Muhammad Ali and the controversial fights?

Maybe it would be a good idea to make a poll including all close fights and see what is general opinion about them.

IMO Ali should lose Norton III and Young, I do not buy the story about "taking the fight to the champion" - the champion is already protected enough by the fact that he keeps his belt in case of a draw.

Shavers could go either way, and while the referee could give Lyle the benefit of a doubt I believe Ali would win anyway.

 

Doug Jones v Muhammad Ali could have gone either way.

A draw would have been fair.

 

Very close,but the young Cassius Clay did enough to win,imo. Very much a transitional fight for him. Similar to Tyson-Tillis,Frazier-Bonavena I and Foreman-Peralta I in that way.

 

"Stoppage against Lyle was a complete joke" ???? :huh :huh

Are you some kind of sadist ?

Lyle was all over the place,and not even able to raise his hands to defend himself let alone hit Ali back.


The Shavers fight displayed how much the 1977 Ali had declined. I still think he scraped it though. And if he'd stunned Shavers,in the fifteenth,about a minute before he did,he'd have made 'The Acorn' fall.

 

A lot of what you say is too much bull**** for me to comment so i'll keep it short.

The jones fight was close, I gave it ali. He struggled against a top ranked opponent, granted, but considering I scored the fight for him i'm happy with the verdict.

Pretty much every fight from young onwards I scored against ali. The thriller clearly took everything ali had left.

As to how I see this affecting his legacy: I have ranked number 1 in hw history. He holds victories over liston, patterson, frazier, foreman, norton and moore. All of whom make my top 50 and most of whom make my top 25.

Joe frazier aside I don't think anyone would beat a prime ali.

The stuff after the thriller is because he was such an icon, boxing didn't wanna let go.

That being said, imo, the timeline of the premiere hw goes foreman-ali-young-norton-holmes.

 

.. and still a **** poster .

u will never neglect your casual fan ways , wud u ?

 

So you disagree with me?

How many fights after the thriller did you think ali deserved to win? I can't think of any.

 

it's not that , u gave him credit 4 Wright , Liston , Patterson and Foreman .
He barely deserves credit 4 Frazier #3 , but i can bear giving him some credit 4 that 1 .


All d time here and u still learned nothing . b4 joining here , when i had much less clue than i have now , and even 4 quite a (2 long) while after , i had Ali in my top 10 HWs .

Any1 who has him there , but especially @ d top 4 is either :
1) a populist publicist who has 2 follow d stream 2 extent while not trying 2 b obvious as such (Rumsfeld)
2) a populist wannabe seemingly like independent minded who has 2 follow d stream in order 2b taken seriously (McGrain , TheGreatA)
3) a total idiot lacking of any thought , judgement or opinion , whose only thought , judgement r based on
___ how will d big boys react when they read it ? (lowest available forms of life such as o'riray , teeto , yourself (lufcrazy) , Hands Of Iron , Bill Butcher , Boxing Fan #1 , Vic-Jofre BRASIL)
4) n automated biased , unchangeable , and unteachable other form of low life (Pachilles)

5)
notice that there is also another form of biologically inferior creature d lora type , who simply avoids all discussion regarding Ali , 4 fear of either Xposing his unconventional stance on d subject , or conversely , having a very conventional stance on d subject but being bored of Xpressing it .

6) d biased agenda driven type (family members , DKP employees , lawyer , close friends , closet homosexuals with a particular penchant 4d bronze kok , Islamist radicals of d old generation , leftist radicals of d old generation , fighters who fought him and have of very low integrity , every1 with n unchangeable opinion 4 a reason on this 1 particular subject )

such as Bokaj , Stevie G. , Ali_ , Solomon Deeds , mcvey , Azzer85

all of these types r ignorant in particular , and each has his additional bad attributes .
most of them could b included in a super type labeled as ppl of low integrity .

7) ppl who simply don't know enough yet , like i was until knowing enough on d subject 2 finally remove him out of my top 10 .
This type is not necessarily ignorant but tends 2b most of d time simply because most ppl do .

 

I listed them as victories. Moore means nothing more than name value. The rest were all the highest ranked opponents available, of amuse i'll give credit for him stopping them.

 

Moore means nothing period .
Patterson had n injured back in their 1st fight , was 37 in their rematch and was always undersized and fragile .
Liston was 2 fixes .
D Foreman fight was 1 of d biggest frauds in d history of d sport if not d biggest . I tend 2 consider it D biggest , but since i never tried 2 rank d frauds yet i don't officially claim it .

 

This is true and it goes without saying that the 3rd Norton fight and the Young fight were both atrocious robberies. A champion should lose his title by 1 point if that's the honest points tally by the three officials. This bull**** about a champion having to have his title brutally shorn from him by the challenger is just BULL****.

 

Yet Moore is a big name to have on your resume.

Yet they were still the highest ranked heavyweights available to fight.

 

Yet they still meant nothing and when he fought even undersized but live opponents such as Doug Jones , Henry Cooper and Alonzo Johnson he got his S whooped .

 

Lyle was out of it......Nowhere near a joke. You're a joke for coming out with such a hideous statement.