View Full Version : The 5 best fights of all time, What you guys think?


mrc213
03-08-2006, 09:12 PM
Who you guys think was the 5 best fights of all time?

I think

Frazier vs. Ali I
Gatti vs. Ward II
Ali vs. Sonny Liston
Rocky Marciano vs Willcot
Hagler vs. Leanord

Float like a butterfly and sting like a bee, I am the champ and will always be the champ, I'm Muhammad Ali
:boxing: :boxing: :boxing:

Winky
03-08-2006, 09:28 PM
Ali vs Frazier 1
Ali vs Frazier 3
Hagler vs Hearns
Morales vs Barerra 1
Corralles vs Castillo 1.

oldgringo
03-08-2006, 11:34 PM
Taylor/Chavez I
Ali/Frazier III
Hagler/Hearns
Castillo/Corrales I
Duran/Barkley

Dempsey 1919
03-09-2006, 01:22 AM
1. Ali-Frazier I (1971)
2. Ali-Frazier III (1975)
3. Dempsey-Firpo (1923)
4. Ali-Foreman (1974)
5. Foreman-Lyle (1976)

Southpaw Stinger
03-09-2006, 07:23 AM
Ali vs Frazier 3
Ali vs Frazier 1
Ali vs Foreman
Hagler vs Hearns
Dempsey vs Willard

I also like Tyson vs Berbick and Tyson vs Bruno 1

Dempsey 1919
03-09-2006, 01:44 PM
Ali vs Frazier 3
Ali vs Frazier 1
Ali vs Foreman
Hagler vs Hearns
Dempsey vs Willard

I also like Tyson vs Berbick and Tyson vs Bruno 1

that wasn't a great fight, that was just a killing!

Southpaw Stinger
03-09-2006, 02:11 PM
that wasn't a great fight, that was just a killing!

Thats why I like it!

Yogi
03-09-2006, 06:23 PM
Holmes/Ali
Berbick/Ali
Spinks/Ali I
Norton/Ali I
Bobick/Ali (Bobick won via Ali's poopy pants forfeit)

Dempsey 1919
03-09-2006, 06:27 PM
Holmes/Ali
Berbick/Ali
Spinks/Ali I
Norton/Ali I
Bobick/Ali (Bobick won via Ali's poopy pants forfeit)

i hope your joking.

Yogi
03-09-2006, 06:30 PM
i hope your joking.

Nope, not at all...But it looks like I may have confused the thread title of "best fights of all-time" with my personal choice of favourite fights of all-time.

Dempsey 1919
03-09-2006, 06:31 PM
Nope, not at all...But it looks like I may have confused the thread title of "best fights of all-time" with my personal choice of favourite fights of all-time.

so you actually like all those fights? :mad:

Yogi
03-09-2006, 06:46 PM
so you actually like all those fights? :mad:

Not just "like", Butterfly, as "love" would be the more appropriate description of how I feel.

I absolutely LOVE those fights!

Dempsey 1919
03-09-2006, 06:50 PM
Not just "like", Butterfly, as "love" would be the more appropriate description of how I feel.

I absolutely LOVE those fights!

i hope your joking.

RockyMarcianofan00
03-09-2006, 06:59 PM
Joe Louis v Max Schmeling II - short sweet and to the point
Rocky Marciano v Jersey Joe Walcott
Mike Tyson v Larry Holmes
Muhammad Ali v Joe Frazier I
Jack Dempsey v Gene Tunney (II i believe)

Dempsey1238
03-09-2006, 09:13 PM
Gans Nelson, a hour and 14 min footage I belive. GREAT fight.

Ali Fraizer 1

Marciano Walcott

Dempsey Tunney 2 complete of couse.

And 5, what would be 5. Louis Schmling 1. That fight was just amazing. Sure fight 2 is all for Louis and all. But the 12 round fight was something to see.

Da Iceman
03-10-2006, 07:22 AM
you have a sick mind if you like ali vs holmes.
anyways
ali vs frazier 1
ali vs frazier 3
louis vs schmeling 2
hagler vs hearns
tyson vs spinks

mrc213
03-10-2006, 01:56 PM
favourite fights best fight it don't matter just the 5 best in you eyes

Dempsey 1919
03-10-2006, 02:55 PM
favourite fights best fight it don't matter just the 5 best in you eyes

well, these are my favorite fights.

1. cassius clay vs. sonny liston I 1964 (clay's coming out party)
2. muhammad ali vs. cleveland williams 1966 (saw how good ali really was)
3. jack johnson vs stanley ketchel 1909 (lol! :D )
4. jack dempsey vs. jess willard 1919 (savage beating)
5. mike tyson vs. reggie gross 1986 (also lol! :D )

Yaman
03-10-2006, 05:53 PM
1-Tyson vs Berbick
2-Tyson vs Bruno 1 or 2
3-Foreman vs Frazier 1
4-Roy Jones vs James Toney
5-Holyfield vs Bowe 1

Great fights.

Two Fisted Piston
03-10-2006, 06:35 PM
Maybe not the greatest but my favourite...

Ward vs Gatti 1
Pacman vs Morales 1
Kelley vs Gainer 1
Holyfield vs Bowe 1
De La Hoya vs Vargas
Benn vs McClellan( great fight but sad)
McClellan vs Jackson 1 & 2
Corrales vs Castillo 1
Mayweather vs Corrales

Two Fisted Piston
03-10-2006, 06:37 PM
Oh yeah and JMM vs Pacman

Johnny Blayzz
03-10-2006, 07:14 PM
Ali could possibly fill this in by himself with what he did in the ring but I'd like to add Duran, Leonard, Hagler and Robinson to the list of "5 fighters" who could be a part of a top 5 all time fight for the abilty to live up to the Hype all the time... with no disrespect the the many fighters who could also top the same list.

Heckler
03-11-2006, 11:10 PM
Nope, not at all...But it looks like I may have confused the thread title of "best fights of all-time" with my personal choice of favourite fights of all-time.


Why are you completely obsessed with bobick? can you even give us a link relating to ali ducking bobick? Why would Ali duck bobick? He never ducked Foreman, Frazier, Lyle, Shavers? Went on to fight Holmes when he had nothing left in the tank? Why the **** of all people, would he duck bobick? It defies logic.

Yogi
03-12-2006, 05:05 PM
Why are you completely obsessed with bobick? can you even give us a link relating to ali ducking bobick? Why would Ali duck bobick? He never ducked Foreman, Frazier, Lyle, Shavers? Went on to fight Holmes when he had nothing left in the tank? Why the **** of all people, would he duck bobick? It defies logic.

Yeah sure, I'm guilty of being "completely obsessed" with a guy that I've brought up what...once, maybe twice in the last four or five months?

If that constitutes being "completely obessesed" with a fighter, what the hell is the proper wording for you & others who feel this need to talk about Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Marciano, etc, etc, nearly every single day that I log on here?

And I've already stated my source on here a few times as to where I got that info and therefore formed my opinion, which just happens to be the same opinion as the MSG matchmaker/president of that time...

Teddy Brenner's contemporary opinion on that Ali/Bobick situation is ~> than some Ali fan's opinion on a message board some 30 years later.

Do you own a library card, Heckler?

If so, head down to your local library, check out Brenner's book "Only The Ring Was Square", and then come back and tell me that the actual MSG matchmaker/president from that time is completely wrong in what he wrote in that book...Ok?

