:good RC, it could prove a tremendous undertaking, but Ali-Young has certainly been one of the very few intractable disagreements you and I have had over the years, and I think it would be a tremendous exercise in boxing education for any younger fans who have never seen it from beginning to end to view it for themselves and express their own opinions about it, rather than merely parroting whatever those of us more established fans have long since ossified.
Getting a thread going where everyone scores close fights would be great and really isn't that hard to set up.I've brought it up a few times, yet can never quite muster up the effort to get it started. Maybe i should lay off thinblack..
The ultimate has to be Charlie Mitchell against John L Sullivan. Got a 39 round draw, which sounds good on paper. Took a one sided beating for three hours, surviving by repeatedly going down without being hit to get 38 seconds respite, whenever Sullivan came near him. Was knocked out cold and carried back to his corner at least once. This was against a depleted Sullivan, who had lost most of the mobility in his left arm, and was ravages by alcoholism.
The comment qualification was all I looked for mate. The fight was close and I can accept justified opinions other than "the judges said" I believe it was a clear 9-6 with ken failing in the final round but having it sown up by then
I've been converted to be a Hopkins hater, but Hopkins won that for me, although if both could be given a loss it would be fare decision
It's not anyone thinking Hopkins edged it that bothers me. It's that in the months after the fight there was a sizeable amount who seemed to think he had produced some sort of pure boxing masterclass.
Dempsey DID clearly hit sharkey in the balls, should have been a DQ win for Sharkey or have been given time to recover.
YES! "Dull Razor" Ruddock got too much credit and additional money in losing 2X to Tyson in 1991...... patsch:shock::twisted::think MR.BILL:hat
Tyson got praised for "taking his beating like a man" for both the Douglas and Holyfield fights but really he didn't deserve ****. Douglas was proven to be short of the elite and had fallen against far lesser fighters than Tyson and was seen as a nothing fight hence the 42-1 odds against him. Whether you reckon Douglas produced his single ATG performance or Tyson was a train wreck or both, the upshot is Tyson massively underperformed against a guy who wasn't remotely in his class and doesn't deserve any praise for ****ing up so badly. Ditto against Evander. Holyfield was seen as a slightly warm corpse going in, looking like crap in not being able to put away a short, fat Bobby Czyz and suffering a worrying stoppage loss to Riddick Bowe where he appeared physically exhausted after a few rounds in his two bouts going in. More worrying is that Holyfield hadn't scored a stoppage for 5 years as well, which included matches with old men like Foreman and Holmes and glass jaws like Alex Stewart. Yet Evander dominated Tyson,flooring and eventually stopping him and Tyson appeared absolutely clueless to do anything about it. But again whilst everyone was celebrating Holyfields remarkable effort, Tyson's shitful display was overlooked and he again was applauded for being brave and gracious in defeat. **** that. In hindsight people say he looked like **** after prison but I don't recall many people saying that after he destroyed Bruno and Seldon and virtually no one thought Holyfield would last 5 rounds let alone dominate and win. So again Tyson fought someone he was expected to whip (this definately wasn't prime Hoyfield he was facing) and again he ****ed it up.
Duodenum, as much as I appreciate your input, from your (admittedly, a year old) post, I do get the impression that you score on emotion ("He didn't take the title") rather than scoring the way a fight should be, by the official rules. There is no rule in any of the sanctioning bodies that states "Fights are scored on a 10-point must system, unless this concerns the challenger, in which case the 10 point-must system is void and it comes down to him taking the title or not". To be more specific: even if he Young and Norton weren't particularly inspiring, I do think they deserved to win based on winning more rounds. Maybe they weren't inspiring, but they weren't hitting air (Ali) either.
Vitali vs. Lewis. Frank Bruno was doing better against a younger, fitter Lewis (I had him up 4-2 and he had landed more clean blows than Vitali in a less messy fight) yet no-one would claim that Bruno was "great" that night.