BoxRec

Kalan wrote:

Controversial wrote: Yet he claims Ali, who almost never knocked anyone out with one punch, knocked him down with a punch that Liston ordinarily would've sneered at. Sorry no doubt in my mind, a fix. I take it you never read the FBI files released a few years ago which gives reason why they suspected foul play?

Liston never claimed he was knocked out by Ali... That's a lie... He took a sharp right and went down... It was a well timed punch with good force on it... NO CRIME in Heavyweight Boxing getting hit in the head and going down is it??? ... Liston than patiently waited for mad man Ali to head to a neutral corner... If a crazy man is standing over you and running around the ring -- and you KNOW about the neutral corner rule that's Ai is violating, then you wait for the referee to gain control.. You DON'T think you'll have to wait the full count -- but nobody is counting over you because the referee is busy trying to control Ali.. Who is breaking the rules in that situation...Liston or Ali???? -- I know you won't answer that.

And the FBI gets it WRONG all the time... J Edgar Hoover called Dr. Martin Luther King a "Communist sympathizer and the mort notorious liar in America" ... They also screwed up before 9/11 and failed to follow up on leads that immigrants tied to Islamic militant radical groups were spending big money on simulated flying lessons for Boing 747 aircraft -- but they expressly DIDN'T WANT any lessons on how to LAND the aircraft... I think some of those guys WANTED to be caught by the FBI.. Because as much as they believed in 72 virgins as their reward they didn't want to die young. The FBI ignored those screaming leads.

And I do think Ali was a great fighter.. Good rhythm, good feet, good speed, good timing, good jab, and good right counter.. Like every boxer he had his strong points and his weak ones... Does being a great fighter mean Ali gets to ignore the neutral corner rule with impunity???? You won't answer that either.

I said Walcott cocked it up. Liston thought he had been counted out and he hadn't because Walcott mucked the count up. He tried to take a dive and it backfired. Taking everything into consideration, Liston's shady connections to the mob, the Oscar winning dive and evidence gained that big money was made on the back of that fight, a fight no one predicted would end in one, is good enough for me. Of course Liston is going to claim all sorts afterwards, he couldn't hear this, couldn't here that, what did you expect him to say? Thats my opinion and no swaying me so you are wasting your breath. If he caught him off balance fair enough, no need to made a big meal of it.

Here is what you said before when I asked what made Ali a great fighter, your response was laughable. Nothing about Ali's ability so at least be consistent.

"Controversial wrote:
what skills and attributes do you think made Ali a great fighter?

Kalan: Invincible confidence and self belief... Having goals and timeframes which he learned from Joe Martin... A gift for showmanship... A belief that good talkers rule the world, which he learned from a high school friend who always got all the girls... A strong sense of History. He knew instinctively that the Viet Nam War was going to be a loser... Great courage and taking setbacks in stride... Natural charisma"

Controversial wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:I always thought the punch that downed Liston was legit. The 'how many other fighters did he KO in 1?' argument is silly. How many names did Nunn KO in 1, other than Kalambay? And Kalambay had a great chin too. How many names did Hill KO in 1, other than Tiozzo? And Tiozzo had a great chin too.

Fair point but they looked legit, Listons didn't. When you add in the mob ties and FBI reports suspecting a fix then it adds another dimension to it. Ali had him beat no matter what and Liston knew it. I know not everyone agrees with this line of thinking but I happen to.

Forensically it looks perfectly legit. I have watched that slowed down to a place where time reveals it's true secrets. That punch resonated through Liston's body. Period.....so regardless of what it "looks like" in real time, and to the eye not used to looking at something for it's full set of physics, the challenge to Liston's constitution is clear and present when reviewed correctly.

Reagan didn't "look" like he took a bullet.......but he clearly did. Just review it without prejudice.... it's all there to be seen.

BoxBuzz wrote:

Controversial wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:I always thought the punch that downed Liston was legit. The 'how many other fighters did he KO in 1?' argument is silly. How many names did Nunn KO in 1, other than Kalambay? And Kalambay had a great chin too. How many names did Hill KO in 1, other than Tiozzo? And Tiozzo had a great chin too.

Fair point but they looked legit, Listons didn't. When you add in the mob ties and FBI reports suspecting a fix then it adds another dimension to it. Ali had him beat no matter what and Liston knew it. I know not everyone agrees with this line of thinking but I happen to.

Forensically it looks perfectly legit. I have watched that slowed down to a place where time reveals it's true secrets. That punch resonated through Liston's body. Period.....so regardless of what it "looks like" in real time, and to the eye not used to looking at something for it's full set of physics, the challenge to Liston's constitution is clear and present when reviewed correctly.

