Armando Muniz vs Jose Napoles

Dempsey, I've seen the fight several times and believe me, forget about Pac-Bradley, Everett-Escalera, Holyfield-Lewis I or any others you may hear about. This was the true robbery of the centuy (I know I've included 2 centuries there but it was that bad) and it was second only to the first Coggi-Gonzalez fight in corruption. Through the first 7 rounds the fight held the same complexion, Muniz trying to work his way in to the body and Napoles expertly countering. I gave the first 7 rounds to Napoles. In that time, because of the way they were fighting, they clunked heads. One was guilty as the other as this was how they were fighting and they were both cut. The cuts were no issue and were contained by both corners. However, about the 8th round Muniz changed his style and began jabbing his way in which now reopened the contained cut over Napoles' right eye and continued to worsen it with this new strategy. In the 10th round Muniz let it all out rocking Napoles from pillar to post and would have dropped him with more time but the bell rang. In the 11th was the most despicable thing I have ever seen in a ring. Napoles came out pounding Muniz below the belt while the referee looked the other way. I believe Muniz said 10 or 11 full-blooded shots hit him square in the twins. It was excruciating to watch. Napoles would come near him and Muniz would automatically start holding his knee up to block the low shots. Muniz later said, the ref was just there waiting for him to retaliate with a low shot so he could DQ him. In the 12th, Napoles was defenseless, blind (and so covered with illegal globs of ointment that Rich Roberts, a west coast writer said that he looked like he was hit with a custard pie) and finally referee Ramon Berumen had to stop it (actually he comically brought in the doctor, doing everything he could to salvage Napoles' title). He then conferred with Sulaiman, the doctor, the Guerrero State commissioner and claimed that since Muniz had butted him in the 3rd and 5th rounds, it had to go to the scorecards. It should be noted that points were never taken from Muniz in those rounds or any round. Roberts noted in an article on the fight that Napoles corner also used swabs that were banned for this fight and made it clear that after each round the used swabs got 'lost' in the crowd. I did see one point in the fight that the Napoles corner handed off a wad of something ringside but I couldn't see what it was. Anyway, sorry for the lengthy explanation, but this one has always stuck in my craw.

Scartissue

 

aye true, it's a fight that always made me think less of Napoles.He was up to his balls in the shadiness of it and i can't say i've ever read or heard anything from him admitting some of the stuff that went on here.could be wrong there though.

 

Napoles was great up to a certain point in his career......then "external" forces help him retain his title a few times at the end of it.

 

This was Napoles on the steep down-slide of his career...and you've got to be kidding lora...you'd hold this fight against him? Just **** all the brilliance of earlier years? Might as well hold Ali in contempt for the judges who loved him so much in the Norton and Young fights....or JCC for all the gifts that he recieved in his career. BTW, Napoles more than redeemed himself in the rematch with Muniz, but it was more or less a reprieve as he lost to Stracey after that.

 

I don't hold it against him as a fighter red.I'm more just talking regarding his character and as a sportsman.

Him beating Muniz in a rematch has nothing to do with any redemption for what went on here.Nobody is laying into an aging Napoles for struggling against a very good fighter in Muniz per se.It's the corrupt goings on that are being criticised.

btw Chavez shady second fight with Randall left a bad taste in the mouth as well.

 

Yes, that one really disgusted me with Chavez as well, but I'm now beginning to appreciate JCC for all the quality stuff he did.

 

true you've got to seperate things like this from a fighters overall career, as plenty of fighters have had a bit of homecooking at some point.

 

In spite of the shenanigans Muniz said that Napoles was the best fighter he ever faced and that he would have beaten Sugar Ray Leonard

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixZw8AigScs[/ame]

 

Muniz was a good, gutsy, hard luck kinda guy, but really, in '69 or '70, he would have been butchered by Napoles....no contest.

 

A couple of years after this bout took place, on the eve of the first Palomino-Muniz fight I believe, Muniz was alone with Jose Sulaiman and asked the question, "Senor Sulaiman, it's been two years, we're alone, why didn't I win that fight?" Sulaiman's response, "Armando, Mantequilla is a friend of mine. I would have done the same thing for you." I'll bet Muniz felt really friggin' touched over that one. There is no doubt Napoles was a greater fighter, I will never take that from him. But on the night in March of '75, Armando Muniz was deprived of the world title by a corrupt referee, corrupt commission and a corrupt WBC president.

 

Sulaiman truly is a piece of ****.

 

I have just watched the fight again. It is true that Napoles lands lot of low blows, but we have to be fair and add that Muniz was sticking his head into Napoles´ all the time and this caused and worsened the cuts until Napoles could not continue.

Woller

 

I found Napoles just as guilty of the head as Muniz during infighting through the first seven rounds. It was the way they were fighting, they were both cut. Napoles never came out of a clinch holding his head or complaining to the ref. It was inocuous and believe me, if the ref knew how this was going to unfold he would have deducted points from Muniz and made a public warning. i did not feel napoles punched low at all during the fight until that one concentrated effort in the 11th where he fired everything into the nads with Ramon Berumen just standing there watching and saying nothing. It was disgraceful.

 

Can I just say, I think this is an amazing fight. So full of balls out action