BoxRec

The heavyweight elimination tourney that followed Ali's exiled has been relegated to almost a footnote among the important events of heavyweight history.

For starters, there were those people at the time, regardless of whether or not they agreed with Ali's political stance, that felt his profession as a fighter was independent of politics and thus that he should not have been stripped of his heavyweight title. Thus, many people would still regard Ali as the "unofficial champion" regardless of what the tournament's official outcome would be.

The tournament's credibility was even further damaged when Joe Frazier, the consensus #1 contender and considered the likely heir to Ali's throne, refused to take part in it. Without Frazier, the tournament's purported purpose of deciding a top fighter in the divisision pretty much was dashed from the start.

When Frazier refused to take part, the WBA responded by very controversially stripping Frazier of his #1 ranking and moving all the contenders up a rank (which allowed Leotis Martin to enter).

The final nail in the tournament's coffin (from a standpoint of historical significance) came when Frazier absolutely crushed the tourney's winner, Jimmy Ellis, as though he had no business being in the ring with him. That basically embarassed the whole tournament.

However, I'd like to put all of this aside for a moment and reminisce about some of the positive aspects of this tournament - and there were quite a few.

For starters, it was a very well developed and well matched tournament, moreso than any other tournament I've ever seen in boxing.

Moreover, the fights themselves were generally spirited and entertaining fights and provided some memorable moments to anyone who saw them.

Almost every fight in the tourney ended with an upset.

Going in, the fighters that were the most well known and most accomplished were Patterson and Terrell. Both of them were very surprisingly beaten in the first round of fighting. Terrell's loss (in an exciting battle with Thad Spencer) was a particularly shocking upset.

Ironically, the fighter that was probably given the least chance of winning the tourney at the outset was Jimmy Ellis, who most people still thought of as a "blown up light-heavyweight". Ellis provided one of the tourney's most memorable moments when he decisively beat Oscar Bonavena, dropping him along the way. Many people (including myself) simply couldn't imagine that skinny, blown up light-heavy beating that big, hulking brute.

The tourney is also what got Irish Jerry noticed and made him a crowd favorite contender.

The final match between Quarry and Ellis wasn't exactly a barnburner, but it was close and interesting nonetheless. Most people as I recall were pulling for Quarry, but... oh well!

As soon as I manage to scrape some money together (though who knows when the hell that will be!) I plan to buy every single fight in the tourney and then re-live them again in the order that they occured. 8)

Personally, I don't think we'll ever seen another tournament as well put together as this one was. The "big" middleweight tournament of a few years back tried to imitate this formula, but let's face it, the whole thing basically just revolved around one man (Tito). In this tournament, every fight was interesting and the result of the whole thing was very much in question until the very end.

Anyone else here have fond memories of this tournament?

Im doing my best to get my hands on all these fights as well..

The ones I do have are pretty fun to watch.

They do have a few on You Tube....

My2Sense wrote:The heavyweight elimination tourney that followed Ali's exiled has been relegated to almost a footnote among the important events of heavyweight history.

For starters, there were those people at the time, regardless of whether or not they agreed with Ali's political stance, that felt his profession as a fighter was independent of politics and thus that he should not have been stripped of his heavyweight title. Thus, many people would still regard Ali as the "unofficial champion" regardless of what the tournament's official outcome would be.

The tournament's credibility was even further damaged when Joe Frazier, the consensus #1 contender and considered the likely heir to Ali's throne, refused to take part in it. Without Frazier, the tournament's purported purpose of deciding a top fighter in the divisision pretty much was dashed from the start.

When Frazier refused to take part, the WBA responded by very controversially stripping Frazier of his #1 ranking and moving all the contenders up a rank (which allowed Leotis Martin to enter).

The final nail in the tournament's coffin (from a standpoint of historical significance) came when Frazier absolutely crushed the tourney's winner, Jimmy Ellis, as though he had no business being in the ring with him. That basically embarassed the whole tournament.

However, I'd like to put all of this aside for a moment and reminisce about some of the positive aspects of this tournament - and there were quite a few.

For starters, it was a very well developed and well matched tournament, moreso than any other tournament I've ever seen in boxing.

Moreover, the fights themselves were generally spirited and entertaining fights and provided some memorable moments to anyone who saw them.

Almost every fight in the tourney ended with an upset.

Going in, the fighters that were the most well known and most accomplished were Patterson and Terrell. Both of them were very surprisingly beaten in the first round of fighting. Terrell's loss (in an exciting battle with Thad Spencer) was a particularly shocking upset.