Reagan didn't "look" like he took a bullet.......but he clearly did. Just review it without prejudice.... it's all there to be seen.

It's my opinion and I happen to disagree. I have watched all the slomos, a punch definitely landed, im not saying it didn't. I just think Liston used that as his timr to fall. No prejudice at all, as I said before when you take everything into account it adds a different dimension to it. I think Ali would've beat Liston regardless and the first fight looked legit. Something not right about the rematch though, in my opinion.

Controversial wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:

Controversial wrote:
Fair point but they looked legit, Listons didn't. When you add in the mob ties and FBI reports suspecting a fix then it adds another dimension to it. Ali had him beat no matter what and Liston knew it. I know not everyone agrees with this line of thinking but I happen to.

Forensically it looks perfectly legit. I have watched that slowed down to a place where time reveals it's true secrets. That punch resonated through Liston's body. Period.....so regardless of what it "looks like" in real time, and to the eye not used to looking at something for it's full set of physics, the challenge to Liston's constitution is clear and present when reviewed correctly.

Reagan didn't "look" like he took a bullet.......but he clearly did. Just review it without prejudice.... it's all there to be seen.

It's my opinion and I happen to disagree. I have watched all the slomos, a punch definitely landed, im not saying it didn't. I just think Liston used that as his timr to fall. No prejudice at all, as I said before when you take everything into account it adds a different dimension to it. I think Ali would've beat Liston regardless and the first fight looked legit. Something not right about the rematch though, in my opinion.

A punch doesn't have to be devastating to drop you.. Chuvalo's punch that dropped Quarry was a tap.. The liver shot that GGG iced Macklin with was an arm shot.. Michael Katsidis was a big underdog, but caught Juan Manuel Marquez with a short left hook that dropped him like a tree.. The Boxing Commission had no business revoking Liston's license for getting decked because Sonny was hit with a seemingly light punch -- because seemingly light punches drop fighters all the time.. Frequently the commentators don't even see the KO punch or call it wrong in real time.. Then on the replay they go, "Oh it was a short left uppercut.. it caught him as he was starting a right."

Controversial continues to excuse Ali's reprehensible behavior in refusing to go to a neutral corner... He wants to hang it all on Walcott.. He says Walcott screwed up the count.. Ali wiped out the count by refusing to go to a neutral corner.. Walcott screwed up by listening to Nat Fleischer.. Ali didn't hear the count... Walcott didn't hear the count... NOBODY in that ring heard the count... That's WHY the fight resumed... Liston would have waited to be counted out by the referee if he wanted to TANK the fight -- he wouldn't have gotten up as soon as Walcott gained control of Ali.. He woud have let Walcott count him out.. and he also wouldn't have ducked ALL of Ali's follow up punches if he intended to throw the fight.

Kalan wrote:

Controversial wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:

Forensically it looks perfectly legit. I have watched that slowed down to a place where time reveals it's true secrets. That punch resonated through Liston's body. Period.....so regardless of what it "looks like" in real time, and to the eye not used to looking at something for it's full set of physics, the challenge to Liston's constitution is clear and present when reviewed correctly.

Reagan didn't "look" like he took a bullet.......but he clearly did. Just review it without prejudice.... it's all there to be seen.

It's my opinion and I happen to disagree. I have watched all the slomos, a punch definitely landed, im not saying it didn't. I just think Liston used that as his timr to fall. No prejudice at all, as I said before when you take everything into account it adds a different dimension to it. I think Ali would've beat Liston regardless and the first fight looked legit. Something not right about the rematch though, in my opinion.

A punch doesn't have to be devastating to drop you.. Chuvalo's punch that dropped Quarry was a tap.. The liver shot that GGG iced Macklin with was an arm shot.. Michael Katsidis was a big underdog, but caught Juan Manuel Marquez with a short left hook that dropped him like a tree.. The Boxing Commission had no business revoking Liston's license for getting decked because Sonny was hit with a seemingly light punch -- because seemingly light punches drop fighters all the time.. Frequently the commentators don't even see the KO punch or call it wrong in real time.. Then on the replay they go, "Oh it was a short left uppercut.. it caught him as he was starting a right."

