Tweet
This, of course, is always in reference to the 20th century, the only century we have a full 100 years of action from. At the time they are billed as such, Fights of the Century really seem like that. That billing usually denotes a fight that is expected to be close. The fight between Dempasey and Carpentier was billed as Fight of the Century, as well.
Apparently, Fights of the Century only take place among heavyweights. The sham of calling Pac/MW Fight of the Century (the 21st) will pass away in due time. The only claim this fight has is its gate.
Johnson/Jefferies
Louis/Schmeling
Ali-Frazier
are the viable candidates already billed that way among heavyweight fights. To be Fight of the Century, the world must take spellbound notice.
Much of the interest of Jefferies/Johnson was racially motivated. Jeff had been a great fighter in his day but he had been growing fat on the Alfalfa farm for several years, and Jeff had a tendency to easily fatten. His coming in at a trim weight reminds me of Ali against Holmes, where Ali made a good weight too and was smashed to pieces because the weight did not mean he was healthy for fighting. The first Fight of the Century had all the necessary electricity, but was not much of a competitive bout, unfortunately. Johnson thoroughly had his way. He promised before the fight that he would pin the super-strong Jeff's arms behind his back, and he is seen several times in the fight doing this.
Louis/Schmelling II was connected to world politics and became a symbol. Socially, no fight has ever been bigger. It rallied folk like no fight has ever done. Unfortunately, the fight was a dud for action mongers, though emminently satisfying on the social level for everyone but ****s.
To most people today the Fight of the Century means Ali/Frazier I. The fight carries a lot of clout and was a high action affair with give and take. Of the Fights of the Century listed above, it is the best action fight by far. The fight was also socially significant, though not to the level of Louis/Schmeling or, for that matter, Johnson/Jefferies. I suppose that point is arguable.
For myself, the Fight of the Century was Ali/Foreman. The result of Ali/Frazier did not carry the significance of the other fights. It lacked the sense of finality, though Joe had clearly won. A new champion of champions had not been found. Frazier never gained the kind of reputation Liston had earlier or Foreman had later.
For sheer boxing intrigue, for miracles, for exciting action, for world attention, for significance of the result, for what I think will be its more lasting impression on history, I have to choose the Rumble in the Jungle as the Fight of the Century, when all those elements are summed. The one king had been found. That was the highest moment in boxing history, the greatest crowning ever in the sport, the mightiest acheivment of any heavyweight to date.
Anyway, that is my take on it. Since it is a subjective matter without exact definition, any view by anyone is valid. If we limit ourselves, as history seems to do, to heavyweight fights, there are not many candidates to consider.
Apparently, Fights of the Century only take place among heavyweights. The sham of calling Pac/MW Fight of the Century (the 21st) will pass away in due time. The only claim this fight has is its gate.
Johnson/Jefferies
Louis/Schmeling
Ali-Frazier
are the viable candidates already billed that way among heavyweight fights. To be Fight of the Century, the world must take spellbound notice.
Much of the interest of Jefferies/Johnson was racially motivated. Jeff had been a great fighter in his day but he had been growing fat on the Alfalfa farm for several years, and Jeff had a tendency to easily fatten. His coming in at a trim weight reminds me of Ali against Holmes, where Ali made a good weight too and was smashed to pieces because the weight did not mean he was healthy for fighting. The first Fight of the Century had all the necessary electricity, but was not much of a competitive bout, unfortunately. Johnson thoroughly had his way. He promised before the fight that he would pin the super-strong Jeff's arms behind his back, and he is seen several times in the fight doing this.
Louis/Schmelling II was connected to world politics and became a symbol. Socially, no fight has ever been bigger. It rallied folk like no fight has ever done. Unfortunately, the fight was a dud for action mongers, though emminently satisfying on the social level for everyone but ****s.
To most people today the Fight of the Century means Ali/Frazier I. The fight carries a lot of clout and was a high action affair with give and take. Of the Fights of the Century listed above, it is the best action fight by far. The fight was also socially significant, though not to the level of Louis/Schmeling or, for that matter, Johnson/Jefferies. I suppose that point is arguable.
For myself, the Fight of the Century was Ali/Foreman. The result of Ali/Frazier did not carry the significance of the other fights. It lacked the sense of finality, though Joe had clearly won. A new champion of champions had not been found. Frazier never gained the kind of reputation Liston had earlier or Foreman had later.
For sheer boxing intrigue, for miracles, for exciting action, for world attention, for significance of the result, for what I think will be its more lasting impression on history, I have to choose the Rumble in the Jungle as the Fight of the Century, when all those elements are summed. The one king had been found. That was the highest moment in boxing history, the greatest crowning ever in the sport, the mightiest acheivment of any heavyweight to date.
Anyway, that is my take on it. Since it is a subjective matter without exact definition, any view by anyone is valid. If we limit ourselves, as history seems to do, to heavyweight fights, there are not many candidates to consider.