Yogi
03-12-2006, 05:08 PM
P.S. Hindsight is different, Heckler.

Heckler
03-12-2006, 05:23 PM
Ive never heard one reputable historian say that Ali ducked bobick, obviously brenner did though. I respect your opinion i just dont understand it, one guy comes out claiming Ali ducked bobick and you agree with it even though it completely defies logic. Its not a widely believed theory, nor one that is common knowledge throughout the boxing community. I just can't understand why Ali would duck an average joe boxer (knocked out easily by norton and JOHN TATE, Only win against an opponent worth mention THE MIGHTY CHUCK WEPNER) at that time when he went on to fight superior, more intimidating opposition

leff
03-12-2006, 05:41 PM
ali frazier 1
ali frazier 3
foreman lyle
dempsey willard
marciano walcot1

Yogi
03-12-2006, 05:59 PM
Ive never heard one reputable historian say that Ali ducked bobick, obviously brenner did though. I respect your opinion i just dont understand it, one guy comes out claiming Ali ducked bobick and you agree with it even though it completely defies logic. Its not a widely believed theory, nor one that is common knowledge throughout the boxing community. I just can't understand why Ali would duck an average joe boxer (knocked out easily by norton and JOHN TATE, Only win against an opponent worth mention THE MIGHTY CHUCK WEPNER) at that time when he went on to fight superior, more intimidating opposition

You've got to consider the source, Heckler, as it wasn't only "one guy"...it was the guy who was most responsible for doing the work in putting that whole Ali/Bobick, Norton/Lyle card together, and actually signed the fights.

If you were to read that book by Brenner, you would probably (almost definately) see that the guy came across as being completely honest all throughout...The whole book is littered with "tell it like it is" insider stories, including excellant details from the talked about Moore/Robinson fight, the background behind the controversial Gavilan/Graham fight, fixed fights in both the U.S and in Europe (involving Urtain), etc., etc...Lots of very detailed "insiders" stuff that you probably won't find on the internet, including very good details surrounding the whole Ali/Bobick situation.

And see...your comments about Bobick there is why I followed up with that "P.S." comment about hindsight being different. Bobick was not considered no "average joe boxer" at that time, as he had an undefeated record of 38-0 with the vast majority of those wins being via the knockout route...He was also the talk of the Heavyweight scene around that time (his photo frequented the cover for the boxing magazines, as well as getting featured stories written about him in magazines that had nothing with the sport...like People Magazine and the like) and was considered a very dangerous opponent. Hindsight tells us that he wasn't as good as the hype that surrounded him at that time, but in late 1976/early 1977 when the Ali/Bobick fight was discussed, he wasn't percived as the faulty fighter that we view him nowadays...He was considered a very dangerous opponent by the boxing community, as evidence by his high ranking inside the top three or four, the tremendous amount of hype & many stories written on him in the boxing mags, the undefeated record, and the fact that he was considered a "pick 'em" when he stepped in there against Norton (who had just outfought Ali in their third encounter and might've generally been viewed as sort of the uncrowned champion).

smasher
03-12-2006, 09:08 PM
Ive never heard one reputable historian say that Ali ducked bobick, obviously brenner did though. I respect your opinion i just dont understand it, one guy comes out claiming Ali ducked bobick and you agree with it even though it completely defies logic. Its not a widely believed theory, nor one that is common knowledge throughout the boxing community. I just can't understand why Ali would duck an average joe boxer (knocked out easily by norton and JOHN TATE, Only win against an opponent worth mention THE MIGHTY CHUCK WEPNER) at that time when he went on to fight superior, more intimidating opposition

I read the book years ago (yes I got it from the library) so to the best of my 20 year plus memory I will try to accurately recall what Yogi is alluding to (and attempting to bait you and butterfly if you haven't figured it out by now).

Now, Bobick did have an impressive albeit padded record at the time and was being touted as a legitimate heavyweight championship threat.

From what I remember reading about that potential fight, Ali saw Bobick at the time as being a potential risk, and because Bobick was white, Ali was apprehensive of taking the fight. The reason being that Ali did not want to lose the title to a white man as he felt it may diminish him as a black role model.

How's my memory Yogi? It has been a long time.

You have to take into account this is Brenner's spin on the story and whether it is embelished or exaggerated only those close to the story would know for sure. Remember, Brenner had a book to sell so it always makes sense to provide and elaborate on every all-important "little known fact" angle. Take what you want from it. I take very little from it. The very fact that this is never referred to by any biographical or historical account of Ali leaves me to wonder just how apprehensive Ali really was, or was it really just a preference that he would rather lose his title to a black man if he were to lose it at all.

When Ali fought Trevor Berbick the plan (if Ali had have won) was for him to next challenge Mike Weaver for the WBA title. Ali (again if he had have won) then wanted a huge money unification showdown with the winner of Holmes-Cooney to which Ali publicly stated at the time he thought Cooney would win. Sounded like the 40 year old Ali (after allegedly ducking Bobick according to Brenner) was targeting the more dangerous Cooney...

lidsy
03-12-2006, 09:57 PM
Thrilla in Manilla
Hagler/Hearns
Duran/SRL 1
MAB/Morrales 1
Correlas/Castillo 1

sleazyfellow
03-12-2006, 10:16 PM
srr-fullmer (the one where srr landed the left hook)
archie moore/durell
ali/frazier 1
srl/hearns
hagler/hearns

not my personal top 5 list just 5 off the top of my head

Yogi
03-12-2006, 10:20 PM
From what I remember reading about that potential fight, Ali saw Bobick at the time as being a potential risk, and because Bobick was white, Ali was apprehensive of taking the fight. The reason being that Ali did not want to lose the title to a white man as he felt it may diminish him as a black role model.

How's my memory Yogi? It has been a long time.

Your memory is good, Smasher...really good if you haven't read the book in 20+ years, because Brenner did mention the fact that Bobick being a white Heavyweight might have had something to do with Ali backing out of the fight by announcing his retirement.

What we do know is that in Nov of '76, Ali signed to defend against Bobick, which was scheduled to be a part of a MSG doubleheader with Norton/Lyle as the co-feature. We also know that some time after signing to fight Bobick, Ali announced his retirement from the ring, only to see him announce a comeback soon after the Norton/Bobick fight was signed in the place of the doubleheader (we saw Ali face Evangelista around the same time as Norton/Bobick took place). And we also know that MSG filed a breach of contract lawsuit against Ali after Ali backed out of the signed & scheduled fight with Bobick...Those are the facts that we know of.

Now Brenner did eventually state his personal opinion that Ali backed out of the Bobick fight because of Bobick being a percieved dangerous white Heavyweight, but he stated something along the lines that Ali only backed out once he started believing all of the tremendous hype surrounding Bobick at the time (Ali did originally sign to fight that same white Heavyweight afterall)...Those are Brenner's personal opinions on what was going through Ali's head, which may or may not be accurate. But the facts that he stated in the book, of which can also be found elsewhere, clearly show that Ali signed for and then ducked out of a scheduled title defense against Duane Bobick.

smasher
03-12-2006, 11:41 PM
Your memory is good, Smasher...really good if you haven't read the book in 20+ years, because Brenner did mention the fact that Bobick being a white Heavyweight might have had something to do with Ali backing out of the fight by announcing his retirement.

