Beating Muhammad Ali

[ForemanCrossArm]

Go to sleep, little child.

Little child? Why don't you just call him a tom. Since that's what Ali liked to do.

[LondonRingRules]

Get off the Jack Daniels, loser.

** I rather enjoy hoisting BlackJack with my right and jabbing you to tarnation with my left.

So, what's happening in Brooklyn, kid? I was there several times this past year and sorta enjoyed the challenge of figurin' out the Big Apple. Well, the best feeling was crossing the Verrazano bridge and catching 95 south. Sorta like entering the gates of heaven for this country boy !

[StarshipTrooper]

I'll actually reply to your post, as Poet didn't even use the term anecdotal properly, especially in the sense he was attempting to dispell actual quotes from actual people that were actually there.

Anecdotal is one person, like, say, me (for instance, and I just say (with no evidence to back up my claim), "Liston threw the fight." It isn't even "hearsay" as that is often tied to some facts, if I were being anecdotal it would be closer to stereotyping or mass generalization.

Those quotes, most of them having backing with actual semi-hard evidence (from people having mob-ties, to Wepner fighting a 42 y/o Liston compared to a 32 y/o Ali, to his CLOSE friends, etc..). Sure you could call it jello, but, hell, jello stands on its own.

American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source an·ec·dot·al (ān'ĭk-dōt'l) Pronunciation Key
adj.
also an·ec·dot·ic (-dŏt'ĭk) or an·ec·dot·i·cal (-ĭ-kəl) Of, characterized by, or full of anecdotes.
Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis: "There are anecdotal reports of children poisoned by hot dogs roasted over a fire of the [oleander] stems" (C. Claiborne Ray).

In other words, just the kind of statements you have been citing. You give quotes but provide NO substanitive evidence to back them up. That makes them mearly gratuitous assertions which, as I said, may be equally gratuitously denied. You hatred of Ali has made you unhinged and in your quest to discredit him you have only discredited yourself.

Poet

[wmute]

American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source an·ec·dot·al (ān'ĭk-dōt'l) Pronunciation Key
adj.
also an·ec·dot·ic (-dŏt'ĭk) or an·ec·dot·i·cal (-ĭ-kəl) Of, characterized by, or full of anecdotes.
Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis: "There are anecdotal reports of children poisoned by hot dogs roasted over a fire of the [oleander] stems" (C. Claiborne Ray).

In other words, just the kind of statements you have been citing. You give quotes but provide NO substanitive evidence to back them up. That makes them mearly gratuitous assertions which, as I said, may be equally gratuitously denied. You hatred of Ali has made you unhinged and in your quest to discredit him you have only discredited yourself.

Poet

Let's be clear about this, your denying is not worth as much as the quotes from the people that Tosches interviewed for months (years?), because YOU are randomly denying them because it fits well with your opinion. Those ppl on the other hand have at least a claim of having been around the facts on topic and knowing something about them, (that they actually spoke the truth is a different matter, of ciurse). However you not knowing **** and denying them "gratuitously" is ridiculous.

I dont give a **** if I am on your ignore, I just like to straighten things out for the reader.

[Weltschmerz]

Well many contend Ali was beat more times than his record show... Of course he was highly beatable.

[young_robbed]

Well many contend Ali was beat more times than his record show... Of course he was highly beatable.

yeah when he was past his prime in the 70s, he was definitely beatable. I think really the only guys Ali IMO unofficially lost to was Jimmy Young and Ken Norton III. And he was clearly past prime in both matches. Still, the Norton III fight was close and not exactly a robbery imo.

at least he never got KO'd like the guy in your avatar though.

[juggernaut666]

Well, the easiest way to beat him was by a fair score-card. On points he should've lost to Norton again, Frazier in their re-match, he was far behind Bonavena before rd. 15 kayo, etc.. etc.. He was a good fighter, but he was more of an olympic fighter than a professional fighter when it came to foes he couldn't kayo.

I have to agree with this Ali's true talent was his jab,take away that and he cant do much. This really wasnt hard to do even smaller guys like Folley had success in their short fight ,if Norton was around in the 60's ,Ali would most likely lose because his jab in the 70s was more accurate and harder ...the real myth is Ali in the 60's was better ,its false ,he just fought better ,bigger fighters in the 70s who were much more athletic from the previous era.

[juggernaut666]

Like I said, while I don't agree with everything in the article, it does prove that Louis defeating Ali was more possible than people are usually willing to accept. He (the author) also never takes into account the simple fact that Joe's low left hand would leave him open to Ali lead rights down the pipe all night long.

*On the subject of a Liston-Clay "fix": There really is no substantial, hard proof to say that Liston threw the fight for fear of his life, or monetary purposes. While the quotes presented are antecdotal accounts of hearsay, that could be the only evidence needed to suggest something was screwy. A "good" mafia of organized crime probably eliminated any black-and-white evidence, if indeed a fix was in place. I'm not saying there was a fix, but hearsay is sometimes based on real-life accounts. We are not a court of law, we are speculative observers.

I dont believe Louis would have had the footwork to defeat a ready Ali .Even the simplest footwork bothered Louis ,Ali would out speed him in hands as well and get through Louis 's defensively poor positioning easily ,how would Louis's chin hold up ?He was lucky nt to have been k.od a handful of times by much less caliber than Ali.

[billeau2]

I thought that this was an interesting (if old) article.

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/alilouis.html

While I don't agree with everything (i.e. counter-jab would "completely" nullify Ali's jab), it does bring some interesting points to light that are often indoctrinated to us about Ali in the opposite direction. It changed some of my recent understanding of a matchup between these two, having re-read it. It also gives a person a better, non-biased view towards other fighters of similar styles matching up against Ali.

We must deconstruct the idea that he was invincible, or too fast. He was beatable, and several people have outlined (and employed), these methods for doing so to success.

One thing that the author of this particular article failed to address, however, was the fact that Joe Louis kept his left hand low, and Ali was notorious for surprising his opponents with a lead-right from out of nowhere. That would be something that Ali would figure out, and probably exploit.

Your thoughts on his [Ali's] beatability, how it could be done, who could have done it with similar (or other) techniques, etc.

Actually one of the things that made/make Ali so special is that he was as a fighter, chronically vulnerable. he does everything from a boxing perspective azz backwards (not from a martial arts perspective btw) but had the talent to get away with it. But if you look at Ali all his foibles are covered. For example, he was hittable but had whiskers to die for, he could really do some ****** things but just as suddenly end a fight with spectacular efforts. Ali rose to the occasion...And if anyone had said he would beat Foreman by laying on the ropes at intervals? nobody would have bought it.

What Ali could do so well was mentally exploite an opponent and be very unpredictable as to how he would use his speed.

[billeau2]

The timing of the jab against Ali was key in opening up the left hook as well, especially for smaller guys like Frazier, Dempsey, Tyson, etc. Have the right hand protecting your face, wait for Ali to flick the jab, fire your own jab, rinse, wash, repeat. When he tries to uppercut an incoming pressure-fighter, throw the left hook. Frazier just happened to have all of these tools, without great handspeed. This is why I understand the man's article about giving Joe Louis a good shot against Ali, because he had these tools, plus great hand speed, explosive power, phenomenal finishing skills, and one of the best boxing brains in the business.

Good post, London.

No. Ali's jab was very hard to counter...watch tapes. Ali came in and was never commited in a way that countering his jab would bare fruit. Ali could double, triple up on the jab and he had incredibe upper body movement which made it hard to counter him after the jab.... There are gifts of Ali using head movement to avoid up to eight punches in a row....On foreman and on another fighter.