Do you love Muhammad Ali? If so why so and if not why not?

[McGrain]

I got a love-hate relationship with the guy. I love watching him fight, even the washed up version, but I don't tend to seek out his fights any more. Having said that, when I see him fight, like in a HW highlights package or something, or here on the forum, I feel a little hypnotised. What a mover.

I like his talk too.

"I saw Sonny the other day and -,"

"Ain't he ugly?"

That is funny when you see it, he's quick like that.

I also like the mythology. I like reading about him, Mailer and all that there, and I used to love all the documentaries, hearing people, even weird people like Billy Crystal talk about him - boxing is my thing and it seems like Ali makes everybody love it just a little bit. Anyway. I watched When We Were Kings again the other day and I just fell in love with the mad bastard all over again, who he was, what he did...the man and the fighter. I can't see it taken away from him. He whipped Uncle Sam. "Only man that ever did it." On the other hand, I was reading an old Ring the other day (the one I lifted that Jeffries interview from) and they are talking about how soft Washington was on him...and the stolen bike and just everything. It's all cool.

When I really started getting into it all, I loved him, but I love Frazier more now and I don't like the way Ali came off in all that. I wish Frazier had won in Manilla. Also, I'm a big Sonny fan, and it bothers me that when I google Liston all I get is Ali, Ali, Ali everywhere. So I got mixed feelings.

How about you?

[mr. magoo]

- He had the balls to say what others were afraid to say, and during a time when you simply didn't say it...

- He was one of the first natural heavyweights to adapt a boxing style that abandoned the traditional techniques that were used by a lot of natural heavys.

- He had the guts and courage to fight anyone and everyone, or at least until the very late part of his career. From about 1975-1978, he was probably padding his record some, but I would never doubt the man's heart for even split second..

[MesmerFrog]

- he was a racist
- he was a womanizing douche who repeatedly cheated on his wives
- The way he treated frazier was fucking dispicable
- the Ali Legend has made it impossible to have a real discussion about any of the 70's heavyweights.
-The Ali "legend" also spawned the Ali magick shit talking myth wherein any fantasy fight where's physically outmatched, he'll magically win by "getting in his opponents head" via shit talking

[mr. magoo]

- he was a racist
- he was a womanizing douche who repeatedly cheated on his wives
- The way he treated frazier was fucking dispicable
- the Ali Legend has made it impossible to have a real discussion about any of the 70's heavyweights.
-The Ali "legend" also spawned the Ali magick shit talking myth wherein any fantasy fight where's physically outmatched, he'll magically win by "getting in his opponents head" via shit talking


Although I don't particularly like these criticisms, I must confess that most of them are valid ones.

[Bad_Intentions]

- He had the balls to say what others were afraid to say, and during a time when you simply didn't say it...

- He was one of the first natural heavyweights to adapt a boxing style that abandoned the traditional techniques that were used by a lot of natural heavys.

- He had the guts and courage to fight anyone and everyone, or at least until the very late part of his career. From about 1975-1978, he was probably padding his record some, but I would never doubt the man's heart for even split second..

:yep:good

[McGrain]

- He had the balls to say what others were afraid to say, and during a time when you simply didn't say it....

There's a clip of him being interviewed in Kings by a white reporter, and the guy is telling him, "keep your mouth shut, just for a minute, shut it" and Ali says to him, "you know that's impossible, i'm The Greatest, i'm knocking out all the bums...if you get to cute i'll knock you out, too."

A black fighter threatening to KO a white reporter. Must be a first.

[Smith]

A lot of people are sick of him, including myself, because of who he was, because of the fact so many pre-pubescent kids and lads down at the pub seem to think he's the only boxer along with Tyson that ever existed. Thats human nature. Obviously though if you analyse what he did specifically in the ring then he's right up there with the best of the best, but my god does it grate on me when you get Joe Bloggs downing his pint quoting Ali and saying he's the greatest annd having no knowledge of anyone or anything else. Hollywood eh!

[lucatoni08]

Bit of a racist, bit of a cunt at times.

But he was a great fighter and thuroughly entertaining. There is so mnay great interviews with the guy and obviously so many great fights...

