Your unpopular boxing opinions

Taking away Ali's license in 1967 made him even more historically valued today than he would have been if he had been fighting all the time... this break improved his position even further

 

Douglas received some very generous officiating in the Tyson fight.

For someone who was supposedly all fine and dandy like everyone claims, Douglas cut it AWFULLY close with the count (many referees would've counted him out) when Tyson floored him with that uppercut, and was clearly unsteady on his feet upon rising.

The referee (perhaps subconsciously) clearly slowed the count (perhaps most obvious around the 6 second mark), and stopped counting at 9 as Douglas was in the process of rising but not actually on his own two feet yet.

 

Bruce is quoted as basically saying he would have no chance against Muhammad Ali.

I remember one of person in one of the documentaries (I think Dan Inosanto) also saying he liked boxing, especially Jersey Joe Walcott’s footwork.

 

A dirty fighter wasn't a cheap one,sure these tricks technically broke the rules,but some "dirty" fighters that's actually smart enough...to hide the foul, really doesn't deserve to just be downplayed as a "dirty,cheap fighter who wasn't skilled and only knew how to foul",I'm sure every fighter that could hide that foul well really knows a lot about the game,bonus points for those fighters that could hit a foul/questionable moves that could just be dismissed as accidental.

 

I've thought this myself
Watched the fight a few times now and came to that conclusion.
If the ref had been a little..speedier maybe, then perhaps Buster doesn't make it.

 

Ali would have lost against Cooper in 1963 if Angelo Dundee didn't give Ali smelling salts in the corner after the knockdown.
time stamp 12:31.

This content is protected

 

Defensive-minded fighters aren't good for boxing

 

Tua and Ibeabuchi are overrated, Bruno and Morrison underrated...

 

Hagler clearly never ducked or avoided McCallum, since Mike was never a contender at MW during his reign and never on the agenda. Leonard has been open about that he considered McCallum too much risk and too little reward, but they were never in the same division so you can't talk about a duck, I think. Duran's decision to face Hearns instead of McCallum in 1984 makes sense on every level, so while he refused to face a mandatory in McCallum I don't see it as a duck.

Hearns on the other hand... When he fought at 154 for the last time in 1986, McCallum was the best fight available for him at the time in the division and while of course not a Leonard/Duran/Hagler kind of pay-day, I think it was a fight that could have made good numbers if promoted well. There was unification at stake and also an old, bypassed stable mate who had been his equal in sparring, so I don't see why it couldn't have been sold to an audience. Instead he faced Medal.

I wouldn't straight out call this a duck since I don't know what the politics were with promoters and orgs at the time and it wasn't like it was a widely demanded fight (even though I think public demand could have been created), but it has the look like they wanted to stay away from this to me. Especially taking Steward's later comments about how good McCallum was and how great his sparring sessions with Hearns were (have to say he was very generous in his appraisal seeing how bitter and resentful McCallum came to be towards him).

I'm pretty sure this was the moment when McCallum felt shafted by Steward, not actually when Hearns got the Duran fight in 1984. After beating Kronk fighter Braxton in 1985 he was still very respectful to his former stable when interviewed in the ring afterwards. He said he wanted Hearns and hoped for that fight, but did not saying anything about being ducked or sidestepped and showed no disrespectful behaviour towards Steward in the corner. This is in stark contrast to the vitriol he hurled at him after beating his fighter McCrory in 1987.

At that time he clearly felt he had an axe to grind. I think that was because he felt he had been shafted on the opportunity to unify against Hearns.

 

Floyd Mayweather was overrated.

 

- Aaron Pryor's victory over Arguello is illegitimate, and Aaron Pryor should not be anywhere near ATG conversations due to the fact he was a disgraceful drug cheat. Without Panama Lewis, Arguello beats him. And their 2nd fight doesn't really prove anything because just 10 months earlier Arguello suffered a career altering beating in that faithful 14th round at the hands of drugged-up Pryor which likely destroyed his punch resistance.

- There are too many asterisks in Ali's resume for him to be considered the HW GOAT. Smelling salt incident in the 1st Cooper fight mentioned above being one of the examples.

- Prime for prime, I would pick Lennox, Holyfield, Bowe and Ibeaubuchi to all beat Tyson. I view Tyson v Mercer as a 50/50 fight. I also have Tyson just outside of my top 15 HWs.

- Monzon would defeat Hagler.

- Richard Steele's decision to stop the Chavez v Taylor fight was an unmitigated joke. He didn't even give Taylor the opportunity to answer his question. He asked him if he was okay, and immediately waived it off.

 

James Toney didn't want to fight Roy Jones.

 

This content is protected

 

Prime Tyson was far more skilled than Bowe or Ike, he was super fast.

 

From an interview Emanuel Steward gave in 2009 :

"Another one was the second fight with Alexis Arguello and Arron Pryor, when Pryor asked me to train him. He was afraid going into the rematch with Arguello because Panama Lewis had been arrested and put in jail at the time, and he was the guy who trained him for the first fight, and even though he never admitted it in so many words, he told me that they were basically getting by with some kind of things that were not legal".