Ambers, Armstrong, and the greatest infighting battle of all time

I don't see Armstrong fouling a lot. Sure, he played dirty but shoving opponents in a way Hank did it is not that dirty. I see good, fast paced brawl and that's it. Ambers didn't seem to argue a lot against Hank's work either.

 

Fraud. Lol. Yeah both refs who deducted a total of NINE out of thirty rounds from Armstrong had it out for him and committed fraud against him despite him being the most popular fighter south of Joe Louis in the state and Mike Jacobs’ second biggest cash cow. Yeah right. Armstrong was just as pure as the driven snow, lol. He beat the breaks off of Ambers? Which is why despite winning their first fight he looked like hed been hit by a truck and had to have oral surgery and which is also why despite half of his welterweight title defenses being against lightweights he forced Ambers to agree not to go after the WW title to get the rematch... because he beat his ass so bad and was so confident of winning a rematch LOL. Anyone who doesnt share your particular brand of colorblindness can see Ambers gave Armstrong hell like nobody else on film.

 

He didnt just shove him. He elbowed him, hit him low, headbutt, etc. its why out 30 completed rounds between the two Armstrong lost 9 because of fouls. Fouling works both ways ya know, if the ref doesnt call it and you win the glory goes to you. If the ref calls it and you lose or lose points you get what you deserve. Because of the rule in New York at the time a fight could not be stopped on a DQ Armstrong took advantage of this. He was warned, rounds were taken, and he continued to foul because if it wore Ambers down and he got the stoppage all those deducted points wouldnt matter. I fail to see why Armstrong should be lauded of no mention should be made of the fact that he basically accepted he couldnt beat Ambers clean or that Ambers, who fought one of the greatest fighters in history who was incessantly fouling maintained his composure, fought clean, and gave Armstrong hell in splitting two very close fights.

 

I don't see him fouling nearly as much as you imply, but fair enough.

 

So you believe two different refs in two different fights had no justification for warning Armstrong and then deducting him just under 1/3 of the total rounds fought between he and Ambers?

 

So you're admitting you're a fraud who can't point to any fouls being commited. Gotcha. If you can't point to any fouls you don't know there were any fouls. In fact you can't point to a single foul in the footage.

Anyone that isn't blind can clearly see Armstrong clearly outboxed Ambers without fouling.

 

Jim Crow refs

 

I just said that I don't see that much fouling on the film, but we don't have full fights. Can you show me examples of these fouls on video?

 

Golden age of boxing; for sure !!!
20,s through the 50,s !!!
Just too skilled, too tough, too seasoned, too hungry

 

Armstrong wasn't robbed, at least I can't say he was in good faith since I haven't seen the full fight.

From what I have seen, I think Armstrong does look the better fighter, and I can't imagine someone watching that footage believing Ambers is the best LW in the world at that moment.

It's a controversial result because of the deductions being the difference on the judges cards.

But then again apparently the first fight is a controversial result also.

I think there's too many extreme opinions on this fight as its clear to see they're pretty evenly matched.

My most recent viewing had these thoughts attached:

"Armstrong vs Ambers.

I've watched this fight before and as I said I'd always dismissed Ambers as not anything special.

But with what I've been watching recently and a better look at the context of the era and the skill of those who fought in it, I must say I am now 100% sold on Ambers as a great LW.

I think he's a slightly lesser version of Canzoneri, although he did go on to beat Canzoneri a year later.

But the fight against Armstrong, the footage we have is insane. He tries to stick and move and Armstrong relentlessly walks him down, coming over the top with his power shots.

I read online earlier someone saying Armstrong was great because he threw 100 punches and didn't care what came back at him. That just isn't true, he bobbed and weaved like a prime Joe Frazier. Obviously we'll timed hooks can break through that defence and not many throw hooks as well timed as Lou Ambers.

The thing for me is most defensive fights clinch or wilt when a pressure fighter closes the distance.

Ambers doesn't do that, he trades hooks and exchanges in the inside with Armstrong.

Now as much as this made for a fan friendly fight, it just isn't how you'll beat Armstrong. There's a tiny handful of men who can beat him on the inside and a counter hooker isn't one of those.

From what we see, it's clear that Armstrong gets the better of the action. The question is about the fouls, obviously on a 10 point system they'd be even 9-9 rounds if Armstrong was winning the round and 10-8 if Ambers was.

Are the deductions justified, I don't know and from what I've read I don't think I ever will know.

But I am happy declaring Armstrong a better fighter than Ambers.

I was debating his placing in comparison with a prime Ross as well, but Barney answered that one for me.

Armstrong has so few "LW" fights. But weighing as a LW he beats Ambers and Ross, two of the greatest LW fighters in history.

Bonkers."

