BoxRec

golden oldie wrote:

Kalan wrote:

golden oldie wrote:I think it is fair to say Spinks would have been totally humiliated by the pre exile version of Ali. For some reason or other his critics always use the post exile version of the man to decry him.

Louis was out 4 years for WW2 and came back with no tune-ups ... Vitali Klitschko was out 4 years to rehab his legs and fought Peter with no tune-ups ... Tyson was out 4 years for a bogus rape conviction ... Dempsey took 3 years off to party and tour and then fought Tunney with no tune-ups ... Jeffries was out for 6 years and fought Johnson with no tune-ups ... George Foreman was idle for 10 years ... Holmes was out 5 years ... David Haye took over 3 years off rehabbing his shoulder... But people only seem to bring out the crying towels for Ali, when other Heavyweight Champions were out a lot longer.

Ali was 28 when he came back and was better than ever versus Quarry.. He looked trimmer and sharper in that fight than the Frazier fight.. Haye will be 36 next month and he's bigger and better than ever. He just needs tougher fights and a lot more of them.. Klitschko was better and smarter than ever when he came back at 37... Foreman got smarter. He learned about pace, patience, and business during his years off. He made 10 times as much money as an old timer than he made as a youngster.

Guys like Dempsey, Tyson, and Louis suffered more from taking years off... Their dominating speed and power games were greatly diminished... Fighters who rely more on craft and guile were actually better in many aspects when they came back... Hopkins is 4 years older than Roy Jones but he was a shoo-in to win their rematch.. They both accumulated a lot of craft over the years -- but B-Hop is more of a technician and strategist who observes every move you make and uses the information better.

All very interesting, but none of it has any bearing on the fact that no Heavyweight, before or since, brought the attributes to a boxing ring that PRE EXILE Ali brought.

What other fighters did or didn't do during their lay offs / exiles has less than nothing to do with Ali losing his ability to " float " around a boxing ring in the way he could before 1967, but he simply could NOT do in 1970, or indeed any time afterwards.

Sorry, but beating the shite out of Jerry Quarry does not compare with the humiliations of every fighter Ali faced before his government decided to make an example of him.

NOBODY was humiliated!!!! ... NOT light heavyweight Doug Jones. Most people thought he beat Ali... NOT George Chuvalo. He easily went 15 rounds with Ali on 2 weeks notice, when Frazier and Foreman easily stopped Chuvalo... NOT Henry Cooper. He knocked Ali flat on his ass... NOT Karl Milderberger. Most people said he would never make the 6th round... NOT Sonny Liston. The scorecards were even when Sonny was forced out with torn biceps. In the rematch Sonny was his feet, easily ducking Ali's punches, when the fight was stopped for no reason. The referee never gave Liston a count, so Sonny got up and resumed fighting, only for Nat Fleischer to tell Walcott the fight was over. Fleischer wasn't a commissioner and had no jurisdiction over the fight.

Controversial wrote:

Cutman Scabbers wrote:
Does anyone know Leon Spink's total amateur record?

I imagine he had a lot of amateur bouts.

Amateur Record: 178-7 with 133 knockouts

Wow! That is an outstanding and extraordinary record for an amateur of any kind.

BoxBuzz wrote:An old nearly washed up Ali underestimated a still pretty good young Spinks.......and then he took him seriously and beat an even better Spinks. Spinks second fight with Ali was his best effort.

But by this time...Ali was long in the tooth. So it's an interesting discussion for the back porch, but it doesn't add or subtract much from the fact that Ali was a much better fighter than Kalan would like you to believe.....and maybe not quite as good as the most zealot supporters of his would have you believe.

The wars with Frazier and the boutique skills of Norton, and the Foreman affair did sap a bit from this very good, but aging out fighter.

The Spinks, Holmes and Berbick fights are just some asterisks to his genuinely remarkable legacy.

I remember when the great Muhammad Ali lost to Leon Spinks. It was a Friday night of February 15, 1978. I didn't see the fight. A neighbor told me the next day in the morning. I was sad, but not as sad when Ali lost to the great Larry Holmes two years after that. There was a rematch, so, I knew he could regain his title back.