What we do know is that in Nov of '76, Ali signed to defend against Bobick, which was scheduled to be a part of a MSG doubleheader with Norton/Lyle as the co-feature. We also know that some time after signing to fight Bobick, Ali announced his retirement from the ring, only to see him announce a comeback soon after the Norton/Bobick fight was signed in the place of the doubleheader (we saw Ali face Evangelista around the same time as Norton/Bobick took place). And we also know that MSG filed a breach of contract lawsuit against Ali after Ali backed out of the signed & scheduled fight with Bobick...Those are the facts that we know of.

Now Brenner did eventually state his personal opinion that Ali backed out of the Bobick fight because of Bobick being a percieved dangerous white Heavyweight, but he stated something along the lines that Ali only backed out once he started believing all of the tremendous hype surrounding Bobick at the time (Ali did originally sign to fight that same white Heavyweight afterall)...Those are Brenner's personal opinions on what was going through Ali's head, which may or may not be accurate. But the facts that he stated in the book, of which can also be found elsewhere, clearly show that Ali signed for and then ducked out of a scheduled title defense against Duane Bobick.

Essentially then, for whatever reason, Ali backed out of a signed fight with Bobick. Ali did say he was retiring after he fought Norton in September '76 (Sports Illustrated headline "NOT THE GREATEST WAY TO GO") and this signing was a mere two months afterwards. It could have been a case of Ali deciding to retire once and for all (after signing), then at a later date changing his mind (which he did countless times) when he realized the easy money to be made defending against opponents the likes of Evangelista. Considering that Ali fought the dangerous punching Ernie Shavers in 1977 at The Garden, it seems unlikely he was afraid of Bobick.

I have read and heard some questionable and historically inaccurate statements attributed to Brenner before, so I would take some of his opinions with a grain of salt at best.

Leave it to the posters north of the 49th to sort this one out, and for the record Ali by decision over Bobick and Lyle by KO over Norton .

smasher
03-13-2006, 03:22 AM
OK Yogi you owe me for this one. I wasn't far off. Heckler save yourself the trip to the library. Here is a copy of the actual legal document pertaining to the findings of the Ali-Bobick contract lawsuit.

http://www.lapres.net/msq.html

Ali won the lawsuit and a thorough read through hardly supports the contention that Ali ducked Bobick. Brenner made an error on the date of the contract which legally would deem it null and void. You guys can read the rest. Like I stated previously, take Brenner's account with a grain of salt. It might have been his way of trying to save face after he ****ed up the contract. Enjoy.

Frazier's 15th round
03-13-2006, 07:22 AM
Ali ducked fighters all the time. It's no surprise here, either.

Yogi
03-13-2006, 08:16 AM
OK Yogi you owe me for this one. I wasn't far off. Heckler save yourself the trip to the library. Here is a copy of the actual legal document pertaining to the findings of the Ali-Bobick contract lawsuit.

http://www.lapres.net/msq.html

Ali won the lawsuit and a thorough read through hardly supports the contention that Ali ducked Bobick. Brenner made an error on the date of the contract which legally would deem it null and void. You guys can read the rest. Like I stated previously, take Brenner's account with a grain of salt. It might have been his way of trying to save face after he ****ed up the contract. Enjoy.

Ok, Smasher...I've read that link that you've provided and all it does is says that Ali backed out of a signed agreement to face Bobick.

I'm also no lawyer, but according to that link that you gave, the fact that Brenner was off by a day didn't seem to have any bearing on the court's decision, as going along down the page they still spoke of it as a completely legitimate contract between the parties and not one that was percieved to be null & void.


Taken from that link;

"Ali's claim that there was no breach must fail. When Ali again announced his retirement, it was clearly a stated intention of his refusal to perform and was at least an anticipatory breach of the contract, and MSGB would have the right to sue for that breach.

Since MSGB did not bring an action at that time it is neccessary for the Court to examine its conduct to determine if the contract was then mutually rescinded or abandoned."


Now the follow up to that quoted statement says that since MSG didn't immediate enforce the contract (which was talked about as being still completely viable), and instead accepted Ali's repayment of the advance given & also enlisted his help in promoting the then signed Norton/Bobick, the court decided that the contract was "abandoned" by both parties after Ali's decision & subsequent announcement of his retirement...But that document does state that had MSG taken a different route with their business (like putting in a lawsuit earlier, and not enlisting Ali's help with the Norton/Bobick), then they would've been completely in the right in filing that lawsuit. And what the document also clearly states is that Ali signed an agreement to face Bobick, and then subsequently ducked out of that agreement by announcing his retirement.

I don't see where your link much contradicts what Brenner said in his book, Smasher.

Shanus
03-13-2006, 08:57 AM
Thrilla in Manilla IS the top 5 of all time.

DaGrandWiz
03-13-2006, 01:13 PM
for me its gatti ward 1, hagler hearns, hagler leonard, the thrilla in manilla and duran leonard 1. thats just my preference though in no particular order

smasher
03-13-2006, 01:24 PM
Ok, Smasher...I've read that link that you've provided and all it does is says that Ali backed out of a signed agreement to face Bobick.

I'm also no lawyer, but according to that link that you gave, the fact that Brenner was off by a day didn't seem to have any bearing on the court's decision, as going along down the page they still spoke of it as a completely legitimate contract between the parties and not one that was percieved to be null & void.


Taken from that link;

"Ali's claim that there was no breach must fail. When Ali again announced his retirement, it was clearly a stated intention of his refusal to perform and was at least an anticipatory breach of the contract, and MSGB would have the right to sue for that breach.

Since MSGB did not bring an action at that time it is neccessary for the Court to examine its conduct to determine if the contract was then mutually rescinded or abandoned."


Now the follow up to that quoted statement says that since MSG didn't immediate enforce the contract (which was talked about as being still completely viable), and instead accepted Ali's repayment of the advance given & also enlisted his help in promoting the then signed Norton/Bobick, the court decided that the contract was "abandoned" by both parties after Ali's decision & subsequent announcement of his retirement...But that document does state that had MSG taken a different route with their business (like putting in a lawsuit earlier, and not enlisting Ali's help with the Norton/Bobick), then they would've been completely in the right in filing that lawsuit. And what the document also clearly states is that Ali signed an agreement to face Bobick, and then subsequently ducked out of that agreement by announcing his retirement.

I don't see where your link much contradicts what Brenner said in his book, Smasher.

My line of work is in the legal field. If the date of service or date of issue on a contract or other legally binding document is incorrect, that contract or document becomes null and void unless there is an amendment made to the document and both the issuing and receiving parties sign the amendment. Otherwise a completely new contract would have to be drafted, re-served and re-signed.

What we see is that Ali was contemplating retirement when MSGB employee Brenner attempted the deal through Ali's management. A contract was drafted, and Brenner eventually travelled and met with Ali. Brenner then had Ali sign a contract to fight Bobick of which Brenner erroneously and incorrectly dated.

5 days later Ali announced that he was going to retire after all and wouldn't be fighting Bobick. Brenner and MSGB then immediately went to work on a Norton-Bobick fight. Nothing was discussed with Ali by Brenner ("it's over and done with") about the contract and any enforcement of the contract. MSGB in fact encouraged Ali to give a press conference announcing his retirement and to help hype the Norton-Bobick fight which he did.