Ironically, the fighter that was probably given the least chance of winning the tourney at the outset was Jimmy Ellis, who most people still thought of as a "blown up light-heavyweight". Ellis provided one of the tourney's most memorable moments when he decisively beat Oscar Bonavena, dropping him along the way. Many people (including myself) simply couldn't imagine that skinny, blown up light-heavy beating that big, hulking brute.

The tourney is also what got Irish Jerry noticed and made him a crowd favorite contender.

The final match between Quarry and Ellis wasn't exactly a barnburner, but it was close and interesting nonetheless. Most people as I recall were pulling for Quarry, but... oh well!

As soon as I manage to scrape some money together (though who knows when the hell that will be!) I plan to buy every single fight in the tourney and then re-live them again in the order that they occured. 8)

Personally, I don't think we'll ever seen another tournament as well put together as this one was. The "big" middleweight tournament of a few years back tried to imitate this formula, but let's face it, the whole thing basically just revolved around one man (Tito). In this tournament, every fight was interesting and the result of the whole thing was very much in question until the very end.

Anyone else here have fond memories of this tournament?

Ali pretty much figured out the tournament and the aftermath and reduced it to one sentence:

Ellis will win the tournament and Frazier will destroy Ellis... Ali also said that he was beating up Jimmy Ellis since he was sixteen years old...

I was but a child then...My interest in Ali really began with the return...


I was watching the Ali-Bonavena fight (again)...After the fight Ali is being interviewed by Cosell and Bonavena is saying repeatedly "I apolgize, you beat Frazier...I apologize ,you beat Frazier." He had called Ali a "chicken" before the fight...His personality reminded me of Duran...

As much as I love Patterson it pains me to imagine what Frazier
would have done to him had he got the nod that he deserved against
Ellis.

I think that fight would have been brief but exciting.

Robinson wrote:As much as I love Patterson it pains me to imagine what Frazier
would have done to him had he got the nod that he deserved against
Ellis.

I think that fight would have been brief but exciting.

I don't think Floyd would have weathered Smokin Joe's assault... I think it ends rather quickly...

This is a real interesting topic but because it's just before my time I'm stuck, I have Ellis, Patterson, Terrel, Quarry, Spencer, Martin & Bonavena can someone fill in the other three. Did they come in ranked 1-10 and how was the tournament set up. Is there some place where each of the results are posted?
Thanks,
Bobbin & Weavin

Quarterfinals
Thad Spencer UD12 over Ernie Terrell (8/5/67)
Jimmy Ellis TKO9 Leotis Martin (8/5/67)
Oscar Bonavena UD12 over Karl Mildenberger (9/16/67)
Jerry Quarry MD12 Floyd Patterson (10/28/67)

Semifinals
Jimmy Ellis UD12 over Oscar Bonavena (12/2/67)
Jerry Quarry TKO12 over Thad Spencer (2/3/68)

Finals
Jimmy Ellis MD15 over Jerry Quarry (4/27/68)

I believe (as My2Sense touched on) the fighters in the tournament were chosen based on the WBA rankings at the time. Frazier would have been in the tournament had he chosen to do so.

I always thought the tournament was very interesting as well. It was a unique way to determine the new champion. This also really shows the depth of the division at the time. You also had guys like Henry Cooper,George Chuvalo, and Sonny Liston that were left out.

Bobbin & Weavin wrote:Did they come in ranked 1-10 and how was the tournament set up.

The tournament was set up by the WBA and was suppose to feature the top 8 fighters in their rankings. Going in, the rankings pretty much reflected what people thought who should be ranked. Frazier was #1, Leotis Martin was ranked #9, which meant he was supposed to be left out of the tourney. However, Frazier refused to take part in the tourney, probably knowing that as the #1 contender, whoever else won the tourney would have to fight him after it was over, so why bother taking part. In childish retaliation (setting the tone for what we have come to expect from the WBA) the WBA dropped Frazier from its #1 spot all the way down to #9, then moved everyone else up one spot, including Martin from #9 to #8. However, the New York Commission (as they always used to do when a big tourney was arranged by someone else) nominated their own top contenders (Frazier and Mathis) and refused to recognize the winner of the WBA tourney unless he beat their own title nominee first, which of course turned out to be Frazier.

Unfortunately, other than Leotis Martin being ranked at #8, I don't remember exactly how the other fighters were ranked or how it was decided who should fight who. I would have to believe Terrell and Patterson were probably the highest ranked out of all of them (Terrell always seemed to be in the WBA's pocket anyway), but I don't know for sure.