As for Spinks, he fought the fight of his life that night. He fought like if there was no tomorrow. He was in great shape. He was busy and deserved the win. Ali was washed up and 36 years of age. He already was in the decline and way past his prime. Ready to be taken. But, to say that Spinks was IN BETTER SHAPE in the rematch, is INACCURATE, BoxBuzz! INACCURATE!

When Spinks won the title, he went into a party frenzy. He didn't even trained nor had the same desire nor motivation after winning the title. For the next 7 months into the fight, Spinks was no where to be found into the gym. While The Greatest trained like the last day of his life. This time as hard as his younger days. He knew it was his last fight. And he had THE MOTIVATION to be the first heavyweight champion to win the crown 3 times.

The fight showed the outcome as no matter how young or talented you are, if you don't work hard nor train, talent is out of the window. Spinks was not that way talented. Maybe his management team saw that he wasn't going to go far anyway. So to challenge a washed up warrior was the route to go. Plus the champion was THE CASH COW of the sport at the time, of course, he gave the aging champion a rematch for $2 million dollars. Which at the time, in 1978, was a lot of money. Who would not do that?

handsofstone wrote:Im gonna watch both fights next week,ive never seen them and TBH im not exactly looking forward to them as ive read enough about them and they werent classics by all accounts

Still as a boxing enthusiast i think i should

The first fight between them was a classic. The second fight was a dull affair. A going away after party fight for The Greatest, nothing else.

Cutman Scabbers wrote:

Controversial wrote:

Cutman Scabbers wrote:
Does anyone know Leon Spink's total amateur record?

I imagine he had a lot of amateur bouts.

Amateur Record: 178-7 with 133 knockouts

Thank you!

Who beat him?

133 KOs as an amateur that is amazing if not unprecedented! That means 133 KOs in three rounds or less, almost hard to believe. - Did they wear headgear then? Fighting with 12oz gloves? - I can't remember if the Olympic boxers were wearing headgear in '76, anyone know?

I really don't think Spinks wanted to beat Ali in the rematch... Comedians were making fun of Spinks and St Louis cops were harassing him.. He got more driving tickets as World Champion than he did the rest of his life.. Emotionally he wasn't ready to be World Champion or handle the media, or disgruntled Ali fans.

Spinks fought terribly in the 2nd Ali fight and started losing tons of fights.. He didn't seem to care a whole lot.. For some reason I think if he had been brought along normally for 20 fights or so, before they ever had him challenging for a World Title ... his career would have been a lot different.

Kalan wrote:

golden oldie wrote:I think it is fair to say Spinks would have been totally humiliated by the pre exile version of Ali. For some reason or other his critics always use the post exile version of the man to decry him.

Louis was out 4 years for WW2 and came back with no tune-ups ... Vitali Klitschko was out 4 years to rehab his legs and fought Peter with no tune-ups ... Tyson was out 4 years for a bogus rape conviction ... Dempsey took 3 years off to party and tour and then fought Tunney with no tune-ups ... Jeffries was out for 6 years and fought Johnson with no tune-ups ... George Foreman was idle for 10 years ... Holmes was out 5 years ... David Haye took over 3 years off rehabbing his shoulder... But people only seem to bring out the crying towels for Ali, when other Heavyweight Champions were out a lot longer.

Ali was 28 when he came back and was better than ever versus Quarry.. He looked trimmer and sharper in that fight than the Frazier fight.. Haye will be 36 next month and he's bigger and better than ever. He just needs tougher fights and a lot more of them.. Klitschko was better and smarter than ever when he came back at 37... Foreman got smarter. He learned about pace, patience, and business during his years off. He made 10 times as much money as an old timer than he made as a youngster.

Guys like Dempsey, Tyson, and Louis suffered more from taking years off... Their dominating speed and power games were greatly diminished... Fighters who rely more on craft and guile were actually better in many aspects when they came back... Hopkins is 4 years older than Roy Jones but he was a shoo-in to win their rematch.. They both accumulated a lot of craft over the years -- but B-Hop is more of a technician and strategist who observes every move you make and uses the information better.

Kalan; not every fighter is the same.

Ali was effectively done after The Thrilla in Manila.

Yes, he fought on way after, but he went life & death with opponents he would have toyed with in his prime.

Also, as I keep saying, he had neurological damage way before it was officially confirmed, so you can't keep beating Ali with the same stick because he couldn't do things that other fighters of a similar age did before & after him.