On December 16 MSGB was contacted by letter and it was stated that Ali would fight Bobick or if Norton-Bobick was already committed then he would fight Bobick 4 months after the Norton-Bobick fight. Ali agreed to return his advance on training expenses if the deal was not done. Neither Brenner nor MSGB ever contacted Ali so he returned the training expenses.

The original contract WOULD NOT have been considered viable if there was an error on the date of service. It may not have been initially detected, however the fact that the incorrectly dated contract is pointed out in the judge's ruling demonstrates that this likely would have been a factor had the legitimacy of that contract come under question.

It never got to that stage because the main reason for the dismissal was based on the grounds that MSGB didn't bother to take any initial action regarding the enforcement of the original contract.

The Brenner spin (I never used the word contradiction, there's a difference) then is the following:

A) BRENNER MADE AN ERROR on the signing and service date of the contract which likely would have deemed it null and void had this become the issue of contention.

B) BRENNER MADE NO EFFORT to try and enforce the original contract.

C) Ali contacted Brenner by letter with an offer to fight Bobick at a later date to which BRENNER EITHER IGNORED OR CHOSE NOT TO RESPOND TO.

These errors and lack of action on Brenner's cost his employer MSGB a lot of money. Had Brenner served a valid contract then immediately taken action by attempting to enforce it, MSGB would have had a legitimate lawsuit and likely would have received compensation in monetary damages. It was Brenner's actions or lack of then that cost MSGB the lawsuit.

Do you get the picture that MSGB may have given their employee Brenner some heat over his negligence which ended up costing them a huge amount of money? Do you think then that Brenner just may have tried placing more blame on Ali in his book to cover for his own ineptness?

Dempsey 1919
03-13-2006, 03:25 PM
My line of work is in the legal field. If the date of service or date of issue on a contract or other legally binding document is incorrect, that contract or document becomes null and void unless there is an amendment made to the document and both the issuing and receiving parties sign the amendment. Otherwise a completely new contract would have to be drafted, re-served and re-signed.

What we see is that Ali was contemplating retirement when MSGB employee Brenner attempted the deal through Ali's management. A contract was drafted, and Brenner eventually travelled and met with Ali. Brenner then had Ali sign a contract to fight Bobick of which Brenner erroneously and incorrectly dated.

5 days later Ali announced that he was going to retire after all and wouldn't be fighting Bobick. Brenner and MSGB then immediately went to work on a Norton-Bobick fight. Nothing was discussed with Ali by Brenner ("it's over and done with") about the contract and any enforcement of the contract. MSGB in fact encouraged Ali to give a press conference announcing his retirement and to help hype the Norton-Bobick fight which he did.

On December 16 MSGB was contacted by letter and it was stated that Ali would fight Bobick or if Norton-Bobick was already committed then he would fight Bobick 4 months after the Norton-Bobick fight. Ali agreed to return his advance on training expenses if the deal was not done. Neither Brenner nor MSGB ever contacted Ali so he returned the training expenses.

The original contract WOULD NOT have been considered viable if there was an error on the date of service. It may not have been initially detected, however the fact that the incorrectly dated contract is pointed out in the judge's ruling demonstrates that this likely would have been a factor had the legitimacy of that contract come under question.

It never got to that stage because the main reason for the dismissal was based on the grounds that MSGB didn't bother to take any initial action regarding the enforcement of the original contract.

The Brenner spin (I never used the word contradiction, there's a difference) then is the following:

A) BRENNER MADE AN ERROR on the signing and service date of the contract which likely would have deemed it null and void had this become the issue of contention.

B) BRENNER MADE NO EFFORT to try and enforce the original contract.

C) Ali contacted Brenner by letter with an offer to fight Bobick at a later date to which BRENNER EITHER IGNORED OR CHOSE NOT TO RESPOND TO.

These errors and lack of action on Brenner's cost his employer MSGB a lot of money. Had Brenner served a valid contract then immediately taken action by attempting to enforce it, MSGB would have had a legitimate lawsuit and likely would have received compensation in monetary damages. It was Brenner's actions or lack of then that cost MSGB the lawsuit.

Do you get the picture that MSGB may have given their employee Brenner some heat over his negligence which ended up costing them a huge amount of money? Do you think then that Brenner just may have tried placing more blame on Ali in his book to cover for his own ineptness?

nice post.

Yogi
03-13-2006, 07:27 PM
Do you get the picture that MSGB may have given heir employee Brenner some heat over his negligence which ended up costing them a huge amount of money? Do you think then that Brenner just may have tried placing more blame on Ali in his book to cover for his own ineptness?

No, I don't, because I don't see their thoughts in that link, nor have I ever read the hierarchy of MSG's views on that whole situation. You're making an assumption or guesstimation on what they may or may not have felt towards Brenner, which is easily done on both sides of the fence and here's a quick example of such; Brenner may have not forced the issue with Ali because of their "friendship" and the great respect he seemed to have had for the aging champion, as well as prefering his help in the promotion of the subsequently signed Norton/Bobick fight (all those may have been damaged if immediate action was taken) etc., etc...Something like that, but who the hell knows, right?

Now you're going on about Brenner initially signing the wrong date on the contract, which, besides that small mention of it in the link, doesn't seem to be an issue with that court. Whether the date was amended by Brenner & Ali, it doesn't say one way or the other...But the document you linked to does continue to speak of that contract as being completely viable, including all down the page.

I quote again;

"When Ali announced his retirement, it was clearly a Stated intention of his refusal to perform and was at least an anticipatory breach of the contract, and MSG would have the right to sue for that breach.

Since MSG did not bring an action at that time it is necessary for the Court to examine its conduct to determine if the contract was then mutually rescinded or abandoned."

The document briefly mentions the date error earlier, but to me those two quoted statements there clearly shows that the courts considered the agreement that Ali signed as still being completely legitimate & viable, as do other statements from that document (because they did so, should I take one of your views and make an assumption that the contract's date was corrected without knowing for sure?).

Ali's Dec 16th letter to MSG is funny, but only because he was very well aware that Norton/Bobick was already signed & agreed to take place (the whole boxing world knew on Dec 7th of that year, when the confirmed Norton/Bobick fight was announced in the papers) , which he just happened to be helping with promotion of said event...Should I make one of your guesstimations & assume Ali heard rumblings about him being a chicken**** or something in his ear or possibly the press, and in an attempt to maybe save face, he then issued the letter stating that he'd fight an already "busy" fighter?

To me, the whole issue of the date on the contract is irrelevant because, besides a small mention, the court obviously didn't give it much relevance by continueing to talk about it as a viable contract (again, we don't know if the contract's date was amended or not). The may Brennner & MSG handled the lawsuit also has little irrelevance to me, because it doesn't change the fact of how Ali himself acted...To me the whole bottom line is Ali signed an agreement with his intentions to face Bobick, and soon after & for whatever reason(s), ducked out of that agreement by announcing his retirement. Or as you own personal link states, which is also along the lines of what Brenner states in his book;

"When Ali announced his retirement, it was CLEARLY a Stated intention of his refusal to perform"

smasher
03-14-2006, 12:23 AM
...To me the whole bottom line is Ali signed an agreement with his intentions to face Bobick, and soon after & for whatever reason(s), ducked out of that agreement by announcing his retirement. [/B]

Where do I begin? Firstly, I have close to 20 years experience in the legal field and have spent much of that time in courtrooms and courthouses dealing with Judges and lawyers and have examined many transcribed Judge's decisions, as well as prepared and examined many notice of motions, certified legal documents, etc.... So on the civial legality issues I raise pertaining to MSGB vs Muhammad Ali I will stick to the letter of the law which is supported by case law in the civil, criminal and Supreme Courts.