I suppose you could say I have mixed opinions of him

[Stevie G]

I've probably made it so obvious on this forum I do indeed love Muhammad Ali. As to Mesmerfrog's criticisms,nobody is perfect. If you'd had Ali's looks and status etc.would n't you be,at least tempted to be a womaniser ? I'm not saying that it's the right way to behave,but Ali was a charismatic young man in the most charismatic position in the world (heavyweight champion) temptation can rear it's ugly head. Ali is the first to admit that he took his act too far where Frazier is concerned. When you put on an entertaining show like Ali did it must be hard,sometimes to know where to draw the line. Frazier was sometimes out of order as well. He's been on record for years as badmouthing Ali in the press,yet when he's been featured on documentaries with him it's all "Ladies and gentlemen we all love Ali" Especially the This Is Your Life show. This all happened a long time ago. Also,being a fan of Ali does n't stop me being rational when it comes to debate about 70's heavyweights. This will be an interesting debate though.

[McGrain]

A lot of people are sick of him, including myself, because of who he was, because of the fact so many pre-pubescent kids and lads down at the pub seem to think he's the only boxer along with Tyson that ever existed. Thats human nature. Obviously though if you analyse what he did specifically in the ring then he's right up there with the best of the best, but my god does it grate on me when you get Joe Bloggs downing his pint quoting Ali and saying he's the greatest annd having no knowledge of anyone or anything else. Hollywood eh!

Yeah, that's a cracking post gets right to the nub of the thing. Trying to explain to people why anyone other than maybe Robinson (who they only heard off because Ali spoke about him) is greater than Ali is like explaing why fucking is fun to the Pope.

[GPater11093]

Of course i love the guy. Ever since i can remember i knew who Muhammed Ali was. Then I started wathcing boxing and some of the first fights i watched was Ali's and he is mesmerising the way he runs rings round Liston and Williams. Its just brilliant to watch.

Also he had that great sense of humour and is just hilarious in interviews, so much charisma and character. Also his intelligece and wit is excellant.

Some people mark him down as a rascist and he was. But hes not anymore in fact hes probably one of the first names you'd think of when you mentioned Black and White Unity. He appeals to every race ow and he encourages unity and peace.

His womanising ways has also been brought up but everyone has their weaknesses and women was his. Most great fighters vice is woman. Even Alexis Arguello was a womaniser.

[McGrain]

I guess i'm the only guy who doesn't think of his womanising as a weakness :lol: at all.

[GPater11093]

I guess i'm the only guy who doesn't think of his womanising as a weakness :lol: at all.

of course its a weakness but it aint a particulary bad one, it could be worse.

[McGrain]

of course its a weakness but it aint a particulary bad one, it could be worse.


As far as I am concerned my heroes should be drilling loads of babes :lol: No two ways about it.

[Unforgiven]

As a fighter, he was great. Not necessarily The Greatest but definitely great.

As a historical figure he's overrated. Or at least he's misrepresented. People talk about him as if he was seriously some sort of champion for civil rights, freedom and progress. But he wasn't. Anyone can do the research and uncover the fact he was totally out of step in his thinking with both the moderate "civil rights" and the more radical "black liberation" crowds, clasically represented by Martin Luther King and Malcolm X respectively.

The man Ali backed fanatically and continuously from the 60s through to the mid-late 70s was Elijah Muhammad, who was admittedly an inspiration to the downtrodden blacks of the 40s, 50s and early 60s, but frankly and obviously a nut - and his claims were laughable to any intelligent progressive person certainly by the end of the 1960s.
Malcolm X was killed in 1965, and by then all black muslims and all black radicals were free to make up their minds whether what Malcolm was saying towards the end made more sense in those times than what Elijah Muhammad was saying.

Elijah Muhammad wanted a severely segragated America, a turning back of the clock, no "race-mixing", with black people living under his "prophethood", and hanging on to his silly stories as gospel truths, no involvement with politics, educated in the ways of his self-fabricated religion that he had the audacity to call "Islam". He cared not for civil rights nor for revolution.

That's all very well. I have no problem with Ali for following that creed. No one said boxers had to be intelligent people.

But why then is Ali revered as something he's not ?
Why is he introduced as someone who did so much for black people ?
What did he do ?
From where I'm sitting, when it came to issues of blacks and whites he ranted some embarrassingly bad stuff in the 1960s, spoke out for the American apartheid system rather than against it.

Sorry for the essay, but this thing about Ali totally baffles me.

[MrSmall]

Outspoken
Charismatic
Stood by what he beleived in
I like his confidence as well.

Great footwork
Great speed
Great durability

[GPater11093]

As far as I am concerned my heroes should be drilling loads of babes :lol: No two ways about it.

thats part of the appeal to Ali aint it?

every woman loved him

[Mr Butt]

he was what he despised a racist.
he made stupid statements about frazier for which even frazier`s children suffered
was dumb enough to let other racists tell him what to say and then look smug and try to convince everybody how clever he was

great fighter though,but as a human being at times let himself down

[Unforgiven]

But why then is Ali revered as something he's not ?
Why is he introduced as someone who did so much for black people ?
What did he do ?
From where I'm sitting, when it came to issues of blacks and whites he ranted some embarrassingly bad stuff in the 1960s, spoke out for the American apartheid system rather than against it.

