what if foreman had back off of ali every time he roped?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by lightning333, Aug 20, 2007.

  1. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Messages:
    112,537
    Likes Received:
    47,074
    Ali would have won a wide points decision in this situation, I guess.
     
  2. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Messages:
    112,537
    Likes Received:
    47,074
    Interesting. Why? The only exchanges Foreman won were the ones on the ropes.
     
  3. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Messages:
    112,537
    Likes Received:
    47,074
    It's possible to score every round for Ali, though that's not how I have it.

    John Thomas produced three scorecards on Classics a few days ago and all were for Ali, one had every round for him.
     
  4. lefthook31

    lefthook31 Obsessed with Boxing banned

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    Messages:
    20,862
    Likes Received:
    138
    Yes, I have watched the fight, saw When were kings in the theater, its just been a long long time. I just remember Foreman beating on Ali. Foreman was tired, but also had the bully sydrome that was crushed by Ali, and led to the stoppage.
     
  5. lefthook31

    lefthook31 Obsessed with Boxing banned

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    Messages:
    20,862
    Likes Received:
    138
    My interest in boxing started in the mid 80's. I can pretty much tell you round for round every fight from 1986 on in all weight divisions. I have watched some of the older fights before that, but not many of them. Its been a while since I saw that fight yes..
     
  6. anut

    anut Boxing Addict banned

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    6,731
    Likes Received:
    11
    foreman would have won......but ali outsmarted him...:smoke:smoke:smoke
     
  7. hobgoblin

    hobgoblin Active Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    810
    Likes Received:
    26
    I recall maybe 2 or 3 (tops) rounds in the fight where a case could be made for Foreman. The rest were all Ali. Some could legitimately say all 8 rounds for Ali. This is actually my favorite fight of all time - even more fun is the pre fight hype. See it again.

    No way. If this is true - then why didn't Foreman catch Ali in the first three rounds when he wasn't so tired? Because it isn't that Foreman kept hitting Ali, got tired, and then Ali took over. It is that Ali's right hand lead was staggering and beating him and knocked him DOWN. He was tired to get up from it. Exhaustion certainly played a role - only an auxiliary role though.

    Much easier said than done - especially with Ali who was never close to that situation despite facing many punchers of Foreman's caliber - some whom one could argue even better than 24 year old Foreman. Ali is too resilient has too much heart has too fast & long arms , too ACCURATE - Foreman would have been outfought.

    Exactly -couldn't have said it better myself.
     
  8. trac209

    trac209 Active Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,129
    Likes Received:
    0
    Might as well gave ali a chair
     
  9. Illmatic

    Illmatic Boxing Addict Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2004
    Messages:
    6,062
    Likes Received:
    4
    Foreman was outclassed in every way and wouldve been knocked out regardless. The whole ropeadope is so misconstrued. Ali wasnt just leaning on the ropes taking a beating like Rocky Balboa...he was countering and parrying Foreman to PERFECTION. He made Foreman look like a caveman swinging a club, and if I remember correctly, had Foreman just winning one round in that fight.
     
  10. Illmatic

    Illmatic Boxing Addict Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2004
    Messages:
    6,062
    Likes Received:
    4
    No, Foreman lost b/c he was slow. Foreman was outclassed in the early rounds as well. Ali backed up, caught and parried his slow punches and countered him to death.
     
  11. Decker

    Decker Boxing Addict Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    3,443
    Likes Received:
    934
    Not much of a stretch. :rofl This is one reason why I consider this fight a semi fix. The ropes were ridiculously loose to help Ali's rope a dope tatcics. It's no big secret that due to the too loose ropes, Ali's body was not only farther away from GF punches, but his body was more sloped - about 45 degrees. It's the same principle of using sloped armor for a tank to deflect incoming shots. Foreman's puches had much less of an impact on Ali's body. Why did Ali need this kind of help? Also the ref was in Ali's corner. I doubt it took much $ from DK to buy him off. Ali had GF in headlocks during that fight. Yes, Ali was quicker. So he could pop GF w/the jab and when GF tried to close Ali would tie him up w/the clinch. If only Wlad had Ali's skills in that area, especially earlier in his career. :yep And GF didn't exactly execute the smartest fight.

    Baloney. You're being affected by the crowd that was almost 100% behind Ali in Africa. The crowd would have an orgasm everytime Ali half connected with a jab. Poor George must have thought he was taking on eveybody that nite. After wasting so much energy on punches that had much less effect due to the the loose ropes, he was ready to go when Ali tagged him later on. The same guy who destroyed Frazier & Norton (who Ali struggled mightily with in all 6 fights), gets stopped by the "power" punching Ali. Yeah, styles blah blah. And Ali never wanted to give GF a rematch. Lets see a GF-Ali fight w/legit ropes, a neutral ref, in the US were GF would have some support. Maybe Ali would win, but the outcome would be much harder if not different.
    And hasn't GF recently stated that he thought he was sick or slightly poisoned before the fight? Maybe sour grapes but stranger things have happended.

    Is this an indication that you're not a fan of "what ifs"? They're popular, but you can what if anything to get the result you're looking for.