I think I remember reading somewhere that every fight in the tourney ended in an upset. I know Ellis was the underdog in every fight he had, and Spencer was the underdog against Terrell, and Quarry probably entered as the underdog against Spencer, based simply on Spencer being more impressive in their first-round matches (many people thought Quarry's decision over Patterson was questionable). If that's the case, then that would mean Bonavena was the underdog against Mildenberger, which seems a bit surprising to me in retrospect. But then, I suppose Mildenberger was more well known (if only for his big fight with Ali), and I believe the fight was on his home turf in Germany as well.

This tourney has always fasinated me to no end.

Though it took place well before my time in that I was only six or seven while it was taking place & I didn't take an interest in the sport until eight years later in '76, I've been intrigued by it since first reading about it in books & magazines back then.
The idea of eight out of the top ten heavyweights of the day meeting in one series of fights totally appealed to me.

You can only imagine how disappointed I was in 1979 when the WBA had another tournament for their vacant title, but this time only featured four fighters ( or five if you consider Duane Bobick's quick cameo appearance against John Tate a part of it ) rather than eight.

Of all the fighters in this tourny it is Thad Spencer that I have
seen the less of. Apart from his loss to Quarry (which is on
YouTube) I have not reallly been able to see much of him.

This would have been an interesting period to watch it all unfold.
It really is exciting when top guys in a division fight it out over
a close period of time for a purpose...say to become champ..
or in a way...the 2001 MW unification series...or the Tyson era
HW unification series.

Kym

All the fights from that tourney still exist. I have them all on DVD. I got them from some bloke whose name I forget who had them on SELL.COM a while back. Most are B/W but a couple are in colour.

They are well filmed and put together but the fact that two best heavies weren't involved meant it was fatally flawed from the beginning.

Still, it makes for enjoyable viewing over a few evenings.

These tournaments ended up a tad better than Don King's tournaments, many which ended up tainted...

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:These tournaments ended up a tad better than Don King's tournaments, many which ended up tainted...

The United States Boxing Championship that King was involved with was a good idea.

Imagine if the USA had a title / belt similar in stature and respect as the UK title / belt ie one that people aspired to win AND defend unlike the USBA & NABF belts / titles which are won and then discarded.

Of course, it would be almost impossible to implement now with all the half-arsed baubles on offer and the overall dilution of any title but at the time it could have been something good.

But too many crooks got involved and even The Ring was taking kickbacks.

Collins2000 wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:These tournaments ended up a tad better than Don King's tournaments, many which ended up tainted...

The United States Boxing Championship that King was involved with was a good idea.

Imagine if the USA had a title / belt similar in stature and respect as the UK title / belt ie one that people aspired to win AND defend unlike the USBA & NABF belts / titles which are won and then discarded.

Of course, it would be almost impossible to implement now with all the half-arsed baubles on offer and the overall dilution of any title but at the time it could have been something good.

But too many crooks got involved and even The Ring was taking kickbacks.

The Ring wasn't taking kickbacks, but Johnny Ort was. I knew Nat Loubet, and I can tell you he was completely dumbfounded that Ort sold out the Ring's reputation.

raylawpc wrote:

Collins2000 wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:These tournaments ended up a tad better than Don King's tournaments, many which ended up tainted...

The United States Boxing Championship that King was involved with was a good idea.

Imagine if the USA had a title / belt similar in stature and respect as the UK title / belt ie one that people aspired to win AND defend unlike the USBA & NABF belts / titles which are won and then discarded.

Of course, it would be almost impossible to implement now with all the half-arsed baubles on offer and the overall dilution of any title but at the time it could have been something good.

But too many crooks got involved and even The Ring was taking kickbacks.

The Ring wasn't taking kickbacks, but Johnny Ort was. I knew Nat Loubet, and I can tell you he was completely dumbfounded that Ort sold out the Ring's reputation.

He probably was dumfounded but I still believe the buck stops with Loubet. Ort was one of his creatures.

For all Fleisher's idiosynchricies, while he was in charge he ensured The Ring lives up to it's motto.

Of course, one can always say that the buck stops with the boss. (Being a boss I'm not so sure I always agree with that sentiment). My point is that Nat Loubet and the Ring as a corporate entity were not guilty of any wrong doing. It was all Ort.

raylawpc wrote:Of course, one can always say that the buck stops with the boss. (Being a boss I'm not so sure I always agree with that sentiment). My point is that Nat Loubet and the Ring as a corporate entity were not guilty of any wrong doing. It was all Ort.

What became of Ort beside being fired?

And of course King escaped from the mess , relatively unscathed...

raylawpc wrote:Of course, one can always say that the buck stops with the boss. (Being a boss I'm not so sure I always agree with that sentiment). My point is that Nat Loubet and the Ring as a corporate entity were not guilty of any wrong doing. It was all Ort.

Tom,

You're not the BOSS, an you know it.....

