"Fitzsimmons was the greatest and Ali was a bum"

I'd say it was the same with Louis. And Holmes also had more close fights go his way than the other way around.

And, again, Ali's only really controversial wins came after Manilla, when his legacy was already secured and he was way past it. People think Ali is great because he beat Liston, Frazier and Foreman, and easily dispatched of many good fighters like Patterson, Quarry etc. Not because he controversially edged Young and Norton (rubber).

Have you ever seen anyone use those fights as proof for Ali's greatness?

 

Which fights with Louis ?

I'm not sure about Holmes. I thought Williams beat him, but I thought he beat Spinks the 2nd time probably. Witherspoon was a close fight. And let's be honest, those fights of Larry's get mentioned a lot.

That's true for people who are well clued up.
But, for many people, the fact that he is 2-1 against Norton on paper, instead of 1-2, and that his second reign lasted 3 1/2 years instead of 1 1/2 years, makes it easier to see his greatness.
It's a far neater picture than if those decisions (Norton or Young) were against him.
Cleanness of a fighter's record does influence people.

Yes, I have seen people say Ali avenged the Norton defeat twice over.
Haven't you ?

 

Godoy, Pastor and Farr are said to have been close fights. Not robberies, but close. And they were in in his prime. Walcott is seen by some as a robbery. But none of the fights Louis lost were close.

Holmes got the nod close fights with Norton, Williams ans Spoon. He was robbed according to many in the Spinks rematch, but he still got the judges' approval in most of his close fights.

I've never seen anyone use the years after Manilla as proof of Ali's greatness. I've only seen the Young and third Norton fights held against him, actually.

And what he did before 1976 has him as the greatest or second greatest HW. Would you disagree?

Can't recall I have actually. I have seen it said many times that Norton beat him in all fights, though.

 

I haven't seen those fights in their entirety. I don't think many people here would have.
Therein lies the difference between them and discussions on Ali-Norton and Ali-Young or whatever.

You're talking about close fights, that could go either way.
I'm not sure Ali-Norton 3 qualifies, even at its closest. But you have Ali winning that one, then just say it, because that brings a different context.

I can only talk about fights I've seen and my view on them.

I don't disagree. But we know what we're talking about.

But even when Ali is mentioned as three time world champion, 1964-70, 1974-78 and 1978-79 - as he is in many books and encyclopedias, and which he was in fact - that contributes to an overall picture of his career and dominance. 1964-70 and 1974-76 would look different.
When he has 5 losses instead of 6 or 7 or 8, that contributes.
Eveything like that makes a slight difference, even if we know it's supeficial.

[url]https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=w9PgTKiU4boC&pg=PT677&lpg=PT677&dq=ali+beat+norton+twice&source=bl&ots=baPdd5Hn3p&sig=qlL1Uyv8wlHl5uj2XCGTN-XGWoY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ILA7VbzRN4jYPOufgYgL&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=ali%20beat%20norton%20twice&f=false[/url]

 

That was odd. Reminds me of how far off Bert Sugar could be sometimes.

 

Ok, we seem to agree on that Ali wasn't the only one winning most of his close fights and that his controversial wins doesn't do any real difference to his legacy one way or another. Ergo, using them as an argument for saying that he wasn't that great is a non-starter.

As for Ali-Norton III, I have given that to Norton by a point both times I've scored it, by virtue of him winning the last round. Which was pretty close.

So no, I don't have it as a win for Ali, but certainly not a robbery either. And it's about the same with the Young fight for me.

I give those fights about as much weight for Ali's overall legacy as I give Hopkins's losses to Taylor. Virtually none.

That an ageing champion struggles with hungry contenders in their prime is nothing strange to me. Very few champions, if any, hasn't.

Ps. as for the link, didn't remember that. But that Katz mentions it as a win for Ali (among several others) isn't really the same as hinging his legacy on it, is it? But the number of times I've seen it held against him on this forum...

 

I agree 100%.
That old dude who called Ali was a "bum" was wrong on many levels, and didn't even have an answer when asked about Frazier, he was like "Oh yeah, you got me.", pretending he's some expert. He said so many wrong things, I'm not sure what he hinged his argument on, something about Cosell and Dundee, and then contradicted himself with "Ali was a good fighter". Definitely an idiot.

I think "Ali had some questionable wins" is accurate though.
And I can definitely say it's true of Larry Holmes too, at least if we're talking 1978-86.
Maybe some others, Holyfield perhaps a good example, got less luck with the close ones (Moorer 1, Ruiz 3, Valuev, Lewis 2 even, quite close anyway - though Lewis was a huge name and favourite too, of course - .... although Bowe 2 was real close too, and Holy got that one, Lewis 1 draw but then everything calls that a loss anyway).
At lighter weights, Pernell Whitaker comes to mind, who got the bad end, it seems.

 

The old man is definitely a heretic.
He has strayed far from the Gospel of this forum.

 

Yeah, Whitakeer for one didn't have much luck. But I don't know how much difference that makes when it comes to fighters who there's plenty of film of. I see Pea-Chavez as a win for Pea just as I see Holy-Lewis 1 as a loss for Holy. What the record says doesn't really matter as far as I'm concerned. Not when I have the opportunity to form my own opinion.

 

Fitz was no doubt an all time great. However as hwt it's hard not to call Ali the best. Coming back and beating Foreman when everyone thought he would be koed THEN showing all time great attributes by beating Frazier in a fight as grueling as there has ever been. In his prime which would be in the mid to late 1960s his speed, chin, durability and stamina would be difficult to overcome.

 

That's an old interview. He calls Ali a bum yet has him at #5 in his all-time Heavyweight rankings atsch

 

I noticed that, I assumed that was the date he uploaded the video as opposed to when it took place..

If that is a new interview, then I've seen that bloke talking the same shyte a few years ago.

 

Here's an interview with him where he gives his rankings of the weight divisions. Strangely, he has Ali at #5.

[url]http://www.doghouseboxing.com/DHB/Tyler021512.htm[/url]