Scoring: Clay-Liston I

[Dempsey-Louis]

Earlier I had written a post stating I was aghast that Ali was leading on the score cards against Foreman, much to my surprise most of the posters disagreed with my assessment and saw Ali winning the fight.

Here is a second set of scores I think are appalling, I wonder if I will be the exception again.

I personally don't see Liston winning a single round of this fight.

Clay-Liston I

59-56 Clay (Gus Jacobson) **
58-56 Liston (Bernie Lovett)
57-57 Even (referee Barney Felix)

** I have found two different scores for Jacobson: 59-56 Clay and 58-56 Clay, anyone know which is correct?

BoxRec has it 58-56 but they have been wrong before; the other score 59-56 comes from an article in a magazine called Sports History.

But this is not the score I am questioning, it is the other two that blow me away. If it had gone the distance would Ali have gotten 'jobbed'?

[OctoberRed]

I think Ali would have edged him by the time it reached the final bell.

[QueensburyRules]

I think Ali would have edged him by the time it reached the final bell.

--- Even I can agree with that, the problem being boxing is such a crooked sport exacerbated by derelict reporting, even talking about it sometimes becomes like trying to find a tooth pick in a 1000 drum of jello.

[Anthony342]

Yeah, good points. I really find myself scratching my head with at least one judge's score most of the time. Like the judge that scored Leonard-Hagler 118-110 for Leonard. I agreed with Dave Moretti's score instead of 115-113 Leonard. You often hear commentators saying I don't know what fight that other judge was watching. Any judges with decisions that off base should be suspended from scoring main events for at least a year and if it happens again, they get relegated to only undercard non title fights and then banned if they screw up that badly again.

[Sugarj]

I personally think Foreman was on his way to being jobbed in Africa, if the fight went to points.

But I think the scoring after 6 rounds of the first Liston was fair. The only rounds that 'Clay' dominated for me were the 1st and 6th. He did have a pretty spectacular first half of the third round (the one that is often shown on most highlight reels), but Liston did finish that round fairly well and might have evened it up to some observers. The 2nd and 4th rounds were fairly close, but Liston clearly dominated the 5th while Clay's eyes were full of that caustic chemical.

[OctoberRed]

Yeah, good points. I really find myself scratching my head with at least one judge's score most of the time. Like the judge that scored Leonard-Hagler 118-110 for Leonard. I agreed with Dave Moretti's score instead of 115-113 Leonard. You often hear commentators saying I don't know what fight that other judge was watching. Any judges with decisions that off base should be suspended from scoring main events for at least a year and if it happens again, they get relegated to only undercard non title fights and then banned if they screw up that badly again.

People still argue over the outcome of that one every day.

[HOUDINI563]

Certainly the fifth round was Listons as Ali ran to survive for most of the round. Round one was also potentially a Liston round as Ali, a bit jittery, did plenty of running. So a 4-2 score after six rounds is completely fair.

[Anthony342]

People still argue over the outcome of that one every day.

I know, but 118-110 either way is just ridiculous.

[QueensburyRules]

--- very typical of future American scoring that rewards running pittypatty wasters that so dumbed down boxing that most modern American fighters are held in low regard.

[HOUDINI563]

Look at Listons face after six rounds. Cut, swollen and bleeding. Putty pat punches do not do that sort of damage. Also those pitty pat punches Staggered Liston several times during the fight.