Just the same, Young's performances against Lyle, Foreman, Shavers, Norton, and Ali are not those of a typical 34-19-2 fighter. TBooze said earlier that "Jimmy Young was 34-19-2 for a reason". I doubt that that reason had much to do with his abilities at his peak. That was my point in bringing up Walcott (I could have used any number of non-starving top contenders during the 40's and 50's, come to think of it, but Walcott was the first who came to mind). Record does not equal ability at one's peak.
For a guy with supposedly zero power, Young threw a real real nice straight sneaky right hand in that 75-77 timeframe. And it had an affect on the guys he hit with it for some reason, which doesn't really figure. It wasn't as if the guy had a nasty follow up left hook or uppercut or anything to be concerned with as far as a follow up combo is concerned. Just that solitary quick right hand. Lyle was a tough hombre and would pause and re-set himself after Young landed it. It not only got his attention, it caused a reaction that Lyle just didn't do all that often. Same with the Foreman fight. That straight right stopped a lot of that Foreman aggression and Big George just didn't wing away with those 2/3/4 follow up tough shots he used to throw against guys. That straight right hand had Ali trying to go toe to toe after he got hit and that was something he only did when he was usually going in for the kill. He rarely went for instantaneous payback. But he'd eat one of them against Young and he reacted differently to getting hit clean than his usual tactic of going into a defensive mode for a few seconds and prevent follow ups. That right didn't exactly stop Norton in his tracks but you could visibly see the effect of it on Kenny. And Kenny did get shook up in there a few times, probably more than he ever was against Ali oddly enough. Young would land that sneaky punch and it always seemed to get the opponent to respect it and not walk through it like you'd think. Not those caliber opponents. And then Young would get opponents to fall for feints. It was definetely an offensive skill in there but strangley enough it was hardly the type that'd cause a knockdown or even cause a cut.
young was an excellent fighter in terms of ability. I feel that he deserved the decision against norton and technically beat ali (even though ali didn't train for that fight, which wasn't youngs fault). He just didn't seem motivated or dedicated enough to reach the top and it's a shame because he could've accomplished much more than he did.
And you are running true to form . Never answering a critical post. You understood my post allright ,but you bottled it. Did you like my jibe about you not checking your facts before posting? Are these sentences far enough apart for you , my myopic friend? Russell Young ? :think I like the sound of that. :good "You can run ,but you can't hide"------------ Joe Louis. 9 , 10 , your'e OUT !
Young had ability and sometimes he showed it, but too often he just showed up and blew any momentum. If he was as hard done by as you suggest, people (particularly in a popular era and division), would of given his career a lift. The truth was, Young was a fair fighter, who's style was never going to make him popular, and was so inconsistent, that rightly he lost in 50/50 type decisions. That is Young's problem, not boxing's, Young could of been so much more if he had put the effort in that a Ali, Frazier or Norton did.
You are re-writing history,I lived the era .Saw the fights as they happened Suck eggs. Heard the expression?
Young could not beat a 37 year old Norton ,or a 35 year old Ali ,because he did not have the COJONES TO GO FOR IT! ps .There is no e in Muhammad and no space bar needed to correct you. In the words of George Plimpton ,[check him out]," You had to be there"
I'm not sure that there's an accepted Romanization from Arabic, is there? (Although I guess as an American, whatever form Muhammad Ali chose was the "correct" one as far as his own name's concerned).
We may be straying a bit from the main point, though: Regardless of how frustrating and boring Young is, can we agree that he's either the best or tied for the best fighter in the world (based on performances) during the time frame I mentioned?
Muhammad would be of aramaic,or cyrillic origin? No? I was just pulling Russell's chain, a little ,we all make typos, me espiciaaaaly:yep
Young beat dangerous fighters like Jeff Sims,nobodies idea of an easy nights work,the guy had real ability,but he squandered it, imo. I watched him make a fool of British Champ John l Gardner, dropping him along the way to an effortless dec. Young looked bored by the fact that it was so easy. At some stage, you have to say, "the buck stops here". Young just . DID NOT WANT IT ENOUGH.
Well, I suspect that it's the Classical Arabic version that Ali was shooting for. The script is Aramaic in origin, although I think the language itself has its roots farther back when whatever it's descended from split off from proto-Semitic. Of course, an easy way to settle all of this is to point out that the infallible boxrec people write it as Muhammad. :yep