In a civil matter such as this, the Plaintiff, (MSGB) would have filed a written lawsuit outlining the allegations while the Defendant's (Ali's) Counsel would have responded to those allegations also in writing. Before wasting the court's time with a full blown and costly trial, a District Court Judge would compare the written statements from both the Plaintiff and Defendant in this case MSGB vs Muhammad Ali and determine if there is merit to the lawsuit. The Judge in this matter, Judge Crowley saw reason to dismiss the lawsuit on other issues before addressing the improper date issue. The very reason the improper date was mentioned in the summation would have been because Ali's Counsel would have raised it in their written response. This is not an assumption. Any legal Counsel that wouldn't raise this important issue would quite frankly be Counsel not worth their weight in salt.

For a contract or any legal document to be legally binding it must be signed and properly dated. There was never any mention in this document of anyone meeting with Ali after the initial contract was signed, something that Judge Crowley's transcribed summation (which is what this document actually is) would have mentioned as this would have been an issue raised by the defendant's Counsel. Judge Crowley must cover and address all the Plaintiff's allegations and Defendant's response in his summation to prevent an appeal based on grounds that he may have erred by not addressing an important issue. So your point that the date issue is irrelevant is incorrect. The improper date issue didn't have to be dealt with directly because Judge Crowley dismissed the lawsuit on the grounds that a suit was not filed immediately and there was no effort to enforce the contract. Had these facts not been grounds for dismissal, the improper date issue and the actual validity of said contract would have been examined more thoroughly, however it never got to that point.

Judge Crowley's statements regarding Ali's breach of contract falls short of saying an actual breach but an anticipatory breach. Judge Crowley's statements are once again required to validate that MSGB did have the right to sue to again prevent Ali's Counsel from counter-suing MSGB for filing a wrongful suit, in essence covering all the bases to prevent a re-opening of the case.

Now historically speaking and supported by Judge Crowley's summation, Ali announced his retirement in a press conference while in Istanbul after the Norton fight. After announcing his retirement Brenner did his negotiating for a Bobick fight directly with Herbert Muhammad. Ali's limited role in these negotiations appears that he signed the contract that Brenner presented him with. As far as I am aware Ali never formally announced he was coming back, and didn't hold any press conference stating his intention of fighting Bobick. So Ali didn't suddenly announce his retirement after signing for Bobick, he was already on record as having held a press conference in Istanbul and announcing his retirement. Instead it appears he had second thoughts about continuing to fight and instead just chose to stick to his guns and remain retired for whatever reasons.

Upon hearing this, MSGB immediately had Ali yet again announce his retirement (again, he had already done so in Istanbul and in the newspapers) then announced Norton-Bobick (according to you) on December 7. Ali then announced on December 16 he would fight Bobick after all. Now Yogi what would be a bigger money fight at that time, Norton-Bobick or Ali-Bobick?

If MSGB really wanted to stage the Ali-Bobick fight all they would have to do was pay Norton step aside money (I assume Norton's contract was already signed). Do you think Norton would have accepted oh say a million dollars to not fight Bobick with a guaranteed shot at the winner? That deal could have been done very easily and step aside money is used quite often as was the case with Lewis and Tyson a few years back. One million dollars would not have been alot of money to pay Norton when you consider the kind of money Ali-Bobick would have raked in. As we know Brenner as matchmaker for MSGB didn't do this.

So then Yogi you have to ask yourself why would MSGB sue Ali? Very simple. To recoup money they lost on the Norton-Bobick fight in comparison to what they would have made on an Ali-Bobick fight. Can you think of a more valid reason?

The lawsuit was dismissed by Judge Crowley due to MSGB not filing suit immediately as well as not taking action to enforce the contract. Teddy Brenner was the MSGB matchmaker for Ali-Bobick and thus it was his job to make the fights, prepare the contracts and obviously follow up on any breach.

It is known that Brenner was very fond of Ali and had in effect mixed business with pleasure and not taken a hard line stance with Ali which ultimately cost MSGB enough money that they deemed it appropriate to file a lawsuit.

If Brenner isn't the fall guy for MSGB losing millions of dollars then who is Yogi?

Do you honestly think Ali ducked Bobick or merely was undecided about continuing to fight when he initially signed the contract which was after not before he announced his retirement.

Yogi
03-14-2006, 02:29 AM
Now historically speaking and supported by Judge Crowley's summation, Ali announced his retirement in a press conference while in Istanbul after the Norton fight. After announcing his retirement Brenner did his negotiating for a Bobick fight directly with Herbert Muhammad. Ali's limited role in these negotiations appears that he signed the contract that Brenner presented him with. As far as I am aware Ali never formally announced he was coming back, and didn't hold any press conference stating his intention of fighting Bobick. So Ali didn't suddenly announce his retirement after signing for Bobick, he was already on record as having held a press conference in Istanbul and announcing his retirement. Instead it appears he had second thoughts about continuing to fight and instead just chose to stick to his guns and remain retired for whatever reasons.

Upon hearing this, MSGB immediately had Ali yet again announce his retirement (again, he had already done so in Istanbul and in the newspapers) then announced Norton-Bobick (according to you) on December 7. Ali then announced on December 16 he would fight Bobick after all. Now Yogi what would be a bigger money fight at that time, Norton-Bobick or Ali-Bobick?

If MSGB really wanted to stage the Ali-Bobick fight all they would have to do was pay Norton step aside money (I assume Norton's contract was already signed). Do you think Norton would have accepted oh say a million dollars to not fight Bobick with a guaranteed shot at the winner? That deal could have been done very easily and step aside money is used quite often as was the case with Lewis and Tyson a few years back. One million dollars would not have been alot of money to pay Norton when you consider the kind of money Ali-Bobick would have raked in. As we know Brenner as matchmaker for MSGB didn't do this.

So then Yogi you have to ask yourself why would MSGB sue Ali? Very simple. To recoup money they lost on the Norton-Bobick fight in comparison to what they would have made on an Ali-Bobick fight. Can you think of a more valid reason?

The lawsuit was dismissed by Judge Crowley due to MSGB not filing suit immediately as well as not taking action to enforce the contract. Teddy Brenner was the MSGB matchmaker for Ali-Bobick and thus it was his job to make the fights, prepare the contracts and obviously follow up on any breach.

It is known that Brenner was very fond of Ali and had in effect mixed business with pleasure and not taken a hard line stance with Ali which ultimately cost MSGB enough money that they deemed it appropriate to file a lawsuit.

If Brenner isn't the fall guy for MSGB losing millions of dollars then who is Yogi?

Do you honestly think Ali ducked Bobick or merely was undecided about continuing to fight when he initially signed the contract which was after not before he announced his retirement.

I'm going to ignore all that legal mumble-jumble for now, because, besides the fact that this post may be long at it is, not only do not have a background in law, but to me all that stuff doesn't change the fact that Ali signed a deal with his personal intentions to defend against Bobick and soon after & for whatever reason, ducked out of his original intentions by announcing his retirement.