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

raylawpc wrote:Of course, one can always say that the buck stops with the boss. (Being a boss I'm not so sure I always agree with that sentiment). My point is that Nat Loubet and the Ring as a corporate entity were not guilty of any wrong doing. It was all Ort.

What became of Ort beside being fired?

And of course King escaped from the mess , relatively unscathed...

John had another short-lived boxing magazine that he edited. It went bust after something like two issues. (The lead story of the first issue was some nonsense that Jack Johnson beat Jack Dempsey in a private matching in 1920. The magazine had a "National Inquirer" kind of tone.) I have not heard anything about him since that time.

On a personal level, John was a decent fellow with whom to work. I was a correspondent for the Ring in the mid-1970s, and John was the person I dealt with most regularly. He was a easy to work with and responsive to questions, concerns etc. I was very surprised when he got caught up in the US Boxing Tournament scandal.

kikibalt wrote:

raylawpc wrote:Of course, one can always say that the buck stops with the boss. (Being a boss I'm not so sure I always agree with that sentiment). My point is that Nat Loubet and the Ring as a corporate entity were not guilty of any wrong doing. It was all Ort.

Tom,

You're not the BOSS, an you know it.....

I pretend that I am . . . Let me have my fantasies, Frank.

raylawpc wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

raylawpc wrote:Of course, one can always say that the buck stops with the boss. (Being a boss I'm not so sure I always agree with that sentiment). My point is that Nat Loubet and the Ring as a corporate entity were not guilty of any wrong doing. It was all Ort.

What became of Ort beside being fired?

And of course King escaped from the mess , relatively unscathed...

John had another short-lived boxing magazine that he edited. It went bust after something like two editions. (The lead story of the first edition was some nonsense that Jack Johnson beat Jack Dempsey in a private matching in 1920. The magazine had a "National Inquirer" kind of tone.) I have not heard anything about him since that time.

On a personal level, John was a decent fellow with whom to work. I was a correspondent for the Ring in the mid-1970s, and John was the person I dealt with most regularly. He was a easy to work with and responsive to questions, concerns etc. I was very surprised when he got caught up in the US Boxing Tournament scandal.

I also read that Mark Kram was fired from SI for taking loans from Don King as that at least presented the appearance of impropriety... This was all around the time of the tournament scandal...

On another note, Golden Boy Enterprises is the holding company that owns Ring Magazine... That does present the appearance of a conflict of interest...

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

raylawpc wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

What became of Ort beside being fired?

And of course King escaped from the mess , relatively unscathed...

John had another short-lived boxing magazine that he edited. It went bust after something like two editions. (The lead story of the first edition was some nonsense that Jack Johnson beat Jack Dempsey in a private matching in 1920. The magazine had a "National Inquirer" kind of tone.) I have not heard anything about him since that time.

On a personal level, John was a decent fellow with whom to work. I was a correspondent for the Ring in the mid-1970s, and John was the person I dealt with most regularly. He was a easy to work with and responsive to questions, concerns etc. I was very surprised when he got caught up in the US Boxing Tournament scandal.

I also read that Mark Kram was fired from SI for taking loans from Don King as that at least presented the appearance of impropriety... This was all around the time of the tournament scandal...

On another note, Golden Boy Enterprises is the holding company that owns Ring Magazine... That does present the appearance of a conflict of interest...

I could be wrong, but my understanding that at SI suspended Kram for his involvement; it did not fire him.

Interestingly, when Fleischer started the Ring magazine, he did so with the full support of Tex Rickard, who gave the Ring office space at the old MSG for a song, a practice continued by subsequent promoters. I don't know whether he gave any direct financial support to the Ring. Conflict of interest for Nat Fleischer? Hmmm . . .

Regarding Golden Boy's ownership of Ring, it looks fishy, but many large corporations invest in news media operations. As long as GB takes a hands-off attitude as to editorial content, I have no problem with it - but, admittedly, it does look funny.

Too bad George Chuvalo was not in this tournament, he could definately taken out Jerry Quarry and I feel that time he could have handled Jimmy Ellis. Angelo Dundee said that Chuvalo was the toughest fighter Ali ever had. While this so called tournament was going on Chuvalo was fighting wars with the true Champ - Muhammad Ali. He put Ali in the hospital after one of his fights!

I agree that Chuvalo would have made an interesting inclusion to this
tournament..why was he not included?

Robinson wrote:I agree that Chuvalo would have made an interesting inclusion to this
tournament..why was he not included?

Simply put, he wasn't among the WBA's top 8 contenders. Neither was Frazier. The WBA said they would include the top 8 in their tournament. When Frazier declined to participate, he dropped from No. 1 to No. 9.