Sorry for the essay, but this thing about Ali totally baffles me.

Actually, I think I know the answer to this.
People dont really care about the substance of the man, what he's really saying, they care about THE IMAGE.

And of course, Muhammad Ali was the man with the loud mouth boasts, full of bravado and the ability to back it all up, he can beat any man in the world, and he has rhymes and poems, he dances like a butterfly and stings like a bee, and he's a handsome devil too. Who wouldn't want him on their side ?

So, when he upset the establishment by joining the NOI, or by changing his name, or by refusing to be conscripted, I guess that's where a lot of anti-establishment people made him into something they wanted, regardless of what he was really about. And over time he's gone down as that something.

[Unforgiven]

Apart from him being a great fighter, another good point is he was very funny at times. Sometimes just silly and tediously childish, but I defy anyone to watch a lot of his footage without cracking a smile or laughing out loud.

[PetethePrince]

First of all I don't anyone should hate any fighter. That always beffudles me when people hate celebrities or stars and athletes. Dislike or get annoyed is one thing but hate... that's far too strong and you might to have to check yourself if someone on your TV is actually bothering you that much.

I love Ali. As a man he had his flaws. But really, I dislike those negatives and flaws just as much as I dislike the over-reaction revisionist history. You know those Thrilla documentaries that take one part of history and spin it upside down and that give it a nice big slant.

And for the guy questioning what he did for his people and how he was inspirational... woah. :patsch

Ali has far more positives if you perceive and embrace the great things he did. Don't get carried away. He isn't the messiah nor is he perfect. However, if you take some of the things within context (Radical black Muslim) and understand the man (The entertainer, etc) then you should only have a positive outlook on the man. For the things that are truly important, he was sensational. In what he did, what he stood for, etc.

I don't think as popular as the man as that most understand him. I think a lot of people believed he had more hate than he did. He was manipulated by the nation of islam but by his own omission through action switched to the more traditional practice later in his life. The 60's/70's were a much later time. The only thing that should bother you is the why the other fighters Ali treated could get perceived... or the way Ali gets portrayed in say the film about him. You have to understand the POV's that refer/retell about the man, though. Things about him hating Joe Frazier... it never happened. But people forget the context, and sometimes people surprisingly don't quite understand this popular figure. If anything, he hated the image of what Joe Frazier represented. As he did with MANY BLACK man (Actors who he criticized for dating white women and this and that, etc).

I don't see how you can't love Ali.

[MrMarvel]

Although I don't particularly like these criticisms, I must confess that most of them are valid ones.

Which ones?

He may have been racially prejudiced against whites (obviously collectively not individually), but he was no racist. Blacks had no institutional power then (they still don't). He was an afrocentrist. Nothing racist about that. It's an anti-colonial political philosophy. It's anti-racist.

Cheating on wives and so forth is something a great many people do. I could care less what a man does with another consenting adult. It has no bearing on the man as the athlete.

He was rough on Frazier, but was selling tickets. Ali said what came to mind about everybody. Frazier should understand that.

The Ali legend makes it easier to have a real discussion about the 1970s heavyweights because we know so much about all of them.

Ali's talking was a way to convince himself, not get into an opponents head. Ali's ritual was to make himself believe he was invincible.

[PetethePrince]

I guess i'm the only guy who doesn't think of his womanising as a weakness :lol: at all.

You have a subtle underlining dislike for Ali. It carries in your post especially when Frazer gets mentioned. You go on about quotes for some obviously slanted book about what Ali said. Neither nor proven nor factual evidence yet you take the revisionism as if it's the obvious reality just to form an opinion outside the popular norm. If there's something I dislike, it's that.

But really. A womanizer? Every HW champion was. If he wasn't, he would be one of the exceptions in HW history. It was a weakness for all them. But who are we to criticize without being in that position. So much easier from our desktops. :lol: Seriously though, it's the big Islam/Muslim thing that lets you give flack for it because it's hypocritical of him. Unless I have percieved that laugh as not being sarcasm. Either way you mentioning something like this out of the blue when it's a criticism you could have of any HW is percular.

[PetethePrince]

Another thing about the greatness of Ali


He probably gets at least half of us into boxing. No? The guy is a legend and face deserves to be the cover of anything boxing. He really helped it as it helped him be the figure he wanted to (He used boxing as a platform to do what he did).

