Most Shameful Ducks In Boxing History

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...best-fighter-on-the-planet-most-often.701311/


Larry Holmes:1-1
Muhammad Ali (W)
Michael Spinks (L)

Muhammad Ali:8-2
Sonny Liston (W)
Sonny Liston (W)
Floyd Patterson (W)
Ernie Terrell (W)
Zora Folley (W)
Joe Frazier (L)
George Foreman (W)
Ken Norton (W)
Leon Spinks (W)
Larry Holmes (L)

Joe Louis:9-1
James Braddock (W)
Max Schmeling (W)
Tony Galento (W)
Bob Pastor (W)
Billy Conn (W)
Billy Conn (W)
Tami Mauriello (W)
Joe Walcott (W)
Joe Walcott (W)
Ezzard Charles (L).

 

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with concerning what I've actually said. It seems that you constantly skirt the actual point I made, which was that the flaws of Patterson's reign were in no way unique. I showed this by comparing to Frazeirs' and Holmes's just as examples, something you completely have failed to adress if I haven't missed it. So here we go again:

1. Patterson choosing the nr. 3 instead of the nr. 1 in '57 is a mark on his reign. I have been clear on this in every post. But again, nothing unique. Frazier went the whole of '72 without defending against a ranked opponent. Ali didn't defend against the nr. 1 in '77 or '78. Holmes didn't for his whole reign, I think, even though alphabet politics share some of the blame for this. Bowe, Foreman's second reign... So nothing unique in any case. And if we go further back to Dempsey and Johnson... Holy, Moley.

2. It's inane to say he ducked Williams. Yes, he defended against less deserving like Rademacher and McNeely, but if he hadn't he had hardly ducked them either. No other champion gets **** for not defending against fringe contenders. So this should go for Patterson as well.

3. Liston's wait was mainly due to the rematch clauses. If he there never was a Liston, I think Patterson still would have closed out '61 with a gimme and taken on the nr. 1 the next year. Sure, doing it later in '61 would have been better, but I don't think he would have Liston or no Liston.

So, again, and for the last time: I have been clear in every post about that Patterson's reigns had some flaws, but as I have also shown, they were hardly unique. So that's the point you need to adress.

This BS about his being one of the worst reigns ever need to stop.

 

Good stuff, this.

What was the status of Ali going in to the Holmes fight, though? Was it really nr. 1?

 

I think it was chatted about in the thread. a horrid number #1 if so but McGrain must have ok'd it.

 

But he wasn't Ring nr. 1, was he? Probably not with the orgs either.

 

Fair enough, although without splitting hairs, this wasn't a mandatory defence (but definitely a 'public interest' defence) and Kenny was basically keeping George's 'seat' warm, hence the threat of stripping Ali later that year unless Ali 'signed' to fight George early 77.

 

While Machen in '58 certainly can be called a duck, here are some I think are worse, to give some proportions:

Sullivan of Jackson

Jeffries of Johnson

Johnson of Langford (even though circumstances made this more tricky)

Dempsey of Wills and Greb

Foreman of Quarry (bit twofold tbf, since Norton was quite deserving, but George turning down the bigger offer says a lot about his true reason)

Bowe of Lewis

Foreman of... everyone more or less

Tyson of Lewis (first step aside money and then blatantly bypassing him and dropping the belt)


Then we have others in the mix like Frazier seemingly side stepping Ali after he beat Quarry the second time, Holmes dropping his belt instead of facing Page and Lewis doing same concerning Byrd. Vitaly and Wlad will always be a live conversation of course, even though that seems very understandable.

 

No

 

Are Norton & Folley at the time of the fight or when signed?

 

Head of complaints and enquiries is @McGrain

 

I'm pretty sure it won't be signed, as finding that out would be way too difficult. Maybe? Norton or Folley weren't #1 at that time.

 

Re: Holmes-Ali. Maybe Mac's thinking is that this gave Holmes the 'title' as he beat the lineal champ and previous to that the Ring crown was 'vacant'?

 

Folley wasn't nr 1 in either case, I think. Think Frazier took that spot directly after Terrell.

 

I think even Milldenberger spent a brief time at #1 too that year!!! So that would have been before Joe in all likelihood.

 

Ok. So maybe Folley was nr 1 and Frazier reached that spot first when he beat Cuuvalo, with Mildenberger there somewhere in between.