Kalan wrote:Because Ali was the most overrated boxer in Fistic History.

Wilt Chamberlain is the most overrated boxer in fistic history.

golden oldie wrote:

Syntax Error wrote:
Kalan; not every fighter is the same.

Ali was effectively done after The Thrilla in Manila.

Yes, he fought on way after, but he went life & death with opponents he would have toyed with in his prime.

Also, as I keep saying, he had neurological damage way before it was officially confirmed, so you can't keep beating Ali with the same stick because he couldn't do things that other fighters of a similar age did before & after him.

With respect I would say Ali was effectively done after his enforced exile. By his own inimitable standards he became something of a punchbag after the exile. I'd say he took more punches in the FOTC than he did in any 10 of his fights pre 67.

As great as Joe Frazier was, he simply wasn't superior to Ali, who could no longer dance away from shots, then rapidly move into range throw his own punches then dance away again. The bravery he showed in his post exile career was as nothing to the skills he showed before it.

That's a fair point.

He wasn't the same when he came back in '70, but he was still pretty formidable & remained so until about '75, even if not at his vintage best.

He certainly took a lot more punches in his second coming & I think Manila was the straw the broke the camel's back for him.

He never really looked that good after Manila & it's plain to see that that fight effectively ended his career & set in motion that neurological issues that would plague him in later life.

Kalan wrote:I really don't think Spinks wanted to beat Ali in the rematch... Comedians were making fun of Spinks and St Louis cops were harassing him.. He got more driving tickets as World Champion than he did the rest of his life.. Emotionally he wasn't ready to be World Champion or handle the media, or disgruntled Ali fans.

Spinks fought terribly in the 2nd Ali fight and started losing tons of fights.. He didn't seem to care a whole lot.. For some reason I think if he had been brought along normally for 20 fights or so, before they ever had him challenging for a World Title ... his career would have been a lot different.

You have some valid points. He certainly wasn't emotionally prepared.

Had he been brought along normally, as you described, I think he would've had a longer run at the world class level. I'm not sure he ever would've beaten Larry Holmes, but the history of the cruiserweight division would probably be much different. What might have been.

APerno wrote:

Cutman Scabbers wrote:

Controversial wrote:
Amateur Record: 178-7 with 133 knockouts

Thank you!

Who beat him?

133 KOs as an armature that is amazing if not unprecedented! That means 133 KOs in three rounds or less, almost hard to believe. - Did they wear headgear then? Fighting with 12oz gloves? - I can't remember if the Olympic boxers were wearing headgear in '76, anyone know?

Not in the footage/still pictures that I recall.

Kalan wrote:
NOBODY was humiliated!!!! ... NOT light heavyweight Doug Jones. Most people thought he beat Ali... .

This is one of those rumors that did/has gotten a lot of lip service over the years. And it's simply not true. MOST people thought Jones came up well short, ....now perhaps you shared the opinion of a MINORITY of people who saw it for Jones. Some thought it was a close fight, closer than it should have been from some folks point of view...but the VAST and I mean VAST majority thought Ali won.

this does seem to indicate that you get your news from the rumor mill. OR and I mean this sincerely...that YOU were one of the minority who saw it that way. But if so, just say so, because the Jones fight does not fall into the category of controversy in any way near the Norton or Young fights. Which I would agree, the public seems split about 50/50 on.

bwu wrote:

Kalan wrote:I really don't think Spinks wanted to beat Ali in the rematch... Comedians were making fun of Spinks and St Louis cops were harassing him.. He got more driving tickets as World Champion than he did the rest of his life.. Emotionally he wasn't ready to be World Champion or handle the media, or disgruntled Ali fans.

Spinks fought terribly in the 2nd Ali fight and started losing tons of fights.. He didn't seem to care a whole lot.. For some reason I think if he had been brought along normally for 20 fights or so, before they ever had him challenging for a World Title ... his career would have been a lot different.

You have some valid points. He certainly wasn't emotionally prepared.

Had he been brought along normally, as you described, I think he would've had a longer run at the world class level. I'm not sure he ever would've beaten Larry Holmes, but the history of the cruiserweight division would probably be much different. What might have been.