Ali did announce his retirement from boxing shortly after the third Norton fight, which was a common practice of his through the latter stages of his career (it's certainly not the only time he announced that immediately after a fight). But what you admit you're not aware of is the fact that Ali also did in fact publicly announce a return to the ring via a press conferance in Houston, which took place on November 22nd of that year, I believe...

"Ali Sees Foreman (and Bobick) in Future And Changes Retirement Plans Again" - article heading in the Nov 23rd edition of the New York Times, which goes on to speak on Ali's planned return to the ring

Contrary to what you believe, Ali was in fact on public record stating that he had in fact intentions on returning to the ring after the third Norton fight and before signing the agreement to face Bobick.

"Instead it appears he had second thoughts about continuing to fight and instead just chose to stick to his guns and remain retired for whatever reason."

Or, seeing as how he obviously didn't "stick to his guns" as evidence by the fact that he came back and continued fighting, one may look at it as him not wanting to risk his title against what may be a dangerous opponent...He seemed quite willing to defend against someone like Evangelista and was very open to the idea of defending against Alfio Righetti, as well (Don King basically said that that fight was agreed upon in principle, which was right after the Evangelista "fight"). I know, I know, he defended against Earnie Shavers. Yeah, a good name & dangerous albeit one-dimensional puncher, but at the end of 1976 Shavers wasn't considered a top ten contender by Ring Magazine and had only snuck into the rankings the fight before facing Ali. Hindsight tells us different, but at that very time Shavers wasn't considered at the level Bobick was by the boxing public (magazines, newspapers, etc.). And unlike Bobick who was still undefeated when the Ali/Bobick signing took place, Shavers had already lost a number of times...meaning Shavers' weaknesses were known and displayed in the past, whereas, like basically any undefeated fighter, Bobick's was not entirely known at that time...

With an unsigned, but agreed match against Righetti, and actual title defenses against the lesser ranked guys like Evangelista, Spinks, Shavers (who was still ranked one spot beind Bobick at the end of '77, even after Norton bounced the right hands off Bobick's head)), it certainly does appear to me that Ali wanted to take the easiest & less dangerous route in the later years of his career...God knows he certainly gave Norton the run-around when Norton tried to get and was in position to recieve another shot (forcing Norton to fight the eliminator with Young, having the WBC push back quite a few deadlines to sign against Norton, etc.), which he certainly deserved.

"Do you think Norton would have accepted oh say a million dollars to not fight with a guaranteed shot at the winner?"

Who knows...he might have or might not have. But I do know that Norton signed for only a mere two hundred grand when he was promised the next shot at Ali's conqueror, Leon Spinks, which does suggest that Norton wasn't all about the benjamins and instead put much more importance in getting the title shot.

"So then Yogi you have to ask yourself why would MSGB sue Ali? Can you think of a more valid reason?"

Yes I can, and my answer is also very simple, as well as being factual. Unlike yourself, I don't have to guesstimate what their reasons were and will instead go on the facts that were presented...They sued Ali because Ali had signed an agreement to defend against Bobick and then ducked out of said agreement by announcing his retirement some time later. Both your court document & Brenner's book agree with these factual occurances and are consistent with each other. And to answer your last paragraph...yes, I do believe Ali ducked out of a fight against Bobick, because the facts state it as such.


Ok, in addition to the law and stuff, I'm quite sure I missed a couple of questions or statements, which I'd like to respond to or speak of. But this post has been long enough and I'm kinda tired of typing. It's also late and I need to get up early tomorrow morning, so... I'll/We'll continue this tomorrow at some time, my friend.

smasher
03-14-2006, 03:00 AM
Yes I can, and my answer is also very simple, as well as being factual. Unlike yourself, I don't have to guesstimate what their reasons were and will instead go on the facts that were presented...They sued Ali because Ali had signed an agreement to defend against Bobick and then ducked out of said agreement by announcing his retirement some time later.

Please. "Unlike yourself?" "I don't have to guesstimate?" Pretty judgemental statement to make about me considering my 20 year professional knowledge and experience of the legalities of a civil lawsuit. Especially since you have chosen to ignore my informative explanation of what you term "legal mumbo jumbo". Take the time to get off your high horse for a moment, you may actually learn something useful.

Lawsuits are launched so that Plaintiffs can be re-imbursed for damages suffered. No other reasons. That's not a 'guesstimate', that's legal fact. In filing the legal papers pertaining to a civil lawsuit, the losses suffered and requested monetary settlement must be specified or there is no suit, plain and simple. This lawsuit would never have made it as far as Judge Crowley and The District Court without MSGB specifically stating what financial re-imbursement they were seeking from Muhammad Ali.

Muhammad Ali was sued by MSGB for money. Period.

Yogi
03-14-2006, 04:05 AM
Please. "Unlike yourself?" "I don't have to guesstimate?" Pretty judgemental statement to make about me considering my 20 year professional knowledge and experience of the legalities of a civil lawsuit. Especially since you have chosen to ignore my informative explanation of what you term "legal mumbo jumbo". Take the time to get off your high horse for a moment, you may actually learn something useful.

Lawsuits are launched so that Plaintiffs can be re-imbursed for damages suffered. No other reasons. That's not a 'guesstimate', that's legal fact. In filing the legal papers pertaining to a civil lawsuit, the losses suffered and requested monetary settlement must be specified or there is no suit, plain and simple. This lawsuit would never have made it as far as Judge Crowley and The District Court without MSGB specifically stating what financial re-imbursement they were seeking from Muhammad Ali.

Muhammad Ali was sued by MSGB for money. Period.

Ah, yeah, I read that part about MSG seeking damages the first time I read your linked document and I'm also aware of why people sue others in regards to financial reasons.

But what I don't recall in that document you linked is the actual amount to what MSG was seeking, therefore your statement of them looking for the difference between what they would've made for Ali/Bobick and Norton/Bobick does seem like a guesstimate, because unless you have something else in your back pocket that directly & factual states what the exact damages seeked by MSG were (which would then also correlate with the differences between the two fight deals), then you can't make a claim to what they were actual seeking as factual. For all we know there may have been other "damages" that weren't directly linked to what the two promotions did make or may have made financially...My answer to that particular question of yours was very bottom line and dealt with the facts to only that case as we know them, which shows that MSG was sueing Ali because Ali signed an agreement and soon after backed out of said agreement. Bottom line & according to the facts pertaining to the case as we know them, that IS the factual reason why MSG wanted to bring that case to court. Any other theories or opinions are only going to be guesstimates and/or assumptions.

Now if I was to "take the time to get off my high horse" and "learn something useful" about legalities and such, is that then going to change the facts that Ali signed a contract with intentions on meeting Bobick and then soon after ducked out of that agreement by announcing his retirement?

Somehow I'd very, very strongly doubt that.

P.S. According to an AP report, in March of 1977, Ali was also discussing & seeking a possible showdown with the immortal, Lorenzo Zanon...Just threw that in for purposes illustrated in my previous post.

Monsi
03-14-2006, 10:32 AM
Lloyd Honeyghan v Don Curry was a classic

smasher
03-14-2006, 10:51 AM
But what I don't recall in that document you linked is the actual amount to what MSG was seeking

then you can't make a claim to what they were actual seeking as factual.

