Ambling Alp II wrote:I am glad you think are more educated now. Time will tell if that is really true.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree about the slip. I think it wishful thinking on your part. The camera angle that I have always seen you can't even tell if Bonavena's punch landed.
My point about judging Ali like any other fighter is that you should as fair to him as anyone else. It should not matter who is fighting. If fighter A deserves the round he should get it, whether he is someone that you him like or not.
You yourself only gave Bonavena two clear rounds in the entire fight. If you think a round is even, you shouldn't be shocked if someone else (the judges or someone else) gives the round to the guy that you don't like. A fighter is not a robbed if he doesn't win the majority of the rounds in a clear manner. Bonavena didn't come remotely close to doing that.
There are guys I can't stand either. Doesn't mean that I need to rip them constantly or whine about every decision they got. You need to get over your obessesion over Ali and how he got all the breaks. (btw-he certainly did not get all the breaks in his career.) That will be a sign that you are more educated now.
I could understand that logic if it was an active fighter, but when you got an all time great legend who by all measures is arguably the greatest of all time, you have to break down his career to the minute details. Fight by fight, moment by moment, has to be analyzed and determined. Whether a man is robbed or isnt because he doesnt win the majority of rounds in a clear manner is really a matter of interpretation. Much like the Pacquiao/Marquez III bout; Compubox shows volume in favor of Pacquiao (even if you do factor in the 1-2% margin of error), but it is aggression and cleaner punches that mean more often times, and in that case Marquez had the more effective punches.
It isn't that I personally dislike Ali, or am biased against him. My issue, as stated above, is that he is the measurement by which all other heavyweights must be compared to; and because of his greatness, you have to be inclined to see the fight more in the sight of the challenger and how he fairs against Ali. That's why some of those rounds I made are even, and some of them flat out are because of sheer inactivity between the two men and you have to weigh in "Does Bonavena's aggression and infrequent power punches mean more than Ali's infrequent jabs?" and really, in truth, powerpunches mean more, but because I was trying NOT to be biased I made the rounds even.
However, I do understand your plight. Often times it is said in this business for a man to defeat a champion or legend he must win the fight hands down, even by knockout; and that is not true, but that is what we as fans are forced to say when things don't turn out the right way or in a fair way. If you listen to the commentators, Durham had it even & Cosell had Ali ahead by one or two rounds. The judges, on the other hand, had it rather wide in favor of Ali. Personally, I think there were more factors at hand as to the decision being that wide on the scorecards than the fight itself; I think had it been a draw or even a split decision win for Bonavena, it would have derailed the FOTC between Ali and Frazier, which is what everybody wanted.
You know as well as I do judges will often times vote in favor of the promoters fighters, or fighters that they have personal interest in. They do this either purposely or unknowingly, because in the back of their mind they are thinking "If I go this way, I may not be rehired again", so that ruins effective judging. I ain't saying that this was what happened here in this particular fight, but its plausible. How else can you explain the contrast between what the audience and commentators saw, and what the judges saw?
Myself, yes, I gave Bonavena 3-4 rounds to Ali's 5, but as stated before, any of those even rounds could have very easily of been his as well. All in all, if it wasn't a draw at the start of round fifteen, Ali at best was ahead one or two rounds. As for the knockdown.... I guess until we get that 2nd camera angle can we tell whether it was a legitimate knockdown or slip, but in my view it looked like a knockdown because the punch landed first before the legs went. However, I will say, as far as slips goes, it was alot more likely to of been a knockdown than say the "step on foot, punch, slip" that Chuck Wepner did to Ali in 1975.
As for Ali getting all the breaks, no that isn't true he did face some adversity against him, however I do think by the time the 70s rolled along he was so beloved that he was able to get away with alot of tactics that anyone else would have been penalized for, the pushing on the back of the head, the pushing, the thumbs to the eye, etc. What he called being a "washerwoman" when he viewed fights of the golden years of Dempsey, he was equally good at.
since I'm so "biased" against Ali. Like I said, if you proclaim yourself the greatest, you have to be put under the microscope more than any other fighter out there. And since we keep hem hawing about the "even" rounds, I'll split the difference, three for Ali, three for Bonavena, making the score now 8-6 in favor of Ali even though I saw it closer than that (possible as 7-6-1 Ali, or all around a draw). And yes, he was a dirty fighter, same as Marciano, same as Dempsey, Duran, etc. To say he wasn't is about a stretch of the imagination as saying Bonavena dominated the fight with Ali, which isn't true, just is razor thin close. Anyways, I guess we will have to agree to disagree.