This is just off the top of my head (just reacting to your remark about not beating Holmes) he did have the same style as his brother, that 'jump in, jump out' style that Michael Spinks used to beat Holmes - but certainly Holmes was the more accomplished boxer and maybe even better fighter; and because 'Neon Leon' (great nickname) would have encountered Holmes much earlier than his brother did, Holmes wouldn't have been passed his prime, (Michael had that going for him) and Holmes probably would have take him - but you know the old cliche "styles makes for a good platitude" . . . or something like that.

BoxBuzz wrote:

Kalan wrote:
NOBODY was humiliated!!!! ... NOT light heavyweight Doug Jones. Most people thought he beat Ali... .

This is one of those rumors that did/has gotten a lot of lip service over the years. And it's simply not true. MOST people thought Jones came up well short, ....now perhaps you shared the opinion of a MINORITY of people who saw it for Jones. Some thought it was a close fight, closer than it should have been from some folks point of view...but the VAST and I mean VAST majority thought Ali won.

this does seem to indicate that you get your news from the rumor mill. OR and I mean this sincerely...that YOU were one of the minority who saw it that way. But if so, just say so, because the Jones fight does not fall into the category of controversy in any way near the Norton or Young fights. Which I would agree, the public seems split about 50/50 on.

Rumor mill??? BuzzBox the only rumor is that you have a brain.. On this website you can check the UPI poll of 25 ringside sports writers directly after the fight. Most of them had Jones winning.. Most people in that arena thought Doug Jones beat Clay.. The Crowd booed the decision and threw debris into the ring. The newspaper stories of the day said so. Where do you get YOUR erroneous information that the VAST MAJORITY had Clay winning??? You're only saying that to dispute what I said, which is idiotic of you.

Kalan wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:

Kalan wrote:
NOBODY was humiliated!!!! ... NOT light heavyweight Doug Jones. Most people thought he beat Ali... .

This is one of those rumors that did/has gotten a lot of lip service over the years. And it's simply not true. MOST people thought Jones came up well short, ....now perhaps you shared the opinion of a MINORITY of people who saw it for Jones. Some thought it was a close fight, closer than it should have been from some folks point of view...but the VAST and I mean VAST majority thought Ali won.

this does seem to indicate that you get your news from the rumor mill. OR and I mean this sincerely...that YOU were one of the minority who saw it that way. But if so, just say so, because the Jones fight does not fall into the category of controversy in any way near the Norton or Young fights. Which I would agree, the public seems split about 50/50 on.

Rumor mill??? BuzzBox the only rumor is that you have a brain.. On this website you can check the UPI poll of 25 ringside sports writers directly after the fight. Most of them had Jones winning.. Most people in that arena thought Doug Jones beat Clay.. The Crowd booed the decision and threw debris into the ring. The newspaper stories of the day said so. Where do you get YOUR erroneous information that the VAST MAJORITY had Clay winning??? You're only saying that to dispute what I said, which is idiotic of you.

Your just plain wrong. end of story.


Here is a fair reporters take:

"In fairness, the winner of that famous 1963 fight was in the eye of the beholder. Did Clay do enough? Could Jones have done more? The hugely divided opinion told the story. The Associated Press scored the fight 5-4-1 for Jones. United Press International saw it 6-3-1 for Clay.

Both men, of course, thought they won. Jones figured he got home by a 6-3-1 margin at the very least. Cassius thought he won seven rounds. A quiet but direct man, Doug wasn’t impressed by the man who would be king: “He talks a lot outside but doesn’t show much in the ring. He better fight me again before he even thinks of Liston.”

That little comment summed up the feeling of most. Clay was a bright young thing, a skillful boxer and a good entertainer. But he wasn’t in Liston’s class. Sonny might just seriously damage him.

Whatever one thought of the decision in New York, Clay and Jones put on a sparkling display that frequently had the crowd cheering. The Garden was still very much the home of big time boxing in 1963 and the atmosphere crackled whenever two well matched men came together.

During his magnificent pomp, Clay’s speed, skill and reflexes allowed him to rip up the textbook of boxing and get away with moves that stunned and horrified the traditionalists. He shunned a traditional high guard, he leaned back to avoid punches, he danced and bounced and threw his own punches from all sorts of funky angles. In the parlance of the day, he wasn’t a “proper fighter.” Liston was a proper fighter. Clay was a flake whose unique formula surely couldn’t work over the long haul. In the hugely unlikely event of Liston not nailing him to the floor, somebody else would.