Controversial continues to excuse Ali's reprehensible behavior in refusing to go to a neutral corner... He wants to hang it all on Walcott.. He says Walcott screwed up the count.. Ali wiped out the count by refusing to go to a neutral corner.. Walcott screwed up by listening to Nat Fleischer.. Ali didn't hear the count... Walcott didn't hear the count... NOBODY in that ring heard the count... That's WHY the fight resumed... Liston would have waited to be counted out by the referee if he wanted to TANK the fight -- he wouldn't have gotten up as soon as Walcott gained control of Ali.. He woud have let Walcott count him out.. and he also wouldn't have ducked ALL of Ali's follow up punches if he intended to throw the fight.

I never said the punch didn't land and of course inocuous looking punches can drop a fighter. You have already admitted Liston and Walcott didn't know the rules. Liston heard the count alright, right up to 10 when he decided to stand up. Biggest fix ever.

Controversial wrote:

Kalan wrote:

Controversial wrote:
It's my opinion and I happen to disagree. I have watched all the slomos, a punch definitely landed, im not saying it didn't. I just think Liston used that as his timr to fall. No prejudice at all, as I said before when you take everything into account it adds a different dimension to it. I think Ali would've beat Liston regardless and the first fight looked legit. Something not right about the rematch though, in my opinion.

A punch doesn't have to be devastating to drop you.. Chuvalo's punch that dropped Quarry was a tap.. The liver shot that GGG iced Macklin with was an arm shot.. Michael Katsidis was a big underdog, but caught Juan Manuel Marquez with a short left hook that dropped him like a tree.. The Boxing Commission had no business revoking Liston's license for getting decked because Sonny was hit with a seemingly light punch -- because seemingly light punches drop fighters all the time.. Frequently the commentators don't even see the KO punch or call it wrong in real time.. Then on the replay they go, "Oh it was a short left uppercut.. it caught him as he was starting a right."

Controversial continues to excuse Ali's reprehensible behavior in refusing to go to a neutral corner... He wants to hang it all on Walcott.. He says Walcott screwed up the count.. Ali wiped out the count by refusing to go to a neutral corner.. Walcott screwed up by listening to Nat Fleischer.. Ali didn't hear the count... Walcott didn't hear the count... NOBODY in that ring heard the count... That's WHY the fight resumed... Liston would have waited to be counted out by the referee if he wanted to TANK the fight -- he wouldn't have gotten up as soon as Walcott gained control of Ali.. He woud have let Walcott count him out.. and he also wouldn't have ducked ALL of Ali's follow up punches if he intended to throw the fight.

I never said the punch didn't land and of course inocuous looking punches can drop a fighter. You have already admitted Liston and Walcott didn't know the rules. Liston heard the count alright, right up to 10 when he decided to stand up. Biggest fix ever.

I'm not sure Liston was aware that the count is suspended if a boxer refuses to go to a neutral corner... He knew a boxer scoring a knockdown is obliged to go to the farthest neutral corner and Ali never did.. Ali never went to a neutral corner.. Liston was on the opposite side of the ring from the timekeeper when he got dropped so he didn't hear the count.. Walcott and Ali were in better positions to hear the count if it were being tolled.. It WASN'T or they would have heard it.. when Ali seemed to be in a non-threatening position (STILL not in a neutral corner, Liston got up).. When Liston dropped back to the canvas he said he saw Ali running at him from behind out of the corner of his eye..

Liston never got a count... DIDN'T hear a count... and Ali, Walcott, or NOBODY knew what the count was... Does the referee count the boxer out??? Or is the boxer obliged to keep track of the count on his own -- without the aid of the referee??? ... These are questions Controversial doesn't like to answer.

Kalan wrote:

Controversial wrote:

Kalan wrote:
A punch doesn't have to be devastating to drop you.. Chuvalo's punch that dropped Quarry was a tap.. The liver shot that GGG iced Macklin with was an arm shot.. Michael Katsidis was a big underdog, but caught Juan Manuel Marquez with a short left hook that dropped him like a tree.. The Boxing Commission had no business revoking Liston's license for getting decked because Sonny was hit with a seemingly light punch -- because seemingly light punches drop fighters all the time.. Frequently the commentators don't even see the KO punch or call it wrong in real time.. Then on the replay they go, "Oh it was a short left uppercut.. it caught him as he was starting a right."

Controversial continues to excuse Ali's reprehensible behavior in refusing to go to a neutral corner... He wants to hang it all on Walcott.. He says Walcott screwed up the count.. Ali wiped out the count by refusing to go to a neutral corner.. Walcott screwed up by listening to Nat Fleischer.. Ali didn't hear the count... Walcott didn't hear the count... NOBODY in that ring heard the count... That's WHY the fight resumed... Liston would have waited to be counted out by the referee if he wanted to TANK the fight -- he wouldn't have gotten up as soon as Walcott gained control of Ali.. He woud have let Walcott count him out.. and he also wouldn't have ducked ALL of Ali's follow up punches if he intended to throw the fight.

