BoxRec

it seems more & more it is becoming fashionable to bash muhammad ali as he is so highly rated in the main stream.

i dont really buy into it one bit, the guys accomplihsments speak for themselves, but the thing that does peev me is a few people trying to say the 1st liston fight was a fix.

now the 2nd one was dodgy looking, but the 1st...? come on! ali did a sensational job IMO. anyway, if you check the latest cover of BM, there is a large full colour shot. if that was a fake... i dont know. chekc out sonnys face. jesus what a horrific job ali did on that guy, it really doesnt show up as much on video. looks like a big swollen melon.

ali really kicked the guys arse but anyway what do you fellas think? anyone seen the pic?

No, what does the pic show?
I've gone off Boxing Monthly since they issued that grovelling - and frankly pathetic - apology to allegedly.
No balls.

If I remember it's a pic of Sonny in what must be the last round of the 1st fight.
No, there's no way that fight was fixed ( and I don't think the 2nd was either: Sonny just got old )
All you have to do is watch a desparate Liston try to be-head Ali in the 5th round ( when he couldn't see ) to realise Sonny was trying to win.

Interesting to hear his corner man admit he was asked to "juice" the gloves in the 4th round - and say they did the same thing in the Cleveland Williams fight too.

I have know doubt the first fight wasn't fixed, the second is debatable. You say Sonny got old, but he went on to win 15-16 contest and should have been considered for the Heavyweight tournament when Ali was stripped, Floyd Patterson was.

I really don't know what to think of the 2nd fight, Gill Clancy once said that one of his fighters experienced a similar punch at the hands of Ali and he too was out-cold. I didn't like Liston's rolling around though. The punch was certainly clean enough to put a cold Liston down, but out? I am still suspicious.

I admit i am part of the Ali bashing crew to be honest, too many controversial wins for my liking. And i agree with Bennie about BM, Glyn Leach was practically on his knees with that apology!!

whilst i wouldnt consider myself to be a "ali basher" it does grate with me how people hold the guy up as some kind of modern day messiah.

whilst theres no doubting the guys ability in the ring his personnal life is far from making him the pardigm of virtue some would have us believe. he was a huge advocate iof the muslim virtue of monogomy whilst all the time being a promiscuous philanderer.

there was an undoubted nasty side to his character particularly in his belitteling of opponents, the names he gave them, various "uncle tom" references and his systematic beating of Ernie Terrell for refusing to call him "Ali" as opposed to "Clay". Watching the film of the fight its sickening to see the punishment he dished out continually shouting out "whats my name" at Terrell. Of course lets not forget the "white men are devils" line he took for a while

the vietnam issue is interesting. this is continually held up as an example of alis humanitarian virtue. truth of the matter is that he only took the stand against joining the army because they lowered the iq standard required for soldiers because of mounting casualties. he was originally knocked back due to the fact his iq wasnt high enough for the army to take him but as the war wore on those standards dropped and ali was indicted again. it was only then he refused to join not because of any religous views but because he felt if he wasnt good enough for them first time then why was he good enough for them now. it was only after this 2nd call up that the issue was highjacked by the nation of islam and ali was presented as a 'preacher' of the faith and was therefore illegible in their eyes. its interesting to note the many interviews given by ali around this time the over whelming majority of which he stated his reason for not going, ie "no quarrel with the vietcon, no yellow guy ever called me a person, why should they send me, a guy who pay more in taxes than it cost to buy one bomber" etc etc. very seldom if ever does he himself ever dennounce the war from a religous standpoint.

i think what we're seeing now is a re-evaluation of Muhammad Ali, carried out by a generation who didnt grow up with him and were therfore not influenced by the 'significance' that ali played in their lives ie an objective viewpoint not necessarily as a fighter but as a person. And whilst no-one can deny he has many good points, he's far from whiter than white (no pun intended) and those people, from the average joe punter in the street to the sychophantic thomas hausser, seem to be very uncomfortable in that.

now before im slated for being anti-ali let me tell you something. i used to box amatuer and about 10 years ago i had the chance to meet muhammad ali through this. i knocked this chance back. not because i didnt want to meet him as i would loved to have met him, but because i didnt want to see and remember my only meeting with muhhamad ali in his current state. i prefer to remeber him as, possibly, the greatest boxer i have ever seen

big fornicating deal. the guy is a human with many flaws like you and me.

as for the controversial decisions.. real fair if you judge a fighter who is in his mid 30s instead of his PRIME. at least ali never got whacked out like holmes did, or worse, knocked out by an old, fat middleweight like holyfield did.

Ali is great, but still overrated.

There are plenty of better fighters.

its a great pic

I still buy BM every month, good mag and good writers.

shakermaker wrote:its a great pic

I still buy BM every month, good mag and good writers.

I have to say I felt stunned that Leach accepted Bunce' latest article. Not, having a go at Bunce (I think he's good for the game and a not bad writer).

However, it felt like a blantant advert for the BBC. The title and caption completely misrespresented the article.

The BM people know I subscribe and I do enjoy it, its the first time though I wasn't entirely happy, happy is not the correct word because I can't criticise the article itself. I just thought that having a BBC columist and analyst discussing the state of TV boxing wasn't correct.

i never liked BM since they took out the readers letters page. why the fornicate do that.

now i wouldnt waste my money on that mess. old news, internet wipes BM out.

overhand_right wrote:i never liked BM since they took out the readers letters page. why the fornicate do that.

Yeah, and also the world wide results page - There is always some fight that I didn't know happend (even with the net) that BM mentioned in that page. Also, their one liners to explain some of the result were also appreciated - like they would say Controvesial decision, or cuts - which made us aware of how things happend.

I disagree about the net, I fear its Boxing News (sorry, Bennie and the rest) that for me have suffered since. Boxing Monthly have longer to put a piece together and their previous (when they conduct an extra page of interviews) is worth getting.

I still occasionally buy boxing news, and don't get me wrong its a top mag, but I find the internet has effected me purchasing that more than BM.

Its horses for courses though and I'm afraid there is nothing BN can do about the internet.

ko artist when you say there were plenty of better fighters do you mean at heavy?
and how do you get that quote block up where you can paraphrase someone else`s post?
i tried pressing the quote button thingy and feck all happened.
i know...i know after a hundred and odd posts you`d think i`d figure it out but i`m stumped on this one.

Yeah Net or not there is always a place for BM and the likes. I enjoy sitting down at work and reading about fights i know the results from yet there team of writers offer a different and skilled perspective. I particuarly enjoy Ant Evans and Graham Houston's articles plus love him or loathe him Buncey is an entertaining character as well.

headhunter wrote: and how do you get that quote block up where you can paraphrase someone else`s post?

Like this? Just press quote and delete whichever text you don't want, but make sure you don't delete the [ ] or it'll fornicate up

stujones wrote:

shakermaker wrote:its a great pic

I still buy BM every month, good mag and good writers.

I have to say I felt stunned that Leach accepted Bunce' latest article. Not, having a go at Bunce (I think he's good for the game and a not bad writer).

However, it felt like a blantant advert for the BBC. The title and caption completely misrespresented the article.

The BM people know I subscribe and I do enjoy it, its the first time though I wasn't entirely happy, happy is not the correct word because I can't criticise the article itself. I just thought that having a BBC columist and analyst discussing the state of TV boxing wasn't correct.

Bunce is a good writer in the broadsheets but his BM columns are a bit crap IMO! They don't flow right.

BM for me is a good reference guide if you wanna pick out a certain fight etc. Plus its more up to date than ring etc.