But nobody ever did and two fights were pivotal in setting up the legend that would become Muhammad Ali: the fight with Jones and Clay’s next bout with Henry Cooper in London, where the Louisville Lip would back into the ropes and be smashed to the floor by a gorgeous left hook. Clay survived both crises with an iron will, a terrific belief in his ability and that special dollop of good fortune that embraces every champion in the making.

Once he had survived that rocky patch in his career, Clay mesmerized Liston and then convinced a string of challengers that they couldn’t beat him. Only Joe Frazier, much later down the line, refused to believe that the undefeated one was invincible.

Against Doug Jones, Clay’s habit of leaning back got him into big trouble in the second round. Tough, stolid and unimpressed by other men’s reputations, Doug slammed a big right into Clay’s jaw that shook him down to his feet. It wasn’t the only uncomfortable moment for Cassius. Jones also rocked him in the fourth and seventh rounds as Clay struggled to cope with Doug’s no-nonsense pressure. Doug was exposing Cassius as a work still very much in progress. Already accustomed to dominating his opponents, the young ace wasn’t happy with being harried and pushed back. Clay’s fast jab wasn’t as effective as it had been in past fights, but he eventually got it working and began to rifle Jones with speedy combinations.

After eight rounds, Clay seemed to realize that his undefeated record was in jeopardy and he put on a big spurt in the last two frames of the 10-rounder. Putting his punches together in fast clusters, he did what he would so often in his career by catching the eye of the judges. But the gritty Jones never stopped firing back and won a great many fans for his defiant showing."


Clay was boastful and heavily favored, the crowd was with Jones in the aftermath. It was a close fight, but most experts saw it as a narrow win for Clay.

Your "FAIR REPORTER" who you won't mention his name, supports ME BuzzBox... He proves I'm RIGHT and you're WRONG

One of his last lines in his Clay worshiping article "the crowd was with Jones in the aftermath" shows that the VAST MAJORITY did NOT have Clay winning as you asserted... He made an unsupported claim to counter the opinion of the great unwashed in his next sentence.

He asserts "most experts" had Clay winning narrowly.. Did he take a poll? Did he say what experts? Where did he dig up that opinion from? Most all of the experts I talked to over the years had Doug Jones winning---because he landed the harder and cleaner punches... Clay was bigger, taller, and stronger than Jones.. He had a big reach advantage on him and wore him down to a degree with his size.. Clay was able to out-wrestle Jones in the clinches---all of which he initiated... Clay finished strong in the 9th and 10th but the fight was already gone because Jones won the first 6 rounds.. The 7th and 8th were closely fought but Clay took hard punches in those rounds and had to clinch like Hell.. Clay fired desperately in the last 2 rounds---while still getting hit---to eek them out, but it was too little too late.

Kalan wrote:Your "FAIR REPORTER" who you won't mention his name, supports ME BuzzBox... He proves I'm RIGHT and you're WRONG

One of his last lines in his Clay worshiping article "the crowd was with Jones in the aftermath" shows that the VAST MAJORITY did NOT have Clay winning as you asserted... He made an unsupported claim to counter the opinion of the great unwashed in his next sentence.

He asserts "most experts" had Clay winning narrowly.. Did he take a poll? Did he say what experts? Where did he dig up that opinion from? Most all of the experts I talked to over the years had Doug Jones winning---because he landed the harder and cleaner punches... Clay was bigger, taller, and stronger than Jones.. He had a big reach advantage on him and wore him down to a degree with his size.. Clay was able to out-wrestle Jones in the clinches---all of which he initiated... Clay finished strong in the 9th and 10th but the fight was already gone because Jones won the first 6 rounds.. The 7th and 8th were closely fought but Clay took hard punches in those rounds and had to clinch like Hell.. Clay fired desperately in the last 2 rounds---while still getting hit---to eek them out, but it was too little too late.