I never said the punch didn't land and of course inocuous looking punches can drop a fighter. You have already admitted Liston and Walcott didn't know the rules. Liston heard the count alright, right up to 10 when he decided to stand up. Biggest fix ever.

I'm not sure Liston was aware that the count is suspended if a boxer refuses to go to a neutral corner... He knew a boxer scoring a knockdown is obliged to go to the farthest neutral corner and Ali never did.. Ali never went to a neutral corner.. Liston was on the opposite side of the ring from the timekeeper when he got dropped so he didn't hear the count.. Walcott and Ali were in better positions to hear the count if it were being tolled.. It WASN'T or they would have heard it.. when Ali seemed to be in a non-threatening position (STILL not in a neutral corner, Liston got up).. When Liston dropped back to the canvas he said he saw Ali running at him from behind out of the corner of his eye..

Liston never got a count... DIDN'T hear a count... and Ali, Walcott, or NOBODY knew what the count was... Does the referee count the boxer out??? Or is the boxer obliged to keep track of the count on his own -- without the aid of the referee??? ... These are questions Controversial doesn't like to answer.

You believe what you want, always a fix in my book. They made millions from it. Whose job is it to control the fighters? Whose job is it to disqualify a fighter? Walcott dropped a major clanger, unfortunately Liston (along with Walcott) not being aware of the rules as you rightly admit, heard a ten count and stood up thinking he had lost.

You keep saying Liston heard a himself being counted out with ZERO proof... Why didn't Walcott and Ali hear the count of Liston did???? Liston wouldn't have squared off to fight with Ali -- and duck all those follow-up punches (6) if he intended to throw the fight...Why was Sonny even defending himself???? ... If he wanted to throw the fight he would take another punch and hit the deck.

Kalan wrote:You keep saying Liston heard a himself being counted out with ZERO proof... Why didn't Walcott and Ali hear the count of Liston did???? Liston wouldn't have squared off to fight with Ali -- and duck all those follow-up punches (6) if he intended to throw the fight...Why was Sonny even defending himself???? ... If he wanted to throw the fight he would take another punch and hit the deck.

You too have zero proof, just your opinion which differs from mine. Liston wasn't expecting to fight on, he thought he had lost and was as confused as everyone when Walcott said fight on. He then had Ali right where he wanted him, right in front of him, not dancing away but right where he could hit him, and what does he do starts ducking instead of fighting back. Just waiting for another "knock out" blow to flatten him again. Shocking fix. Millions they made.

Kalan, who do you see winning the fight if it had continued?

Controversial wrote:

Kalan wrote:You keep saying Liston heard a himself being counted out with ZERO proof... Why didn't Walcott and Ali hear the count of Liston did???? Liston wouldn't have squared off to fight with Ali -- and duck all those follow-up punches (6) if he intended to throw the fight...Why was Sonny even defending himself???? ... If he wanted to throw the fight he would take another punch and hit the deck.

You too have zero proof, just your opinion which differs from mine. Liston wasn't expecting to fight on, he thought he had lost and was as confused as everyone when Walcott said fight on. He then had Ali right where he wanted him, right in front of him, not dancing away but right where he could hit him, and what does he do starts ducking instead of fighting back. Just waiting for another "knock out" blow to flatten him again. Shocking fix. Millions they made.

You make ZERO sense and you're NOT LISTENING!!!... Walcott and Ali went ALL THE WAY over to the timekeeper's side of the ring while Liston was down... THEY didn't hear the count.. How is LISTON going to hear the count??? They BOTH assumed (because Liston got NO COUNT which is EXTREMELY UNUSUAL) that Liston got up in time.. Liston made the same assumption.. This was evident in his body language and behavior. Liston definitely squared off to fight and gestured "Let's go boy." Ali definitely responded by attacking Liston... In fact, Ali believed Liston might still be hurt and attacked furiously. Liston definitely displayed the reflexes and elusiveness of a boxer who's alert and fresh by dodging and ducking every follow up punch Ali threw.

In a court of law an accused person DOESN'T have to PROVE they're innocent.. You CANNOT prove a negative.. The prosecution has to prove you're GUILTY... You presented ZERO evidence that Liston heard the count and deliberately TANKED the fight... I presented a MOUNTAIN of evidence.

I presented Statistical Evidence: THREE (3) people were in that ring. Based on their actions, none of them heard a count.

I presented Testimonial Evidence: Liston, Ali, and Walcott all said they thought the fight was still on when Liston got up.

