Did Ali cheat against Foreman?

Foreman was still firing punches in cannonball like volleys throughout the fifth round. Not the obvious sign of being drugged,is it? George was simply confronted with an enigma he'd never experienced before.

 

Of course, everyone knows that Ali was doped against Frazier. A doctor said it, so it must be true.

https://ibb.co/XXJtCV3

 

Watch from around the 14 minute mark.

This content is protected

 

Wow. Never read that one before.

And this statement by the good doctor:-

“I am not saying Clay doped himself”.

Who on earth did he think would misinterpret him to be suggesting that Ali doped himself?

LOL.

 

No.

Dirty, yes. Cheating not so much.

You could make an argument for Ali-Frazier II, but it was kinda the refs job to stop the clinching.

 

Foreman complained about a number of things immediately following the fight.

Did George actually complain that Ali excessively held and manhandled him? As far as I’ve read, he did not.

Did any journalists at the time accuse Ali of foul tactics in that regard - again, not that I have ever read or heard.

Foreman was warned in several prior fights for manhandling - including against Frazier. And that manhandling made no mean contribution to Foreman’s success.

The old two wrongs don’t make a right doesn’t work in boxing as finitely as some would like it to.

For one example, if your opponent deliberately punches you in the nuts with no action from the ref (and this happens frequently), you damn well punch him in the nuts right back.

An eye for eye - or a gonad for gonad in this instance as per the Old Teste-Ment.

Heavy moralisers within the sport are all well and good but there are others again who think it wrong that two guys even get into a ring to punch each other in the head in the first place - and those same people might laugh at stringent moralistic impositions within a “sport” they view as immoral from the ground up.

Ali preemptively countered the very heart of Foreman’s own MO - to manhandle, outmuscle his opposition. In that context, it was a perfectly sound and wise strategy.

Flouting the rules to an extent yes but not outright cheating nor a practice dissimilar to those Foreman had employed himself.

I actually think that Foreman, even to this day, might hold some belief that he was doped.

That he stopped focusing on and addressing it doesn’t mean he necessarily stopped believing it. Quite simply, it had to run out of legs anyway:-

No one was listening and it was bad for Foreman in PR terms. If Foreman realised anything, whether he believed the doping to be true or not, his continued dwelling on it was only going to damage him as a person and his career by association.

I couldn’t say for sure but I reckon if someone(s) of note gave him a lending ear on it now, even preempting him by saying they too believe he was drugged, it could open Foreman back up to a long suppressed belief.

 

Many fighters get away with that ****. Doesn't make it right, but I've lost count of how many guys I've seen do it. Even fairly clean fighters, like Lennox Lewis. I watched a great KO reel of Lewis the other day and man, I'd forgotten how many times he'd hold a guy by the back of the head with his left and then smash them with a right uppercut. He didn't affirmatively pull down, but he was very clearly holding their head and preventing them from rolling with the punch.

 

LOL, you think Foreman NOW would say something negative about Ali? Not a chance. He'd probably tell everyone that he almost peed his pants when he saw Ali climbing in the ring, that he was so scared he could barely move, that every time Ali hit him it felt like a sledgehammer, and that he's the dope.

I love Foreman but he's got some mental block up to even the slightest bit of negativity.

 

But that’s my point. He did block out negativity - in part because that negativity was fed right back it him to tell him he was a sore loser - and atop that, if you denounced or discredited Ali you were already putting yourself behind the eight ball.

True or not, it was simply in Foreman’s best interests overall to let his accusation go.

My other point is if someone gouged at him - showed their support, encouraged him to be honest, even if only in private - he might just admit that he never disbelieved the doping claim.

Didn’t he resurface the claim in a book several back? A book that was written quite some time after he had apparently divorced himself from the claim?

Cutting to the chase - whether he would admit to it now or not, do you think Foreman would still believe that he was doped?

 

Well most of us love Shavers but he did same - probably more so. His marquee KO of Ellis was actually one of the most blatant examples of the said practice.

 

Pat this is what I'm talking about, every time someone brings up how X thing is breaking the rules even though it is often a ubiquitous tactic employed by nearly every fighter at some point and with general frequency. Like how a certain user always complains about dipping below the waist, which if such was illegal and penalized then fights would be much less interesting! Ali's tactics were not legal but they made fights interesting and it is up to his opponent to circumvent what was one of Ali's signature defensive moves in leaning and pushing the head down or such.

It was no secret Ali employs these tactics and Foreman did not manage to overcome them. this is Foreman's fault, not the fault of the sport or Ali.

 

That was Grant who Lewis knocked out. Also seen Herbie Hide pull that same move twice, vs. Michael Bentt and Riddick Bowe.

As far as Ali holding behind the head, I remember a special they did on NBC about the Rumble in the Jungle, and on that telecast Archie Moore mentioned that Ali's constant pulling down on George's head had a lot to do with him eventually gassing out. I wouldn't say that tactic changed the outcome of the fight, but Foreman has a legit complaint in this case. Pulling down on the guy's head is a little different than just clinching him. Ali did it constantly. He should have been warned at least.

 

Yes you have it right.
As do OTHERS, & it is ironic that the won VALID complaint that could easily have exhausted Foreman before he could bludgeon a self-described "out on his fight" to a KO was what he did not complain of.
That Foreman was not thinking clearly AND made other unfair complaints changes nothing about whether it was a

This content is protected

.

Also as others beat me to the proverbial punch about, constant pulling & clinging, fuhgettibout pulling hard behind the neck, is FAR from "ubiquitous"-or acceptable.
It is a matter of opinion whether allowing illegal tactics makes things "interesting".
I & others believe it is more engaging to see how everyone does-& how they adapt-without using a forbidden tactic.

That makes a fair & even playing field.
That someone like Ali made a habit of this illegality & due to favoritism (& sometimes simple laxity) was allowed to do it in no way makes it any more legal or decent than, say, one fighter getting away with doping because it adds to his power, endurance, & is part of his "game".
And it IS cheating to "flout the rules".
That the referee's job is to enforce them does not make it right.
Saying it is "moralizing" to insist that actions which prevent a fair fight-& easily can win a fight for the guy that otherwise might have lost-is not an argument.
Any more than the irrelevant fact that some do not like the whole sport.
But the point of boxing is sanctioned, regulated, FAIR violence & a test of skills.

That Foreman or any opponent might also cheat in no way excuses cheating or dirty tactics by

This content is protected

.
Thus logically two wrongs still o not make a right.

Although unopposed is the idea that the manhandling Foreman used to keep a swarmer at bay to get power for devastating blows, or pushing them back would likely not be so applicable to an outfighter like Ali & his tactics at the time & during the fight.
Another Red Herring is "cheating back": actually IF the ref does not enforce the rules, I can justify thwarting things that can prevent you winning through illegal means with commensurate actions: which merely allow you a chance.

None of it shows that Ali continually or often grabbing the back of an opponent's neck, let alone pulling him down with all his weight, should ever be allowed.
Like his actions against Frazier in the second fight-that was beyond unsporting, we really cannot know if Ali would have won in a fair fight.