I'v watched that fight and Doug Jones did not win that fight he fought well but win it NO

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:
I'v watched that fight and Doug Jones did not win that fight he fought well but win it NO

I agree, Ali won it. It's not like Jones was a bad fighter either, he was ranked 3rd in the world at the time.

cfang wrote:Blah blah blah Ali overrated blah blah no body arrack blah

Change the record kal and come up with something new

He is one tedious turd troll.....how predictable Ali is next for being overrated.

These guys follow a pattern. First Norris beat a peak SRL is their first outburst of verbal diaarehea. Than its ALi was sshit and Holmes was the GOAT.
Next will be mike mccallum would have beaten the fab four on the same night.
Than it will be the KLitchkos would have killed all the 70s HW's.

mimmy123 wrote:So how did a 7 fight novice beat The Greatest?

A combination of two things.

1 - Ali didn't come in to the ring in good shape. I think that he badly underestimated Leon and seen this as a quick and easy payday.
2 - Spinks gave the performance of his life, one which I don't think he could have ever replicated again.

You put those two things together - a tired, uninterested Champion and a hungry, motivated challenger. It's always a recipe for an upset.

golden oldie wrote:

Bricks wrote:

cfang wrote:Blah blah blah Ali overrated blah blah no body arrack blah

Change the record kal and come up with something new

He is one tedious turd troll.....how predictable Ali is next for being overrated.


These guys follow a pattern. First Norris beat a peak SRL is their first outburst of verbal diaarehea. Than its ALi was sshit and Holmes was the GOAT.
Next will be mike mccallum would have beaten the fab four on the same night.
Than it will be the KLitchkos would have killed all the 70s HW's.

Out of interest which of the fab 4 do you think MM couldn't possibly beat?

I think in my view, the great Mike McCallum could beat 3 out of 4. He could be 1-3, 2-2, or 0-4. But never 4-0. He is not beating Marvelous in my view.

golden oldie wrote:

Kalan wrote:Your "FAIR REPORTER" who you won't mention his name, supports ME BuzzBox... He proves I'm RIGHT and you're WRONG

One of his last lines in his Clay worshiping article "the crowd was with Jones in the aftermath" shows that the VAST MAJORITY did NOT have Clay winning as you asserted... He made an unsupported claim to counter the opinion of the great unwashed in his next sentence.

He asserts "most experts" had Clay winning narrowly.. Did he take a poll? Did he say what experts? Where did he dig up that opinion from? Most all of the experts I talked to over the years had Doug Jones winning---because he landed the harder and cleaner punches... Clay was bigger, taller, and stronger than Jones.. He had a big reach advantage on him and wore him down to a degree with his size.. Clay was able to out-wrestle Jones in the clinches---all of which he initiated... Clay finished strong in the 9th and 10th but the fight was already gone because Jones won the first 6 rounds.. The 7th and 8th were closely fought but Clay took hard punches in those rounds and had to clinch like Hell.. Clay fired desperately in the last 2 rounds---while still getting hit---to eek them out, but it was too little too late.

Latest in.

Ali had the crowd against him in most of his fights pre exile. In one of the Liston fights one white woman was heard to scream at the top of her voice " go on sonny, kill that ( N word )" obviously failing to notice that Liston was also a black guy. The idiot.

I don't care what some stupid racist screamed at Clay... That's one ignorant person in a crowd of many thousands... Clay had a lot of fans who were rooting for him... This fight was not fought in the South and Jones was blacker than Ali by a mile... That crowd went for Jones because he was the aggressor for the most part against a much bigger opponent -- and Jones was landing the better punches and obviously beating Clay for the first 6 rounds.

golden oldie wrote:

Kalan wrote:Your "FAIR REPORTER" who you won't mention his name, supports ME BuzzBox... He proves I'm RIGHT and you're WRONG

One of his last lines in his Clay worshiping article "the crowd was with Jones in the aftermath" shows that the VAST MAJORITY did NOT have Clay winning as you asserted... He made an unsupported claim to counter the opinion of the great unwashed in his next sentence.

He asserts "most experts" had Clay winning narrowly.. Did he take a poll? Did he say what experts? Where did he dig up that opinion from? Most all of the experts I talked to over the years had Doug Jones winning---because he landed the harder and cleaner punches... Clay was bigger, taller, and stronger than Jones.. He had a big reach advantage on him and wore him down to a degree with his size.. Clay was able to out-wrestle Jones in the clinches---all of which he initiated... Clay finished strong in the 9th and 10th but the fight was already gone because Jones won the first 6 rounds.. The 7th and 8th were closely fought but Clay took hard punches in those rounds and had to clinch like Hell.. Clay fired desperately in the last 2 rounds---while still getting hit---to eek them out, but it was too little too late.