I presented Behavioral Evidence: Liston, Ali, and Walcott all thought the fight was still on when Liston got up---and they acted on that belief.

I presented Anecdotal Evidence: Gene Tunney and Buster Douglas were both down on the canvas for LONGER than the timekeeper's count.

The Anecdotal Evidence backs up the rule that the REFEREE counts a decked boxer out---NOT the timekeeper... This also works as Statistical Evidence.

GoonyGooGoo wrote:Kalan, who do you see winning the fight if it had continued?

It's speculative... Ali missed every follow up punch after Liston got up... Ali wasn't looking very sharp or accurate on the offense at that moment... Ali looked a little vulnerable going after Liston and missing those punches -- as if Liston was demonically setting Ali up for 1 killer shot to nail him to the canvas.

Kalan wrote:
You make ZERO sense and you're NOT LISTENING!!!... Walcott and Ali went ALL THE WAY over to the timekeeper's side of the ring while Liston was down... THEY didn't hear the count.. How is LISTON going to hear the count??? They BOTH assumed (because Liston got NO COUNT which is EXTREMELY UNUSUAL) that Liston got up in time.. Liston made the same assumption.. This was evident in his body language and behavior. Liston definitely squared off to fight and gestured "Let's go boy." Ali definitely responded by attacking Liston... In fact, Ali believed Liston might still be hurt and attacked furiously. Liston definitely displayed the reflexes and elusiveness of a boxer who's alert and fresh by dodging and ducking every follow up punch Ali threw.

In a court of law an accused person DOESN'T have to PROVE they're innocent.. You CANNOT prove a negative.. The prosecution has to prove you're GUILTY... You presented ZERO evidence that Liston heard the count and deliberately TANKED the fight... I presented a MOUNTAIN of evidence.

I presented Statistical Evidence: THREE (3) people were in that ring. Based on their actions, none of them heard a count.

I presented Testimonial Evidence: Liston, Ali, and Walcott all said they thought the fight was still on when Liston got up.

I presented Behavioral Evidence: Liston, Ali, and Walcott all thought the fight was still on when Liston got up---and they acted on that belief.

I presented Anecdotal Evidence: Gene Tunney and Buster Douglas were both down on the canvas for LONGER than the timekeeper's count.

The Anecdotal Evidence backs up the rule that the REFEREE counts a decked boxer out---NOT the timekeeper... This also works as Statistical Evidence.

You rarely make sense. Maybe you should watch the knockdown again. When Liston went down he was laying flat on his back arms stretched out, he then rolled onto his stomach. He looked up quickly and Walcott quickly pushed Ali away. Liston went onto his knee but didn't even try and stand, he just rolled onto his back, arms stretched out again. The worst case of acting I've seen. At this point he wasn't even looking at Ali or Walcott. That's when Ali started running around the ring. Liston still wasn't looking at Ali as he had his back to him. He was on the canvas for around 15-16 seconds, most of which he wasn't looking at Walcott or Ali. He then stood and was staggering backwards but looking at the timekeeper along with Walcott so he had his wits about him. He then walked backwards, ducking like crazy without throwing one punch back. So Liston's reactions were that of someone genuinely hurt or acting hurt. His reactions weren't those of someone suffering a flash knockdown, otherwise he would've just stood straight back up, not rolled around. I happen to think he was acting, badly. He could hear the timekeeper counting, heard ten and stood. He was confused Walcott said fight on and had no choice but to put his fists up and carry on but knowing his plan had failed he didn't fight back, instead cowered and ducked maybe hoping Walcott would stop it or Ali could drop him again.

If anyone is to blame it was Walcott for not controlling the fighters and not counting. As you said neither knew the rules so it was mass confusion. But a lot of money was made by people thats for sure.

Controversial wrote:

Kalan wrote:
You make ZERO sense and you're NOT LISTENING!!!... Walcott and Ali went ALL THE WAY over to the timekeeper's side of the ring while Liston was down... THEY didn't hear the count.. How is LISTON going to hear the count??? They BOTH assumed (because Liston got NO COUNT which is EXTREMELY UNUSUAL) that Liston got up in time.. Liston made the same assumption.. This was evident in his body language and behavior. Liston definitely squared off to fight and gestured "Let's go boy." Ali definitely responded by attacking Liston... In fact, Ali believed Liston might still be hurt and attacked furiously. Liston definitely displayed the reflexes and elusiveness of a boxer who's alert and fresh by dodging and ducking every follow up punch Ali threw.

