influential, I don't think his appearance has kept the sport from a massive decline in popularity over the past 30-40 years.

The sport has experienced a massive decline in popularity. The reasons why demand a thread of its own.

I think in Ali's case you had a mixture of the social, political, and the athletic.