Someone brought up how he was no Malcom X or Martin Luther King because he was by the nut Elijia Muhammad. First of all, all those man even the beloved King have ghosts in their closests. Most are FAR WORSE than revisionism against Ali.

[Bokaj]

Yeah, I love him (surprise), but it's complicated.

It's correct that his significance as a political figure is greatly overrated. He spewed a lot of garbage Black Muslim doctrine like some brain washed idiot and even his stand on Vietnam is probably very oversimplified. Probably he just didn't wanted to go more than anything else. Not that I blame him.

On a personal level, his acting toward Malcolm X was even worse than his acting toward Frazier (which was way short of honourable as it was). He was also a weak hypocrite who publically slapped his first wife for wearing to short skirts, but on the same time was just as public with his adultery.

Thirdly, there is his boxing. It's kind of paradoxical that I fell for a style like his when my big football favourite is Barcelona's Xavi. A guy who isn't particularily athletic (small and slow), but more than makes up for it with his perfect technique, vision and ability to read the game. I don't have nearly as much time to spare for athletic marvels like C. Ronaldo or Gerrard.

So what is it? Is it just something that got on my brain when I was young and impressable and who has stuck there?

That would be the easy answer, but I still can't get enough of watching the guy. His way to create his own rules, even his own universe, inside and outside the ring. I still think Mailer put it best: "They (other authorities and luminaries of boxing) are skilled engineers at Indy 600, but he (Ali) is on his way to the moon."

He transcended so many of the concepts we usually use to judge a man and a fighter.

Yes, he acted deplorably in some ways and said deplorable things, but there are so many examples of spontaneous acts of kindness from his side. When all was said and done he really seemed to love his fellow man, and that's not always easy.

Yes, he had flaws as a fighter, but he had an understanding for the craft (both intuitive and intellectually) that probably equals Mozart's or Bach's for music. Watch the rematch against Quarrry and tell me that that's a guy that solely depends on his speed and his will. For me, theres no doubt that there's a master at work in there.

In short, he brought a special kind of magic to proceeding and he was magical himself as well. There's an element about him that suggests something beyond the material and the mundane in a way. There's a very special form of drama over his career and his life, like it was a script written just for him where the rules were allowed to be bent now and then not to get in the way of a great story. It's just plain weird actually, and in this case I'm all for the weird.

[Unforgiven]

He may have been racially prejudiced against whites (obviously collectively not individually), but he was no racist. Blacks had no institutional power then (they still don't). He was an afrocentrist. Nothing racist about that. It's an anti-colonial political philosophy. It's anti-racist.

He said many things that went way beyond that.

I'll quote from Thomas Hauser's book, p.188

"No intelligent black man or black man in his or her right mind wants white boys and white girls coming to their homes to marry their black sons and daughters to produce little pale half-white green-eyed blond-headed Negroes. And no intelligent white man or white woman wants black boys and black girls coming around their white sons and daughters and in return introducing their grandchildren as little mixed-up kinky-headed half-black ni*ggers"
Muhammad Ali

That's pure racism. Pure old-fashioned racism.

[PetethePrince]

He said many things that went way beyond that.

I'll quote from Thomas Hauser's book, p.188

"No intelligent black man or black man in his or her right mind wants white boys and white girls coming to their homes to marry their black sons and daughters to produce little pale half-white green-eyed blond-headed Negroes. And no intelligent white man or white woman wants black boys and black girls coming around their white sons and daughters and in return introducing their grandchildren as little mixed-up kinky-headed half-black ni*ggers"
Muhammad Ali

That's pure racism. Pure old-fashioned racism.

No it's not :lol:. He's just stating his opinion one at that time wasn't particular unpopular. If segregation and racism wasn't obvious and so blatant, why would a comment about it from either side of the race be racist? It's observationally true to a very generalized extent.

Man, why do people not have the ability to understand a simple idea of how things are much difference in the context of things. That statement is only bad in 2008.

It's like if Ali said that "No one wants a n*gger running for president let alone living next door to them." in 1966 when black people were still being lynched/killed & discriminated against. It's not racist but just obvious. Maybe not the best way to handle it.

One of the things I appreciate and liked the most was Ali's understanding of peoples perspective and beliefs. As a Muslim man he understood how people thought differently. It's rather mature of him to say that he can't be "Too mad at people who disliked him for not going to Vietnam because that's what they thought was right at the time. But now popular has opinion has changed to see that I was doing what I thought was right." As we see Ali can understand the context and perspectives well there. It seems quite paradoxical when comparing quotes to him earlier when he talks about the black way of doing things and this and that. Truthfully, he was very wise when he opened up his mind and matured as he got older. He was still just a young black kid in his 20's seeing the world mistreat his own kind. At that time, how would you have handled it? Be honest, much easier to knock on your computer.