Latest in.

Ali had the crowd against him in most of his fights pre exile. In one of the Liston fights one white woman was heard to scream at the top of her voice " go on sonny, kill that ( N word )" obviously failing to notice that Liston was also a black guy. The idiot.

Some idiots were apparently screaming the same thing rooting for Norton against Ali. Aside from being a moronic, rude, and tasteless thing to think, much less scream, Norton was mildly darker than Ali and messed around with a lot of white women, also unlike Ali.

Kalan wrote:Your "FAIR REPORTER" who you won't mention his name, supports ME BuzzBox... He proves I'm RIGHT and you're WRONG

One of his last lines in his Clay worshiping article "the crowd was with Jones in the aftermath" shows that the VAST MAJORITY did NOT have Clay winning as you asserted... He made an unsupported claim to counter the opinion of the great unwashed in his next sentence.

He asserts "most experts" had Clay winning narrowly.. Did he take a poll? Did he say what experts? Where did he dig up that opinion from? Most all of the experts I talked to over the years had Doug Jones winning---because he landed the harder and cleaner punches... Clay was bigger, taller, and stronger than Jones.. He had a big reach advantage on him and wore him down to a degree with his size.. Clay was able to out-wrestle Jones in the clinches---all of which he initiated... Clay finished strong in the 9th and 10th but the fight was already gone because Jones won the first 6 rounds.. The 7th and 8th were closely fought but Clay took hard punches in those rounds and had to clinch like Hell.. Clay fired desperately in the last 2 rounds---while still getting hit---to eek them out, but it was too little too late.

Kalan....the last line was my own....it's not in quotes it's my take after watching the fight recently. I do take you seriously....but I don't agree with you. I don't think your a troll, I just think you evaluate in a different way than many others.

Clay's bragging got the crowd in Jone's corner...not Jones winning performance..he didn't win the fight. When the fight turned competitive vs a one sided beatdown, they went with gentleman Jones. Leave it to your ol' Pal Buzz to bring sensibility to the discussion.

golden oldie wrote:

Kalan wrote:

golden oldie wrote:
Latest in.

Ali had the crowd against him in most of his fights pre exile. In one of the Liston fights one white woman was heard to scream at the top of her voice " go on sonny, kill that ( N word )" obviously failing to notice that Liston was also a black guy. The idiot.

I don't care what some stupid racist screamed at Clay... That's one ignorant person in a crowd of many thousands... Clay had a lot of fans who were rooting for him... This fight was not fought in the South and Jones was blacker than Ali by a mile... That crowd went for Jones because he was the aggressor for the most part against a much bigger opponent -- and Jones was landing the better punches and obviously beating Clay for the first 6 rounds.

I would love to have met this " popular " Clay you have invented, as indeed I suspect Ali would have liked too himself. The whole of the boxing establishment were against him and so were the majority of fight fans, because he did everything that was considered to be " wrong " in the way he fought, and he was a braggard to boot.

You need to learn your history as opposed to creating your own versions. Clay / Ali was one of the most UNPOPULAR fighters ever, until the world ( America in particular ) changed its opinion on Vietnam. It was far from unusual for him to fight in front of hostile crowds.

I was around then and went to a mixed race high school... Almost all of my classmates who were boxing fans and liked Clay.. Most of us believed Clay would beat Jones, Cooper, Liston etc.. Clay had a big mouth and was a rebel, but that was cool in the 60's.. Clay had a big personality. He was a funny guy. The public generally liked him other than a segment of society who will always be with us. Below Ali appeared on "What's My Line" and was very well received by the audience.. NO cat calls or negative reaction -- both right after he changed his name to Muhammad Ali and later when he resisted the draft. So you basically don't know what you're talking about.

Ali's first appearance on What's My Line following Liston fights -- 21:45 of video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucthiM7QbqY

Ali's second appearance when he was resisting the US Gov and draft https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjdwvjgTS4E