How I Scored All Of Muhammad Ali's Controversial Decisions

Your Jimmy Young card is a joke.

 

Those were the days in the mid 1970's when Ali would lie on the ropes...do nothing...have his opponent pound on him for 3 minutes...then after he "won" the fight...you'd find that all 3 judges gave him that round...he "won" lots of those...not because of what he did in the ring...but because of who he was! After the 3rd Norton fight at Yankee Stadium in 1976...one of the NY papers said, "If Ali won that fight last night...then the Japanese won WWII"...Total garbage. Hell...if it wasn't for his opponents...there wouldn't have been any action! He lays on the ropes...they do most of the work...and he "wins"...

 

what about it? im curious your take

 

Nothing wrong with this at all.
Something to think about though, Ali probably loses quite a few of these same fights if he fought them in the mid 60's as opposed to mid 70's.
It amazing to think how hated he was to how loved he'd become in a little over 10 years.
That in itself was an incredible journey.

 

In the mid 60's the fights would not have been so close.

 

Of course not with the 60's version of Ali.
But my scenario was the 70's fights and version of Ali being held in the 60's.
With how hated he was during those years.

 

True enough.

 

Don’t try it, sheath your sword this is no foe but an idea you challenge, a religious one almost - One so powerful people deny with there own eyes and see what they want.

 

About a fifth ot the cards (8 of 41) by my count has Ali vs Young a draw on Eye of the Ring, so it's a fairly common card. Quite probably the most common one.

I think I had Young by a point but it was a long time ago since I scored it. I would probably call Ali-Norton 3 a draw (could never make up my mind about the last round, which is deciding for me as it was for the three judges).

I know that it's not a even slightly controversial result, but I had Ali-Norton 1 a draw when I scored it ages and ages ago. Both Futch and Norton have said it could have been one, I think.

 

It sounds like you were going to give Jimmy that round and didn't because of reasons mentioned above- so you've effectively made a 10-9 round to him 9-10 (that's a 2 point swing!) That's all a bit Mickey Vann deducting Whitaker a point vs Chavez (when the referee didn't) if you ask me- actually it's even worse! People may criticise the ref...but they obviously didn't see his card, so the idea that he wasn't doing Ali favours isn't based on fact. Maybe he could/should have deducted more points and the judges cards could've been even worse!

Having Ali ahead after 7 is a classic example of the habit of scoring any rounds where Ali actually punches back...talk about Ali performing a Jedi mind trick (a full year before Star Wars too). A man gets on his toes, throws a few jabs, hardly any land and the ones that do, having nothing on them, hence the old 'sting like a moth' jokes that emerged around this time. He's offered virtually nothing until round 6.

I know you scored round 1 to Jimmy, obviously, but what makes me laugh is that two of the judges scored this even in a round where Ali actually did less than in Round 1 vs Holmes. That's how impossible it was to get a decision against him at that time. Strange how the power-that-be thought it be best in the public interest to keep him as champ.

Even the judges, two of whom are widely known to have given a couple of the worst cards in history, thought Jimmy finished stronger in the final 3rd rounds, yet you've given Ali a 2-1 lead there... Now that is a 'late rally by the judges' if there ever was one. Again, 'Ali on his toes' seems to impress people...why? The Punches have no zip- and were barely landing anyway.

 

It get lots of 'likes' I suppose.

 

Imagine if the world wasn't flooded with Jimmy Young fanboys, then the controversy rating on Eye of the Ring would be 0%.

 

What a world that would be. One can only dream.