In a court of law an accused person DOESN'T have to PROVE they're innocent.. You CANNOT prove a negative.. The prosecution has to prove you're GUILTY... You presented ZERO evidence that Liston heard the count and deliberately TANKED the fight... I presented a MOUNTAIN of evidence.

I presented Statistical Evidence: THREE (3) people were in that ring. Based on their actions, none of them heard a count.

I presented Testimonial Evidence: Liston, Ali, and Walcott all said they thought the fight was still on when Liston got up.

I presented Behavioral Evidence: Liston, Ali, and Walcott all thought the fight was still on when Liston got up---and they acted on that belief.

I presented Anecdotal Evidence: Gene Tunney and Buster Douglas were both down on the canvas for LONGER than the timekeeper's count.

The Anecdotal Evidence backs up the rule that the REFEREE counts a decked boxer out---NOT the timekeeper... This also works as Statistical Evidence.

You rarely make sense. Maybe you should watch the knockdown again. When Liston went down he was laying flat on his back arms stretched out, he then rolled onto his stomach. He looked up quickly and Walcott quickly pushed Ali away. Liston went onto his knee but didn't even try and stand, he just rolled onto his back, arms stretched out again. The worst case of acting I've seen. At this point he wasn't even looking at Ali or Walcott. That's when Ali started running around the ring. Liston still wasn't looking at Ali as he had his back to him. He was on the canvas for around 15-16 seconds, most of which he wasn't looking at Walcott or Ali. He then stood and was staggering backwards but looking at the timekeeper along with Walcott so he had his wits about him. He then walked backwards, ducking like crazy without throwing one punch back. So Liston's reactions were that of someone genuinely hurt or acting hurt. His reactions weren't those of someone suffering a flash knockdown, otherwise he would've just stood straight back up, not rolled around. I happen to think he was acting, badly. He could hear the timekeeper counting, heard ten and stood. He was confused Walcott said fight on and had no choice but to put his fists up and carry on but knowing his plan had failed he didn't fight back, instead cowered and ducked maybe hoping Walcott would stop it or Ali could drop him again.

If anyone is to blame it was Walcott for not controlling the fighters and not counting. As you said neither knew the rules so it was mass confusion. But a lot of money was made by people thats for sure.

Liston was probably trying to fool Ali into thinking he was hurt... He wasn't going to get up anyway with a crazy, out-of-control Ali running all over the ring and racing at him from behind... He got up and squared off to fight... All had had to do to throw the fight was wait until Walcott counted him out... Walcott allowed the fight to continue and Ali attacked Liston..

You never answer a single question.. What about all the evidence I presented???? If Ali and Walcott didn't hear the count why would Liston???? Does a boxer listen to the timekeeper give him a count??? ... Or the referee????

Kalan wrote:

Controversial wrote:

Kalan wrote:
You make ZERO sense and you're NOT LISTENING!!!... Walcott and Ali went ALL THE WAY over to the timekeeper's side of the ring while Liston was down... THEY didn't hear the count.. How is LISTON going to hear the count??? They BOTH assumed (because Liston got NO COUNT which is EXTREMELY UNUSUAL) that Liston got up in time.. Liston made the same assumption.. This was evident in his body language and behavior. Liston definitely squared off to fight and gestured "Let's go boy." Ali definitely responded by attacking Liston... In fact, Ali believed Liston might still be hurt and attacked furiously. Liston definitely displayed the reflexes and elusiveness of a boxer who's alert and fresh by dodging and ducking every follow up punch Ali threw.

In a court of law an accused person DOESN'T have to PROVE they're innocent.. You CANNOT prove a negative.. The prosecution has to prove you're GUILTY... You presented ZERO evidence that Liston heard the count and deliberately TANKED the fight... I presented a MOUNTAIN of evidence.

I presented Statistical Evidence: THREE (3) people were in that ring. Based on their actions, none of them heard a count.

I presented Testimonial Evidence: Liston, Ali, and Walcott all said they thought the fight was still on when Liston got up.

I presented Behavioral Evidence: Liston, Ali, and Walcott all thought the fight was still on when Liston got up---and they acted on that belief.

I presented Anecdotal Evidence: Gene Tunney and Buster Douglas were both down on the canvas for LONGER than the timekeeper's count.

The Anecdotal Evidence backs up the rule that the REFEREE counts a decked boxer out---NOT the timekeeper... This also works as Statistical Evidence.

