BoxRec

Posted: **30 Aug 2016, 22:53**

This is like Nixon going to China.....much credibility IMHO.

I have to say, I've been way to timid to float that idea before, but it made sense to me at the time...but there was so much clamor about some sort of mythological break in the action, that I held my opinion and really had forgotten about it for years.

Anyway I'm going to scrub some fecal matter from this thread...but I'll leave the boxing related info.

Posted: **31 Aug 2016, 11:23**

Kalan wrote:
Brutu wrote:June 18 1963,Wembley Stadium London England.
(notice what happens at about 8:31 seconds into this film footage.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Frn3rTj5DOY

FACT:Ever heard of the Nixon tapes?
Yeah I heard it... The announcer clearly says that Clay had a torn glove.. That jives with Angelo Dundee's story.. According to regulations the boxers are required to have intact gloves, with no torn, chaffed, or irregular seams or surfaces ... and they didn't stop the fight to change the gloves, which should have been done, because torn gloves can cut the crap out of your face.. But I believe the reason they didn't require the gloves to be changed was because it was obvious Clay was in a bad way after he got up from the knockdown.. They thought Cooper might finish Clay if they didn't give him several minutes to recover changing gloves.. Clay recovered well in the minute's rest and that was that.

And they ALWAYS have back-up gloves for major fights... The idea that they wouldn't is BS... They didn't change the glove to help Cooper.

Yeah,but this was in Britain.
Isnt there a post where this fight made it a rule to have an extra pair at ringside,so that they wouldnt have to send somewone all the way up to the dressing room ?

Posted: **31 Aug 2016, 11:26**

evrenb wrote:Its a legend that has evolved over time...If Henry Cooper told you it minutes you are not going to turn around to him and say 'no it wasn't' lol..unless you wanted an 'enry 'ammer...or if he told you ali's reach was 90 you wouldnt say 'how do you know?' I remember that quote and it made me chuckle - heard him say it many times actually. He used to live about 14 miles from me in Crowborough...a great man...

and it is not a legend that has evolved over time really.
I remember hearing it as far back in 1970 (at least) in the local Barbershop ,back when I wasnt even interested in reading or watching boxing (just King Kong and Godzilla movies mostly and of course the stray Playboy magazine come across every now and then).

Posted: **31 Aug 2016, 11:40**

BTW Is it just me in observing or does it appear that Muhammad Ali is putting some extra "English" into that jab there in the screen shot?
which ones of his gloves was torn again ?

Posted: **31 Aug 2016, 11:49**

has anyone here determined which of Ali's punches to Cooper's face in the footage started the leaking ?

Posted: **31 Aug 2016, 12:13**

So if the extended break idea doesn't work out, we can just evolve this to be about another subject?

Posted: **31 Aug 2016, 12:20**

BoxBuzz wrote:So if the extended break idea doesn't work out, we can just evolve this to be about another subject?

just trying to add some variety on the topic,that's all

Posted: **31 Aug 2016, 13:00**

So just so's I understand.....we begin with the certain yet assumed knowledge that "something went terribly and unfairly wrong for Henry during his fight with Ali, but we are not quite sure what that something is" .....and then begin searching all empirical evidence to determine, qualify and support this known fact?

Your blinding me with science.

Posted: **31 Aug 2016, 15:30**

yes, I would say that there were certain verables connected to it resulting in the outcome.

Posted: **31 Aug 2016, 16:22**

Caractacus wrote:yes, I would say that there were certain VARIABLES connected to it resulting in the outcome.

Allow me to correct your spelling...., by the way, this statement holds true about EVERYTHING..... including putting your shoes on every morning of your life.

Posted: **01 Sep 2016, 19:09**

golden oldie wrote:I was under the impression that old chestnut about extra minutes between rounds 4 and 5 had been dispelled decades ago.

Wrong,(unless you know something we don't).

Posted: **01 Sep 2016, 20:23**

Angelo Dundee was completely responsible for this BS story.. He was always trying to look like a genius and savior.. He said, "Clay wobbled to the corner and we worked furiously to wake him up.. But he was still dazed and wasn't coming around.. So I slit a little tear in the seam of Clay's glove and demanded the glove be changed... That took an extra minute that we desperately needed -- and Clay was completely alert as the 4th round began."

Dundee was so convincing that Ali believed the story for a couple years.. Until he reviewed the fight for the rematch.. "Hey, you never changed my glove."

Posted: **01 Sep 2016, 20:24**

Rather " and Clay was completely alert as the 5th round began."

