Reasons why Muhammad Ali's 'dodgy' decisions.........

Ali had a few questionable decisions....but I don't feel that he gets attacked or called on it quite as much as some? Since he is considered by many (not me) as the best HW ever of course he is going to have a plethora of threads dedicated to his career in a variety of aspects. The problems are twofold in my eyes:

Ali supporters defend every thing he ever did and refuse to engage in sincere and unbiased discussions (For the most part not an absolute).

Ali detractors criticize and challange every remote thread at their disposal to discredit him.

Combined this leads to extreme postions and the opponent makes extreme knee jerk reactions the opposite way and a good discussion is very rare on this forum any more about Ali (or Dempsey or Tyson etc.).

I personally think he gets attacked more than SRL, JCC but think that DLH might get criticized over decisions more than anyone else anymore. But that is the price you pay when most consider you the GOAT...The microscope comes out and the probing begins...fair or not, it happens.

 

Back in the olden days.....many "great fighters" had 3-4 (or more) losses.

Now the media expects you to be "perfect".....with all the "setup" fights for the good guy.

Ali basically fought everyone....and gave some non-deserving fighters a shot at the title in the process.

 

What about the decisions and/or the criticism?

 

Actually it comes up in most Holme's threads....although their frequency is a lot less, so by virtue so is his criticism.

Norton was robbed is the frequent cry....C'mon...I had Holme's by 2 and while I don't see how Norton won on others cards (they are widely debated and interpreted)...but it was in no way a robbery! 2ndly he gets the similar treatment from his fights with Spoon and to a lesser degree williams.

I personally had Holme's/Spinks a draw in the first fight and Holme's winning the 2nd fight...but that gets spoken on much less than his detractors from the previously mentioned 3 fights, likely because Holme's supporters are not in the majority of our posters. He also gets maybe as much flack for the fighters he missed as anyone not named Dempsey.

My question to longhorn was after he praised Ali, yet in no way shape or form answered your question in the OP. This happens in every Ali thread...i will hear of his courage his unparallelled skills, Vietnam, the draft...But the question you asked will scarcely be discussed.

 

"My question to longhorn was after he praised Ali, yet in no way shape or form answered your question in the OP."

I didn't praise Ali....just stated what went on with all the top fighters back then.

That is boxing.....some say the decisions are fair....others say they are bad.
(Jones, Chuvalo, Liston 1&2, Cooper, Frazier 2, all Norton fights, Shavers, Lyle, Spinks 2, etc.)

 

My main problem with d Ali fraud is mainly d cheating in fights and much less d gifts by d judges which also should hurt his legacy .

It is true that he was not d only 1 2 enjoy gift decisions by d judges and that this tradition in this sport is common .

However , d benefits he had from his and his trainer's (Angelo Mirena) cheating r d greatest .

No other man's legacy benefits more from cheating in fights and fixes .
He was not d only 1 in this category either , but this is where i feel that he truly is d gr8est .

A top 10 gr8est cheater , and d undisputed GOAT benefitor from cheating and fixes .

He will probably always remain uderr8ed @ this .

D forgotten deity of fixes and cheating @ this certain sport .

In Ali's case it is a combination of d regular albeit un4givable amounts of wrong verdicts 2 his credit and injured , undersized , old , however handicapped opponents with d irregular amounts of fixes and cheating .
It is this combination that turns almost every outcome which ignorant fools / ignorant crooks count 2 his favor 2 irrelevant .

 

I think it's accepted that he was well past it when these close/controversial decisions happened. By right he should have been retired then and could have sailed into the sunset as GOAT

 

Probably because he was never on the wrong end of a controversial decision. With most fighters they have seen both sides of the questionable cards. De La Hoya, for example, is usually said to have gotten lucky on the cards against Sturm and Quartey, yet it sort of evens out with him being unlucky on the cards against Trinidad and in the Mosley rematch.

There are no fights that "even out" for Ali. He has the controversial wins over Norton and Young, arguably Shavers, yet there are no fights that anyone can really point out and say "Ali deserved the decision but didn't get it."

 

Because he's the most popular fighter in history.

Any dodgey decision should be highlighted in reality though and not swept under the rug because "other's" have gift decisions also.

Any fight I see that I disagree with I record. Any fight I read about that is considered controversial I consider a draw.

 

This content is protected