Are you comfortable with Ali beating up smaller, aging men like Archie Moore and Floyd Patterson?

I have scrutinized it and surprisingly found that he wasn't fighting fifty year olds or aging fighters whom he had thirty pounds on.

 

Patterson was ranked 3rd in the world following his win against Bonavena - ahead of everyone except George Foreman and Ali himself. Pretty amazing for a fighter who first hit the ratings in 1953 as an 18 year old light heavyweight.

 

I will remind folks that in '72 Floyd threw the last punch of that fight and connected with it. He could walk out of that ring with his head held high that night.

Plus ... at least this is the story in Howard Cosell's ghost-written autobiography, take it as you will ... Floyd supposedly had some financial issues and Ali was trying to help him out with a decent purse. The animosity of 1965 was long gone by then.

Patterson was also a better fighter old than he was as a young champion, although there are people on this forum, one in particular, who take every opportunity to denigrate him as a useless jabroni who'd lose to Ossie Ocasio.

 

1972 Patterson would have embarrassed Bahamas Ali. Moore was cooked. Ali was green. He needed a name on his resume. Ali was cooked for Berbick. Patterson had something left.

 

Ali retired in 1979. He somehow (greed related probably) got cleared to fight Holmes the next year. Ali was already in bad shape from Parkinson’s symptoms. I don’t think there’s much of a comparison w Moore and Patterson.

 

He fought Moore as an untested prospect.

He fought Patterson when he was highly ranked and deserving of the fights.

No criticism whatsoever.

But also no credit for beating Moore

 

It's okay when Ali does it because Ali is the best and has no flaws, but when anyone else does it oh boy.........

 

Good that you think a champion facing his nr. 1 challenger is "somewhat understandable".

But hadn't heard that take on Berbick before. That's frankly nonsense. It wasn't on Berbick to tell Ali not to come back, that was on Ali himself and the people close to him. And the fight was competitive so of course Berbick fought as hard as he could to win it. Idiocy to put that on him.

 

Do you have anything productive to share with the class?

 

What is a double standard?

 

People have been talking productively about the topic for most of the thread, with varying stances on how Ali fighting Moore and Patterson was/wasn't ok, but instead of adding to anything said, you just come in and make a disingenuous statement about how everything that Ali does is fine, "because Ali is the best"- Despite the fact that the thread is QUESTIONING if what he did was ok, if it was comparable to what Berbick did in fighting Ali, and if that was ok as well.

Why do you feel the need to rag on Ali instead of adding to the conversation? You don't have to think what he did was ok, but just being an ******* does nothing for anybody on here.

 

Jesus, you got a stick up your behind on Ali.

Who isn't it ok for you mean? Who gives Marciano **** for Louis? Tyson for Holmes? X number of fighters for Tyson and Holyfield? Joshua for Wlad? Whyte for Povetkin even? Povetkin was a walking corpse, unlike Moore and Patterson, but no one I've seen says it should be on Whyte to make those decisions for him. And once the bell rings it's his job to win.

That some random Youtube channel is inane enough to blame Berbick for just being a pro boxer has nothing to do with general sentiments about this. It's the job of trainers, managers, friends and family to look out for a fighter, not the adversary. And both Moore and Patterson came off good wins, and Patterson got to put on a spirited performance that probably felt like a vindication for the one-sided beating of the first fight. I would also say that Ali took it easy on hims in the last round, waiting for the fight to be stopped.

 

Yeah, first day.

 

Don't be obtuse. He didn't make Pacquiao age like an old banana till he fought him? Didn't beat up a much naturally smaller Marquez?

You know what I mean.