MSG was sueing Ali because Ali signed an agreement and soon after backed out of said agreement. Bottom line & according to the facts pertaining to the case as we know them, that IS the factual reason why MSG wanted to bring that case to court. Any other theories or opinions are only going to be guesstimates and/or assumptions.

The document I linked was Judge Crowley's summation in other words his legal findings and decision on the case before the court. It would not have included the specific dollar amount being sought unless the decision was in favour of the Plaintiff at which time it would have been stated in the last line of the summation. This summation was in favour of The Defendant, Muhammad Ali.

Once again if monetary damages were not being sought then the lawsuit could not have even been filed. THAT IS WHAT A CIVIL LAWSUIT IS. The dollar amount being sought must be included. Once again that is not a theory, opinion, guesstimate, or assumption. What is it about a CIVIL LAWSUIT that you do not understand?

Also understand that Ali did not legally breach the contract. There was at least an aticipatory breach. You cannot legally breach or duck out of a contract a mere days after signing it when the date of the fight would have been set for months later. It was MSGB's job to make efforts and take action on the potential contract breach before MSGB requested Ali hold a press conference to announce his retirement so they could quickly announce Norton-Bobick. These are the facts and this is why MSGB failed in their civil lawsuit attempt and why an actual trial on this allegation never saw the light of day.

Contract disputes are as old as boxing itself and that was what this was essentially. A boxer changing his mind after signing a contract is nothing new. Ali is not the first great fighter to do this. The difference here is that Brenner "didn't want to sacrifice a frienship" and considered the matter "over and done with", instead of taking steps to enforce that contract like a promotor is supposed to.

Your statement of so-called fact that "Ali signed a contract with intentions on meeting Bobick then soon after ducked out of that agreement by announcing his retirement" IS NOT supported by the findings of The District Court.

I'll go with the presiding Judge Crowley's documented court decision over Yogi's opinion on this allegation.

Yogi
03-14-2006, 05:22 PM
The document I linked was Judge Crowley's summation in other words his legal findings and decision on the case before the court. It would not have included the specific dollar amount being sought unless the decision was in favour of the Plaintiff at which time it would have been stated in the last line of the summation. This summation was in favour of The Defendant, Muhammad Ali.

Once again if monetary damages were not being sought then the lawsuit could not have even been filed. THAT IS WHAT A CIVIL LAWSUIT IS. The dollar amount being sought must be included. Once again that is not a theory, opinion, guesstimate, or assumption. What is it about a CIVIL LAWSUIT that you do not understand?

Also understand that Ali did not legally breach the contract. There was at least an aticipatory breach. You cannot legally breach or duck out of a contract a mere days after signing it when the date of the fight would have been set for months later. It was MSGB's job to make efforts and take action on the potential contract breach before MSGB requested Ali hold a press conference to announce his retirement so they could quickly announce Norton-Bobick. These are the facts and this is why MSGB failed in their civil lawsuit attempt and why an actual trial on this allegation never saw the light of day.

Contract disputes are as old as boxing itself and that was what this was essentially. A boxer changing his mind after signing a contract is nothing new. Ali is not the first great fighter to do this. The difference here is that Brenner "didn't want to sacrifice a frienship" and considered the matter "over and done with", instead of taking steps to enforce that contract like a promotor is supposed to.

Your statement of so-called fact that "Ali signed a contract with intentions on meeting Bobick then soon after ducked out of that agreement by announcing his retirement" IS NOT supported by the findings of The District Court.

I'll go with the presiding Judge Crowley's documented court decision over Yogi's opinion on this allegation.

Again, I'm well aware of what people are seeking when they take others to court, so there's really no need to stress those points. But this part of our conversation started when you presented me this question, which included your personal answer to said question;

"So then Yogi you have to ask yourself why would MSGB sue Ali? Very simple. To recoup money they lost on the Norton-Bobick fight in comparision to what they would have made on an Ali-Bobick fight. Can you think of a more valid reason?"

My answer to WHY MSG was attempting to sue Ali was the very bottom line to your question and as the route of it all, was the correct answer. Even your linked document says as such in the opening lines; "Madison Square Garden Boxing, Inc. (MSGB) brought this action against Muhammad Ali (Ali), the heavyweight champion of the world, for breach of contract to fight Duane Bobick (Bobick) in Madison Square Garden."...

Your answer to the same question was what MSGB might or might not have been seeking with the attempted lawsuit, and there's no such record of what exactly they were seeking besides the vague description of "damages" (which might or not not have been the difference between the two promotions...you and I don't know that, therefore your answer is a "guesstimate"). In fact your statement is inaccurate even with what we know of what MSG was seeking in compensation, because your document also claims they were looking for an "injuctive relief", which, correct me if I'm wrong, seems to be asking the courts to stop Ali from fighting and making money anywhere else besides MSG.

My answer to why MSGB attempted to sue Ali was bottom line and the factual correct answer as we know it. Whereas your answer to the same question was more along the lines of what they may or may not have been seeking in "damages".

And how Brenner or MSG handled the situation right after Ali announced his retirement doesn't change Ali's actions during the proceedings. Circumstances state that Brenner & Co could have handled things different and if done so, they would have stood a better chance in the lawsuit...

But you and I both know that Ali signed a contract with intentions of fighting Bobick in MSG. That was what Ali did and that's a documented fact. Also, you and I both know that for whatever reason(s), some time after signing with intentions to fight Bobick, Ali had a change of mind/heart about fighting that opponent and announced his retirement instead...And contrary to what you state, those facts are in the findings of The District Court, because they're clearly listed right there in the document. The court didn't side with MSG in that case, which seemed due to Brenner or MSG not taking immediate action & other things (like asking for Ali's help in the Norton/Bobick promotion, etc.), and they found that because of the circumstances both parties had abandoned the contract...That was what the court found, but that doesn't change two simple facts about Ali that you and I both know happened;

1. He signed a deal with intentions to fight Bobick

2. He soon after backed out of said deal with with intentions to retire.

With the focus only on what Ali's actions were at that time, which are documented facts...Yes, to me that clearly is representation of someone clearly ducking out of a commitment to fight.

RockyMarcianofan00
03-14-2006, 05:39 PM
alright thats it i'm making a thread in the Fantasy Fights section Yogi vs Smasher

because you both have got rediculously good grammar and you right in setences and its time to see who will win

Yogi
03-14-2006, 05:52 PM
alright thats it i'm making a thread in the Fantasy Fights section Yogi vs Smasher

because you both have got rediculously good grammar and you right in setences and its time to see who will win

In the promotion that would fittingly be called "Two Old Geezers at Caesers II", I not only have a couple of months youth on my side, but also I have the important benefit of training & breathing in the fresh mountain air of British Columbia...Unlike Smasher, who is forced to train in the lowlands around Toronto and has to breath in that ever present & snicky ass smog in preparation.

hellfire508
03-14-2006, 08:33 PM
IMO the best are:

Gatti-Ward 1
Morales-Barrera 1
Ali-Frazier III
Ali-Frazier I
Leonard-Duran 1

I would like to put Corrales-Castillo in there, maybe it should be.

