If Carnera beat Ali, what evidence would you need to decide it was legit?

You are the foremost denier of Carnera's fixed fights ,and do not accept his own manager stating he fixed over 30 of them.And you dismiss Paul Gallico's ringside recollections.

Q. Why would anyone ever take you seriously on this?

 

A. Because I am consistent in my argument.

 

SO WERE ,"THE EARTH IS FLAT CREW!"

REPEATING A FALLACY OVER AND OVER DOES NOT MAKE IT ANY LESS OF A FALLACY. SORRY FOR THE CAPS.

 

Whatever you think of the pro Carnera argument, they people who advance it have put forth a solid case for it, and they are pretty consistend in what they are arguing.

This makes it a counterpoint to your position, that you have to coexist with.

 

Oh I can co-exist with almost anything and anybody,I just don't agree with most of them!

 

More Counterpoints to most of Primo's early fights being Fixed:

We also have to assume that the "fixers" forgot, or were unable, to fix the Carnera - Diener fight, the Carnera - Stribling fight, the Carnera - Maloney fight, the Carnera - Sharkey 1st fight (when Sharkey wasn't Champion, but somehow got Sharkey in the tank when he WAS Champion), the Carnera - Gains fight, and the Carnera - Poreda fight.

Could some of Carnera's early fights have been fixed? Of course it's possible. It's also possible with many Heavyweight Champions throughout history. I'm sure it happens. I would imagine it would be rare to see a guy, who is not yet champion, take 6 losses with most of his opponents in the tank. No mishaps, or a mistake or two, would be more likely, I would think. (If you had the power to get a lot of fighters and referees in your pocket, I would think you could easily be able to cancel some upcoming dangerous fights if you couldn't get those sorted out to your liking. I doubt if 6 would slip through your net.)

 

Evidence that Ali was lying when he said he wasn't sick. The reality would have to be that he had something like a 104 degree Fahrenheit temperature, maybe the measles, mumps, or chickenpox. Either that or his hernia attack ala the first scheduled Liston-Ali rematch wasn't discovered until it became severely acute mid-way in the first round. Or maybe it would be a burst appendix.

Beyond this type of scenario, there really is nothing to "work with."

 

Nobody seems asked the important question yet.

Would this bee the greatest upset of all time?

My answer is that while it would be a considerable upset, it would not be the greatest ever.

Tyson Douglas would still be a greater upset, and most people seem to accept the evidence of their own eyes with that.

Tyson was viewed as being as unbeatable Ali going into that fight, and Douglas was an unknown contender, ranked somewhere in the bottom half of the top ten.

Carnera at least was a champion, and he would be given some sort of chance on that alone.

 

Why give three explanations when one will do?

Let's just say that a lucky punch fractures Ali's orbit, as occasionally happens in the heavyweight division, and his corner very reasonably throw in the towel.

 

I thought exactly of Douglas- Tyson also.

Given the nature of boxing and the two horse race that it is, 42-1 was unrealistic, even before looking at Douglas’ relative merits. Ali was 7-1 v Liston with many pundits allowing Ali to last little more, if that, than what Buster was being afforded.

IMO, those odds severely overstated Mike while understating Buster, pivoting on the notion of Mike being invincible, which no fighter is of course.

I don’t believe Mike was under par as some do but either way we saw how it was believably and legitimately executed over a comprehensive and painful 10 rds. Douglas always had great tools, that he put them together on the night was the biggest shock but there were previous demonstrations of Buster to uphold himself, even if it was understood in hindsight.

Frazier v Foreman, in complexion and outcome was a big upset but its emphatic nature and legitimacy gave no cause for doubt.

This hypothetical frames Ali being beaten in a comprehensive fashion that Primo gave no indication of being capable of, particularly in the face of Ali’s own proven skill set.

