Jimmy Young was an excellent fighter

Good to see another poster (and one I respect) shares the same opinion as me regarding Young. Had the decisions gone his way in the Shavers and Ali fights as they should of, he would of had wins over Lyle 2x, Foreman, Ali, and Shavers. That would of been an incredible set of wins, especially when you consider that his fight with Norton could of gone either way so you can throw that in as well.

Young is basically the ultimate spoiler.

 

I disagree with the last part, as much as I respect Young I can't get my brain around how he could handle the Klitschkos.

Just horrible style matchups for him, they'd jab him all day from a distance and wouldn't have to worry about anything serious in return. It's near impossible to beat the Klitschko's (especially Wlad) without having good power.

 

It would of gone down as a No decision, as I doubt even the ref could of stayed awake for 12/15 rounds, in that match!

Young was not without ability, but he was less dedicated than Whitherspoon, indeed him and Leroy Jones were arguably the founder members of the Lost Generation.

Sorry, but fighting Ali on arguably his worse night (according to Dundee), and dropping a close/debatable decision, and beating an unmotivated Foreman, four years past his best, does not make you an excellent fighter.

He deserves kudos for coming back strongly in the early 80s, but most of his best work was done on Radio Two (If you are not British and over 40, you will not get that!)...

 

But the decisions did NOT go Young's way did they?
Against Ali ,Young was 28 to Ali's 35
Against Norton, Young was 29 to Norton's 34,and Norton won 2 out of his next 6 fights
In winning fights,against Lyle, Young was 28 to Lyle's 35.
Enough with the excuses!
Spoiler is right he spoiled many a potentially good fight.

 

And I will also maintain that there is a huge difference between an indecisive verdict and a blatant robbery. Calzaghe vs Hopkins was a close fight that possibly could have gone either way, but to say that Hopkins was flat out " robbed " is a stretch. Such is the case in most of Jimmy Young's signature fights. Furthermore, the men who he lost " indecisively to ", were men that were either past their best or deconditioned. Leon Spinks fought a very similar version of Ali and actually faired better!!

I have nothing against Young either, but his inability to impress the judges was probably his own fault.

 

What do Ali's and Norton's age relative to Young have anything to do with the fact that Young deserved the decisions over them?

Lyle was older but it's worth noting that Young beat him before Lyle's fights with Ali and Foreman with him so Lyle was hardly washed up.

 

They have everything to do with where we place Young in terms of posterity, plus he was LOSING decisions to men , aging , past their best.Heard the expression "close the show"?
Well Young never did.
He was a nearly man.

 

Last time I checked the sport was calling boxing, not punching.

Stop reaching.

 

Yep.

 

Not that McVey needs me defending him, but he has a point, Young was a choker, he found a way to lose his big fight (Ali), not win it, despite having a very poor imitation of the original Cassius Clay the Ninth in front of him....

 

Yes, lets ignore how boxing lived and died by Muhammed Ali for well over a decade.

Lets forget every questionable decision (And there were plenty of them) that kept him in power so that tens of millions of dollars could be raked in by men in suits.

Lets forget that he was a media darling, the most popular athlete of the century. Lets forget how much he had handed to him on a silver platter including frequent decisions later on in his career.

Lets say it was Young's fault. Lets place it all soley on his shoulders.

He NEVER choked. He stopped caring post Norton. There's a gross difference between choking and no longer caring.

You call the Foreman masterclass choking? Rematching Shavers and being robbed with a draw? Clearly beating Norton, badly stunning him more then half a dozen times?

Against Ali, he busted his eardrum. Made him fall for plenty of feints, the only person I can ever remember doing that to Ali. He hurt him to the body. He landed more, even angered Ali.

I'm sorry if it's so much more conveniant to blame a fighter who did what he needed to do to win fights, as opposed to looking at the behind the scenes workings, the cogs of boxing that needed to continue turning.

 

Ali was not just Boxing's personality of the 20th century, but as the BBC showed, probably the Sports personality of the 20th century.

I have never seen an Ali fight (he won), when it cannot be argued he could of won, and as defending champ, he deserved any benefit of doubt against Young.

As Dundee stated (in a Photographic history of Ali), this was in his opinion, Ali's worse performance, and yet Young could still not get the W to his name...

Young could of, perhaps should of, but never did, he blew it, and you bitching and dropping names is not going to add to mainstream support he may of had.

Jimmy Young was 34-19-2 for a reason, he never truly respected the sport like a 56-5 Ali...

 

This has no bearing on the actual fight itself. Boxing is won by the guy who wins more rounds, Young won more rounds and performed better than Ali. Anyone and EVERYONE who watches this fight scores it for Young except the judges. How does that classify as choking? Because the judges were in love with Ali and disregarded what was actually happening in front of them?