My favourites are:
Arturo Gatti vs Micky Ward I
Erik Morales vs Marco Antonio Barrera I
Muhammad Ali vs Joe Frazier I
Muhammad Ali vs Joe Frazier III
Arturo Gatti vs Ivan Robinson I
Erik Morales vs Manny Pacquiao I
Oscar De La Hoya vs Arturo Gatti
Oscar De La Hoya vs Fernando Vargas
Kostya Tszyu vs Miguel Angel Gonzalez
Sugar Ray Leonard vs Roberto Duran I
Muhammad Ali vs George Foreman

smasher
03-14-2006, 08:34 PM
In the promotion that would fittingly be called "Two Old Geezers at Caesers II", I not only have a couple of months youth on my side, but also I have the important benefit of training & breathing in the fresh mountain air of British Columbia...Unlike Smasher, who is forced to train in the lowlands around Toronto and has to breath in that ever present & snicky ass smog in preparation.


THE BEAST FROM THE EAST VS THE PEST FROM THE WEST

hellfire508
03-14-2006, 08:36 PM
Yogi why do you hate Ali so much? Are you a white man who served in Vietnam? (No sarcasm or ridicule or anything like that intended if you are, however they are generally the people who HATE Ali).

RockyMarcianofan00
03-14-2006, 08:41 PM
Yogi why do you hate Ali so much? Are you a white man who served in Vietnam? (No sarcasm or ridicule or anything like that intended if you are, however they are generally the people who HATE Ali).
They're probably the ones with the best reason though

whether its rite or wrong

TheGreat1
03-14-2006, 08:47 PM
i no order

Gatti vs. ward II
Toney vs. Jirov
Foreman vs. Lyle
Foreman vs. Holyfield
JLC vs Corrallas I

Yogi
03-14-2006, 09:51 PM
Yogi why do you hate Ali so much? Are you a white man who served in Vietnam? (No sarcasm or ridicule or anything like that intended if you are, however they are generally the people who HATE Ali).

I don't hate Ali, Hellfire.

But with the amount of worshipping of him on this forum and the continous bashing of other great Heavyweights in comparision, I am willing to give my views on things (whether it be a quote from Holmes, my view of the Ali/Bobick situation, etc., etc....whatever) that might not portray Ali in the brightest light...To me it's all about balance.

Actually, I used to be a big fan of Ali in my younger years and still to this day retain a healthy repsect for the man for what he accomplished both in the ring & out. And I'm certainly not going to fault the man for his stand against a war, when my own personal beliefs are that a free man should have the right to make a choice on what he does in his immediate future...I think wars are generally ridiculous if you ask me, and again, I'm not going to fault one's stand against such a thing.

RockyMarcianofan00
03-14-2006, 10:22 PM
I don't hate Ali, Hellfire.

But with the amount of worshipping of him on this forum and the continous bashing of other great Heavyweights in comparision, I am willing to give my views on things (whether it be a quote from Holmes, my view of the Ali/Bobick situation, etc., etc....whatever) that might not portray Ali in the brightest light...To me it's all about balance.

Actually, I used to be a big fan of Ali in my younger years and still to this day retain a healthy repsect for the man for what he accomplished both in the ring & out. And I'm certainly not going to fault the man for his stand against a war, when my own personal beliefs are that a free man should have the right to make a choice on what he does in his immediate future...I think wars are generally ridiculous if you ask me, and again, I'm not going to fault one's stand against such a thing.

thank you
thats exactly what i think

pts for you for

rayrobinsonGOAT
03-15-2006, 06:38 PM
Robinson/LaMotta VI
Moore/Durelle I
Marciano/Walcott I
Robinson/Basilio II
Ali/Frazier III
Ali/Wepner

hellfire508
03-16-2006, 12:45 AM
I don't hate Ali, Hellfire.

But with the amount of worshipping of him on this forum and the continous bashing of other great Heavyweights in comparision, I am willing to give my views on things (whether it be a quote from Holmes, my view of the Ali/Bobick situation, etc., etc....whatever) that might not portray Ali in the brightest light...To me it's all about balance.

Actually, I used to be a big fan of Ali in my younger years and still to this day retain a healthy repsect for the man for what he accomplished both in the ring & out. And I'm certainly not going to fault the man for his stand against a war, when my own personal beliefs are that a free man should have the right to make a choice on what he does in his immediate future...I think wars are generally ridiculous if you ask me, and again, I'm not going to fault one's stand against such a thing.

That's fair enough. It's just that I get the impression from when you say Holmes-Ali is one of your favourite fights that you must hate the man. It was a sickening fight.

Yogi
03-16-2006, 12:59 AM
That's fair enough. It's just that I get the impression from when you say Holmes-Ali is one of your favourite fights that you must hate the man. It was a sickening fight.

Yeah well...when I say something that is that moronic then it is usually intended by me to be just that.

My intentions was to only **** around with Butterfly with that post, but even he clued in to the fact that I wasn't being serious.

Yes, Holmes/Ali is a bummer to watch and that's why I haven't watched it in many, many years (that streak should continue for many more years, as well).

K-DOGG
03-17-2006, 10:38 AM
Well, if we're talking social historical significance:

1. Louis-Schmeling II.....global implications
2. Frazier-Ali I..........social implications
3. Johnson-Jeffries.......racial implications
4. Corbett-Sullivan.......Marquis de Queensbury Rules
5. Douglas-Tyson..........Greatest upset in boxing history


Now, if you're talking just pure entertainment...

Heavyweight:

1. Ali-Frazier III
2. Holmes-Norton
3. Bowe-Holyfield I
4. Marciano-Walcott I
5. Louis-Conn I


Pound-4-Pound:


1. Hagler-Hearns
2. Zale-Graziano....pick one
3. Corrales-Castillo I
4. Leonard-Hearns I
5. Moore-Durelle


At least, those are my picks.

Burzum_666
03-17-2006, 10:48 PM
1. Bobby Chacon vs Bazooka Limon ( 1982)
2. Barrera vs Morales 1 ( 2000)
3. Castillo vs Corrales 1 ( 2005)
4. Ali vs Frazier 3 ( 1975)
5. Arturo Gatti vs Gabriel Ruelas ( 1997)

These are my personal favorites

mokele
03-21-2006, 08:15 AM
I've been a boxing fan for close to 40 years and I've seen a lot of fights, mostly on TV here in the U.S. or else older fights on tape or over the internet. Here are some fights that I saw that did credit to the sport; close, clean, hard-fought battles between world class fighters:

Trinidad-De La Hoya
Pernell Whitaker-De La Hoya
Julio Cesar Chavez-Meldrick Taylor
Julio Cesar Chavez-Frankie Randall 1
Marlon Starling-Donald Curry 1 and 2
Simon Brown-Tyrone Trice 1 and 2
Marciano-Walcott
Ali-Frazier 1
Holyfield-Bowe 1
Holmes-Ken Norton
Holmes-Witherspoon
Foreman-Ron Lyle
Frazier-Quarry 1
Matthew Saad Muhammad-Marvin Johnson
McCallum-McCrory
McCallum-Toney 1
Castillo-Corrales 1
Hagler-Mugabi
Hagler-Antuofermo 1
Duran-Leonard 1
Benitez-Leonard
Hearns-Leonard 1

Of course there are many more. How am I supposed to pick only 5 of these? If you've never seen some of these you missed some great fights.

mrc213
03-26-2006, 12:02 AM
anyone else have an opinion on the 5 best fights of all time

mrc213
04-01-2006, 04:43 PM
aNYONE ELSE CMON THERE GOTTA BE PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT OPINIONS