I may be wrong and perhaps it’s left to subjectivity, but the way I interpret the hypothetical is that there are no legit extenuating circumstances or impairments to be reasoned as having impacted Ali’s performance. The only possibility otherwise if you feel it doesn’t look legit is a fix and following that, what do you few you need to rule that out in your mind.

Now if Primo was just Primo as we know of him, Ali would have to be underperformed and it would clearly appear as such IMO - and yes, I personally would be more than suspicious given same.

Conversely, if I actually saw Ali being Ali as we know him but somehow Primo still over coming him in the manner described, that would equate to the Ambling Alp bringing stuff to the table not seen before and impossible to forecast, BUT, seeing it for myself, I would accept the result. I would view it as a huge upset.

As @janitor said I believe, it can be viewed as being more about proving a fix than disproving a fix. However , I’ll diverge from that point a bit - it could be more difficult to disprove a fix than it would be to potentially prove one. Even science focuses on proving things, not so much disproving, particularly disproving so called negatives.

So, to date, science can say that there is no proof of Santa but, given all the possibilities and yet to be explained phenomena, science cannot say emphatically that Santa doesn’t exist (I’ve been hanging on to this thin possibility since childhood folks, don’t blow it for me).

By fix, I mean notwithstanding official or majority perception of an upset, the complexion, dynamic and result can not be reasonably accepted as legit as per the vision.

There has been NO solid evidence of a fix in Ali- Liston 2 but many still believe it to be so, without any evidence beyond being their being unable to reconcile the vision to be legit otherwise.

Unlike Santa, we understand there has been evidence of fixes and mob control, particularly in connection with Da Preem or least alleged, so musing on a fix isn’t such a complete “negative” as believing in my man Santa. So coupled with dubious and highly questionable vision and both a general history of fixes and Primos personal history for fixes otherwise, that will be your strongest, albeit subjective, evidence even if you can’t scrape up anything otherwise to support it.

If I saw Ali as clearly underperformed with no legit reason for same, I’d call fix. There would be no proof possible to dissuade me because there are numerous possible motives and mechanisms for such things that I could entertain that could be out of the reach of tangible proof.

For the hows and whys, I could muse that it was to simply take control of the title (as @Tonto62 pointed out) so betting or money evidence and traces are not involved.

How to get Ali to come to the party? Well, the mob doesn’t just threaten courageous Ali but also makes clear his family will be harmed if he doesn’t abide. And, that threat holds for any disclosure after the fact - a life long condition and lip buttoner. Ali stays quiet, even strenuously denies the fix as does Primo also. That scenario could very well exist in all possibility but what possible evidence could you find to disprove it or necessarily prove it?

Not perfect and I know there are holes but my belief in Santa seems far more reasonable than believing Primo could beat Ali in any legit scenario - unless Carnera was doing some serious sand bagging in the performances we know of and also indulging in a particular study of Muhammad in order to shock both a fully enabled Ali and the world.

 

I would have to see the fight period....it isn't hard to know when a fighter is holding back especially if you had seen them enough

 

It would depend largely on what went on during the fight and how it looked to the eye of most sports personalities. incidentally while I would make Carnera an unbearable underdog, I would never disregard the possibility that anything could happen. Sure Carnera could pull off an upset. Norton and spinks weren’t supposed to beat Ali either but they did.

 

Because I just can't help myself. You know me by now. Want to get into a 10 page argument about it?

 

Another factor that people are not taking into account, is the magic of hindsight.

After an upset happens, it is rationalized retrospectively.

If Carnera beat Ali, then a hundred explanations would emerge out of the ether.

Some sort or reason would be offered up for Ali's underperformance, regardless of whether it held up or not.

The people who had previously denounced Carnera, would immediately start backtracking, and find some sort of merit in him.

There might even be a Tokyo Douglas style explanation.

If the fight took place in Chipping Sodbury, then the phrase Chipping Sodbury Carnera would be coined.

Also there is no way for Carnera to beat Ali, without his currency going up, and Ali's going down.