You rarely make sense. Maybe you should watch the knockdown again. When Liston went down he was laying flat on his back arms stretched out, he then rolled onto his stomach. He looked up quickly and Walcott quickly pushed Ali away. Liston went onto his knee but didn't even try and stand, he just rolled onto his back, arms stretched out again. The worst case of acting I've seen. At this point he wasn't even looking at Ali or Walcott. That's when Ali started running around the ring. Liston still wasn't looking at Ali as he had his back to him. He was on the canvas for around 15-16 seconds, most of which he wasn't looking at Walcott or Ali. He then stood and was staggering backwards but looking at the timekeeper along with Walcott so he had his wits about him. He then walked backwards, ducking like crazy without throwing one punch back. So Liston's reactions were that of someone genuinely hurt or acting hurt. His reactions weren't those of someone suffering a flash knockdown, otherwise he would've just stood straight back up, not rolled around. I happen to think he was acting, badly. He could hear the timekeeper counting, heard ten and stood. He was confused Walcott said fight on and had no choice but to put his fists up and carry on but knowing his plan had failed he didn't fight back, instead cowered and ducked maybe hoping Walcott would stop it or Ali could drop him again.

If anyone is to blame it was Walcott for not controlling the fighters and not counting. As you said neither knew the rules so it was mass confusion. But a lot of money was made by people thats for sure.

Liston was probably trying to fool Ali into thinking he was hurt... He wasn't going to get up anyway with a crazy, out-of-control Ali running all over the ring and racing at him from behind... He got up and squared off to fight... All had had to do to throw the fight was wait until Walcott counted him out... Walcott allowed the fight to continue and Ali attacked Liston..

You never answer a single question.. What about all the evidence I presented???? If Ali and Walcott didn't hear the count why would Liston???? Does a boxer listen to the timekeeper give him a count??? ... Or the referee????

The ref of course but Liston wasn't too bright was he. Walcott was the 'expert' there and he failed too. Liston heard the timekeeper and made sure he was down long enough, what did you make it 16 seconds? I can hear the timekeeper banging the canvas over the commentators, it would be much louder where Liston was laying so he could hear ok, trouble is he thought Walcott was mirroring the count and thats why he assumed he had been counted out. So who was at fault then, the ref for not controlling things and who is ultimately in charge or Ali?

Controversial wrote:

Kalan wrote:

Controversial wrote:
You rarely make sense. Maybe you should watch the knockdown again. When Liston went down he was laying flat on his back arms stretched out, he then rolled onto his stomach. He looked up quickly and Walcott quickly pushed Ali away. Liston went onto his knee but didn't even try and stand, he just rolled onto his back, arms stretched out again. The worst case of acting I've seen. At this point he wasn't even looking at Ali or Walcott. That's when Ali started running around the ring. Liston still wasn't looking at Ali as he had his back to him. He was on the canvas for around 15-16 seconds, most of which he wasn't looking at Walcott or Ali. He then stood and was staggering backwards but looking at the timekeeper along with Walcott so he had his wits about him. He then walked backwards, ducking like crazy without throwing one punch back. So Liston's reactions were that of someone genuinely hurt or acting hurt. His reactions weren't those of someone suffering a flash knockdown, otherwise he would've just stood straight back up, not rolled around. I happen to think he was acting, badly. He could hear the timekeeper counting, heard ten and stood. He was confused Walcott said fight on and had no choice but to put his fists up and carry on but knowing his plan had failed he didn't fight back, instead cowered and ducked maybe hoping Walcott would stop it or Ali could drop him again.

If anyone is to blame it was Walcott for not controlling the fighters and not counting. As you said neither knew the rules so it was mass confusion. But a lot of money was made by people thats for sure.

Liston was probably trying to fool Ali into thinking he was hurt... He wasn't going to get up anyway with a crazy, out-of-control Ali running all over the ring and racing at him from behind... He got up and squared off to fight... All had had to do to throw the fight was wait until Walcott counted him out... Walcott allowed the fight to continue and Ali attacked Liston..

You never answer a single question.. What about all the evidence I presented???? If Ali and Walcott didn't hear the count why would Liston???? Does a boxer listen to the timekeeper give him a count??? ... Or the referee????

The ref of course but Liston wasn't too bright was he. Walcott was the 'expert' there and he failed too. Liston heard the timekeeper and made sure he was down long enough, what did you make it 16 seconds? I can hear the timekeeper banging the canvas over the commentators, it would be much louder where Liston was laying so he could hear ok, trouble is he thought Walcott was mirroring the count and thats why he assumed he had been counted out. So who was at fault then, the ref for not controlling things and who is ultimately in charge or Ali?

The count should have been suspended -- or Ali should have been DQ'd for scorning the rule book and flagrantly ignoring the referee's direct orders.