 

Jim Crow refs in New York City my ass. Donovan was one of the best refs in the state. Fine, no fouling? Here is a video. I didnt even go through the whole fight and keep in mind the fight itself is just highlights and doesnt even show some of the fouls he was docked rounds for. Youll see headbutts, low blows, kidney punches, elbows, and combos of the above. I bypassed a ton of headbutts just because some devils advocate would say "well, it looks like he was coming in with a punch" and a lot of what looked to be low blows but Ambers' back was to the camera or Donovan passed in front of the camera at the moment of impact. I also didnt include a number of low punches that Armstrong threw and missed including one that was literally a straight arm shot down from long range at Ambers nuts but Ambers was backing away so Armstrong was out of range. Holyfield used to get criticized for his headbutt/low blow combo, Armstrong would have been proud as youll see. I also didnt include a ton of instances of Armstrong literally just cramming his head into Ambers face which is illegal but since its not a classic headbutt I know Armstrong apologists will claim hes just "really physical". Watch how sometimes when Donovan is behind Armstrong Armstrong will move his shoulders as if hes punching but in reality hes not throwing punches, hes headbutting. Hes just giving the appearance of punching to justify the head movement. Again, all of these fouls (many of which werent even called and werent used to deduct rounds) from not even the complete fight (and this is just one fight, how many classically dirty fighters can you find this many examples of in one fight without even going through it with a fine tooth comb???) and people are going to cry me a river that Armstrong was robbed??? Please, as Ive said before, he was lucky as hell a fight in New York at the time couldnt be stopped on a DQ or he would have been tossed. Notice in the last sequence how Ambers arms down and Armstrong lands three low blows in succession prompting Donovan to step in and take a round. Like I said, anyone who cant see his fouls has blinders on. Watch how he moves and sways his head from side to side to catch Ambers. Thats not bobbing and weaving. His style is identical to Joe Frazier and Ive never seen Frazier accused of egregious headbutts. He was blatantly using his head just like Holyfield used to throwing a punch followed right behind with a headbutt. The punch masks the headbutt because of the momentum allowing you and your apologists to claim it was accidental. And finally, keep in mind, all of this fouling came on the heels of Ambers losing his title to Armstrong in a fight in which Armstrong fouled incessantly, had numerous rounds docked, was booed at the finish, and had a complaint lodged by Ambers for the numerous headbutts, low blows, and elbows he threw in the fight. And yet does he fight clean? No. Again, because he knew he couldnt be DQd. He took full advantage and he did so because Ambers was a tough SOB who didnt cave to Armstrong and gave him hell. A far cry from how Burley's racist ass above would love to characterize the fight "beat the breaks off him..." my ass.

This content is protected

 

Wow, remarkable, Harry's silly ass suddenly disappeared...

 

When you base your whole strategy on pushing, it changes the dynamic of the fight. It takes away from the other fighter his right to fight the way he wants to. This is certainly what the opposing fighter wants to do, but if he does it against the rules he shouldn't be allowed to do so. A single push, yes, is minor. An entire fight based on a series of pushes which cross the line is major and the fighter should be held accountable.

One of the biggest offenders ever was Ernie Terrell. I just watched Terrell vs. Gerhard Zech the other day. If the first round had been taken away from Terrell for unnecessary roughness or whatever you want to call it, which it should have been, the entire flow of the fight might have been different. Gene Fullmer is another one. If the rules had been enforced for his so-called minor infractions, he never would have made it out of Utah.

 

Exactly, and with Armstrong, at least in this fight, it wasnt just pushing per se. He would bull forward, yes, but he also ALWAYS positioned his head right in Ambers face, which any ref would warn you to watch your head and then start taking points, Donovan remarkably didnt. Even on the numerous occasions Armstrong would come in with his head, and without throwing a punch start moving his head side to side aggressively in Ambers face forcing Ambers to either move out of position or get headbutted. I know Armstrong is wildly popular and was at the time but he broke the rules like crazy in this fight. The newspapers that werent totally biased in favor of him (and despite Harry's asinine comments about racism there were a ton that simply had blinders on to Armstrong) it was noted in some that after a couple of rounds had been deducted from Armstrong he actually got worse with his dirty tactics, likely in an effort to go all in and try to stop Ambers specifically because he couldnt be DQd. I love Armstrong, he is one of my favorites but you simply cant watch that fight and deny that he was anything but dirty as hell in it. In his worst fights, Evander Holyfield, who was one of the dirtiest fighters of the last 20 years, didnt commit 1/4 the fouls Armstrong did against Ambers. And both threw headbutts in a very similar, subtle manner, leading or following a punch with the head so you could claim it was accidental or so people wouldnt even notice. But when it happens constantly like this its by design not by accident. Is anyone seriously going to argue that given the clear video evidence I posted above that any other fighter having been warned, having had rounds taken away, and yet actually intensifying his fouls wouldnt have been justified for being DQd?

 

I admit, there are a few punches that seems to be low. Other than that, I don't think that using head this way is a foul, he didn't really butt him. Agree to disagree.