yeah I think you are probably right there ,I think George chuvalo paints a shady picture around the ali/liston fights though ,if there was any fixing going on I don't think ali would of known anything about though . ali is not my favourite man or boxer by any stretch but you gotta give him credit for beating liston
What would that have proved? He would have been sloppier and more likely to be stopped, ala Sanders. He has demonstrated a brainier, more controlled approach that has paid off for him very well.
rahman, peter II, Thompson I,and chambers ,wach come to mind. he could of and should been more aggressive they really are not a list of the most dangerous challengers are they. perhaps I rate wlad very highly but think is ultra cautious approach will for some time cause him to be underrated when his career is over. and his fears about his own chin have led to his underachieving
I think that's exactly what happened. Ali was also caught by surprise. In the immediate post fight interview, Ali had no idea whether it was a right or a left that "downed" Liston. They were all expecting the dive later in the fight.
Depends on ya definition really. if someone had the ability and opportunity to achieve more than they did has surely under achieved.
Everyone 'could have' achieved more. There's always something possible left to do. For me, to 'under achieve' would be to do less than you were reasonably expected to do when you started out. The odds are against any boxer actually becoming heavyweight champion of the world, none of them started out being considered 'dead certs' to get even that far.
Any Olympic hw champ is expected to be a professional champ. People can always achieve more so it's about degrees of significance . Could just be that I rate these guys higher than you do.