Futch and Frazier (though I can't find the article now) also scored the first fight a draw. And tbh, I think it was close as well despite the shape Ali was in. I don't know, I just can't give Norton much credit for that one. If one of the even rounds went to Ali, he would've won an SD. I don't think this Ali would've beat or even go the distance with Foreman. Frazier would likely beat him but he might go the distance with him.
LOL. More like had enough of getting manhandled. Pep was not a choirboy. He was fouling as much as Saddler. He just got the worst of it. Could dish it out but not take it. Saddler > Pep.
There’s a narrative built around that series that’s just ridiculous. Pep apparently was wheeled into the ring and carried up the steps while on oxygen. It’s an age-old story. Ezzard Charles faced it for beating Louis although to a different degree (more indifference in his case) — when you’re the guy who knocks off the popular fighter, history and critics don’t treat you kindly. Look at what film there is of their series and read every account and you can only conclude that Pep fought every bit as dirty as Saddler if not dirtier. Sandy stopped him cold once. Pep fought a brilliant fight and decisioned him. Then Sandy stopped him two more times, making him quit. Pep was on a long winning streak coming into their fights and fought at a high, world-class level coming out of them. Only Sandy ever dismantled him.
But did I say or imply or ask for any of that expect "Was Pep winning in a fight he quit in" ? Like c'mon lol.
I thought I heard in one of the fights, Pep was actually winning but had to retire due to shoulder injury ? Not to say Saddler might not of won anyway, but that's what I heard. Although Saddler was a bad style match up anyway.
I think many times beating a superior fighter has to do with size and can the inferior" fighter effectively use his size to win. I do not think a welterweight or superwelterweight Barkley beats Hearns as effectively, but I should follow my no excuses policy. And I never accepted Hearns weak legs excuse since he had 41 fights before Hagler. He should have known about this issue of massage after all those years, and the day of his biggest fights they massage his legs and that is the excuse? In retrospect Hearns should have come out more relaxed and picked his shots against Marvin and tied him up. I don't know if boxing would have worked with a pumped up Hagler at that point. I think picking his shots and landing the right and holding Hagler so slow Hagler down as the fight went on would have worked better.
I’m genuinely surprised that Dempsey vs Fat Willie Meehan hasn’t already been mentioned. Multiple fights but Jack never did figure Willie out. Even when Dempsey was beginning his tear to the title via short route KO wins there was Fat Willie, still looming in the wings - after starching Big Fred Fulton, JD fought Willie for, I think, the fifth time in Sep 1918 and still lost on points over 4 rounds.
He didn’t have Ali’s number per se, but relative to their overall resumes and quality of opposition vanquished and lost to otherwise, Old Henry did surprisingly well in both fights vs Ali. Not enough to beat Ali of course but there was definitely some stylistic issues there for Muhammad IMO. Interestingly, Cooper said Ali never really hurt him - and tbh, it seemed that way on film. Cooper went on to say that it therefore amazed him how Ali was able to roll over some other big guys otherwise, including Foreman.
Barkley win with Hearns 2 times. 1 time at middleweight & 1 time at light heavyweight. Barkley probably just superior as bigger man stronger man. Hearns was skinny welter man ' blown' to heavier class but Barkley was built for light heavyweight so superior for these fights. Is proof by 2 fight.