Posted: **01 Sep 2016, 20:33**

golden oldie wrote:I was under the impression that old chestnut about extra minutes between rounds 4 and 5 had been dispelled decades ago.

It was dispelled by any and all who either watched the fight from the stadium, watched it live on closed circuit, live on tv, or watched the unedited film after the fight.

Which leaves only caractus....who is still attempting to sort it out for himself.

Posted: **02 Sep 2016, 06:22**

BoxBuzz wrote:It was dispelled by any and all who either watched the fight from the stadium, watched it live on closed circuit, live on tv, or watched the unedited film after the fight.

Which leaves only caractus....who is still attempting to sort it out for himself.

Exactly

Posted: **02 Sep 2016, 13:47**

BoxBuzz wrote:
golden oldie wrote:I was under the impression that old chestnut about extra minutes between rounds 4 and 5 had been dispelled decades ago.

It was dispelled by any and all who either watched the fight from the stadium, watched it live on closed circuit, live on tv, or watched the unedited film after the fight.

Which leaves only caractus....who is still attempting to sort it out for himself.

okay name some names then .
such as Steve Bunce ?(born 1962)
Dont make me larf.

Posted: **02 Sep 2016, 13:58**

Caractus....it's a settled matter. The proof is irrefutable.

And this just in: The world is round. Generally speaking.

Posted: **03 Sep 2016, 09:18**

To be fair, there are some internet theories that speak of a gang of interstellar hoodlums. It is rumored that they prey on the obsessive compulsive among us. They goof the space time continuum with subtle changes in our history line. Only certain folks would ever be observant enough to notice. So this matter may be far more significant than a simple timing issue regarding a singular sporting event.

Posted: **03 Sep 2016, 12:42**

golden oldie wrote:
Caractacus wrote:
BoxBuzz wrote:

It was dispelled by any and all who either watched the fight from the stadium, watched it live on closed circuit, live on tv, or watched the unedited film after the fight.

Which leaves only caractus....who is still attempting to sort it out for himself.
okay name some names then .
such as Steve Bunce ?(born 1962)
Dont make me larf.
Seeing as you are able to write, it must also be assumed you are able to count. Have you tried " watching " the film, and counting the seconds between rounds 4 and 5? You could well end up being enlightened.

Did you even read the posts on this thread ?
The footage between rounds four and five were obviously edited out of the existing film kinescope (for time constraits mostly I rekon).
and over the years the missing minutes have been dulled from the boxing public's memory.

Posted: **03 Sep 2016, 17:16**

golden oldie wrote:
Caractacus wrote:
golden oldie wrote:
Seeing as you are able to write, it must also be assumed you are able to count. Have you tried " watching " the film, and counting the seconds between rounds 4 and 5? You could well end up being enlightened.
Did you even read the posts on this thread ?
The footage between rounds four and five were obviously edited out of the existing film kinescope (for time constraits mostly I rekon).
and over the years the missing minutes have been dulled from the boxing public's memory.
I have no doubt you also have theories about the " grassy knoll " and the" twin towers ", forgive me but I have neither the time nor the inclination for such nonsense.

yes,a hobo from the grassy knoll did it.

Posted: **04 Sep 2016, 11:06**

Caractacus wrote:
golden oldie wrote:
Caractacus wrote:
okay name some names then .
such as Steve Bunce ?(born 1962)
Dont make me larf.
Seeing as you are able to write, it must also be assumed you are able to count. Have you tried " watching " the film, and counting the seconds between rounds 4 and 5? You could well end up being enlightened.
Did you even read the posts on this thread ?
The footage between rounds four and five were obviously edited out of the existing film kinescope (for time constraits mostly I rekon).
and over the years the missing minutes have been dulled from the boxing public's memory.

But you yourself have now viewed the unedited version. What's left to sort? Case closed.

Posted: **04 Sep 2016, 13:42**

Well maybe he didn't realize that his biggest concern, that there were missing moments from the various films of the event, were in fact available now for viewing.

Unless one believes someone went to the trouble of matching up the radio and the camera links in some sort of grand deception initiative.

Posted: **05 Sep 2016, 11:29**

Take a look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hwn2mqNI1I
Forward to 15:30 to hear the truth about the torn glove incident.

Posted: **05 Sep 2016, 13:01**

Thanks SteveO

Let's hope the facts of this matter don't continue to cause confusion for some.

Posted: **05 Sep 2016, 14:21**

We live in hope BoxBuzz.

BoxRec

Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)

Re: Cooper/Ali(Clay)