Liston broke NO rules... It's not against the rules to go down after being hit... or to get up and resume the fight, expertly slipping and ducking punches

Here's a question... Were Buster Douglas and Gene Tunney down long enough??? ... If you're counted out by the timekeeper they certainly were.

Kalan wrote:

Controversial wrote:

Kalan wrote:
Liston was probably trying to fool Ali into thinking he was hurt... He wasn't going to get up anyway with a crazy, out-of-control Ali running all over the ring and racing at him from behind... He got up and squared off to fight... All had had to do to throw the fight was wait until Walcott counted him out... Walcott allowed the fight to continue and Ali attacked Liston..

You never answer a single question.. What about all the evidence I presented???? If Ali and Walcott didn't hear the count why would Liston???? Does a boxer listen to the timekeeper give him a count??? ... Or the referee????

The ref of course but Liston wasn't too bright was he. Walcott was the 'expert' there and he failed too. Liston heard the timekeeper and made sure he was down long enough, what did you make it 16 seconds? I can hear the timekeeper banging the canvas over the commentators, it would be much louder where Liston was laying so he could hear ok, trouble is he thought Walcott was mirroring the count and thats why he assumed he had been counted out. So who was at fault then, the ref for not controlling things and who is ultimately in charge or Ali?

The count should have been suspended -- or Ali should have been DQ'd for scorning the rule book and flagrantly ignoring the referee's direct orders.

Liston broke NO rules... It's not against the rules to go down after being hit... or to get up and resume the fight, expertly slipping and ducking punches

Did I say Liston broke any rules? Whose job was it to disqualify Ali?

Kalan wrote:Here's a question... Were Buster Douglas and Gene Tunney down long enough??? ... If you're counted out by the timekeeper they certainly were.

Whose fault was it that Liston was stopped? Liston thought he had done his bit unfortunately he wasn't banking on Walcott cocking everything up. He would've just dropped again had Walcott not stopped it. He needed to as big money was on him losing in the first.

Show me proof that big money was on Liston losing in the first... Who was indicted and convicted??? You pulled that out of your ass.

Controversial wrote:

Kalan wrote:

Controversial wrote:
The ref of course but Liston wasn't too bright was he. Walcott was the 'expert' there and he failed too. Liston heard the timekeeper and made sure he was down long enough, what did you make it 16 seconds? I can hear the timekeeper banging the canvas over the commentators, it would be much louder where Liston was laying so he could hear ok, trouble is he thought Walcott was mirroring the count and thats why he assumed he had been counted out. So who was at fault then, the ref for not controlling things and who is ultimately in charge or Ali?

The count should have been suspended -- or Ali should have been DQ'd for scorning the rule book and flagrantly ignoring the referee's direct orders.

Liston broke NO rules... It's not against the rules to go down after being hit... or to get up and resume the fight, expertly slipping and ducking punches

Did I say Liston broke any rules? Whose job was it to disqualify Ali?

So you admit Ali should have been diqualified???? ... His actions were certainly flagrant enough.

Kalan wrote:Show me proof that big money was on Liston losing in the first... Who was indicted and convicted??? You pulled that out of your ass.

Show me proof money wasn't won.

Kalan wrote:

Controversial wrote:

Kalan wrote:
The count should have been suspended -- or Ali should have been DQ'd for scorning the rule book and flagrantly ignoring the referee's direct orders.

Liston broke NO rules... It's not against the rules to go down after being hit... or to get up and resume the fight, expertly slipping and ducking punches

Did I say Liston broke any rules? Whose job was it to disqualify Ali?

So you admit Ali should have been diqualified???? ... His actions were certainly flagrant enough.

If the ref decided he should be then the refs decision stands. Trouble is the whole event was a shambles, Walcott didn't know what was going on or what he was doing.

Controversial wrote:

Kalan wrote:Show me proof that big money was on Liston losing in the first... Who was indicted and convicted??? You pulled that out of your ass.

Show me proof money wasn't won.

In a court of law you don't have to prove you didn't do a crime.. You can't prove a negative.. The prosecution has to prove you DID, otherwise they're 4-flushers

Controversial wrote:

Kalan wrote:

Controversial wrote:
Did I say Liston broke any rules? Whose job was it to disqualify Ali?

So you admit Ali should have been diqualified???? ... His actions were certainly flagrant enough.

If the ref decided he should be then the refs decision stands. Trouble is the whole event was a shambles, Walcott didn't know what was going on or what he was doing.

Ali could have helped Walcott out by going to a neutral corner and obeying his orders... Liston wasn't responsible for either man's fukups.