[Manassa]

I do actually like the man, just not the favouritism and allowances he received during his time and still today.

[Bill Butcher]

Yes

The man was a born entertainer, great to watch inside the ring with his speed & ability.... also his antics & interviews, the guy was always excellent viewing.

Even tho some might not agree with some things he did or some aspects of his life, it completely amazes me that their are some that flat out dont like him, absolute retardation on their part :-(

Im off to read the other posts now, this should be fun.

[PetethePrince]

There is this revisionist history like with all revisionist history. People end up feeling like the truth has been exposed and that Ali is a lie just like Santa Clause why. The truth is people just love having an opinion outside the norm. The man is a legend. And just like with all figures/legends/athletes, etc you should embrace their good qualities while not harping over their bad ones. I can trip all of you up about the truth of any of your heroes. I guarantee it.

From Columbus to MLK to FDR to JFK. None of them were perfect.

[GPater11093]

The thing with Ali is everyone knows him.

My Grandad who never watched boxing loved watching Ali. Im sure you guys will know someone like that

[Chinxkid]

A great start to a deep and wide conversation ... Interesting thread, McGrain.

PetethePrince :good Context fellas, context!

Most of you weren't born yet, am I right? A lot of you weren't here in the U.S. Two criticisms surprise me so far ... Racist and Womanizer. Huh?

I would think that most of you calling him a racist are white, yes? As am I. But if you were a black man, back in the 60's, in America, especially in a Southern State, Kentucky is a Southern State, you were the target of systematic discrimination and racism. Imagine fellas, I know you all love your mothers, watching her from the time that you were old enough to understand what was going on, get treated like a 2nd or 3rd class citizen. How many times would you have to see her disrespected before it would piss you off irreparably? Not many I would guess. Segregated public rest rooms, neighborhoods, schools, water fountains. No colleges available to you other than the black ones. Few good jobs open to you. The idea of becoming a professional, more of a fantasy; and better not talk back or fight back or disrespect a white man. How 'bout this? Though legally the blacks got the right to vote in the 1930's, they were often kept out of the polls, to the extent that JFK at one point had to send troops to the South to make sure black voters were permitted to exercise their legal right. Ali a racist? That's like if you're walking down the street and someone sucker punches you ... but you getting arrested for giving him a good beating.

And the connotation of the term womanizer, implies a guy who angles and plots and deceives to get a woman in the sheets. There is something very unattractive about that guy, I agree. But Ali didn't have to try that hard. If anything he had to keep them away. A black guy bedding a lot of women, white women even, then?! Scandalous. Sex is fun. Sex with a new woman is fun. Don't you agree? Few of us would have, if given Ali's opportunities, had beautiful women throwing themselves at us, always, the character to consistently walk away, IMHO.

As a fighter, he revived the fight game. His loud mouth was more a way to build the gate, at a time when interest in the game was at a low point. His style was a breath of fresh air. A great fighter with all the skill, heart, and toughness to hold your interest, I heard old fighters at the time, fighters that didn't like his mouth, his bragadoccio, his ring calling, say that he was the best thing to happen to the game since WWII.

[Bokaj]

He said many things that went way beyond that.

I'll quote from Thomas Hauser's book, p.188

"No intelligent black man or black man in his or her right mind wants white boys and white girls coming to their homes to marry their black sons and daughters to produce little pale half-white green-eyed blond-headed Negroes. And no intelligent white man or white woman wants black boys and black girls coming around their white sons and daughters and in return introducing their grandchildren as little mixed-up kinky-headed half-black ni*ggers"
Muhammad Ali

That's pure racism. Pure old-fashioned racism.

Wasn't it you who thought Hauser's book just was unbearable ass-kissing of Ali?

[junior-soprano]

- he was a racist
- he was a womanizing douche who repeatedly cheated on his wives
- The way he treated frazier was fucking dispicable
- the Ali Legend has made it impossible to have a real discussion about any of the 70's heavyweights.
-The Ali "legend" also spawned the Ali magick shit talking myth wherein any fantasy fight where's physically outmatched, he'll magically win by "getting in his opponents head" via shit talking

1 a lot of people do that. and that has nothing to do with his fighting ability. it depends on you're own moral standards if you consider that normal behaviour.
2 true.. but on the other hand frazier ain't talking nice about ali also ( atleast now a days)
3 how and in what way ? on this forum there are lot's of threads about the 70ties heavyweights and most of them by normal sain people (at least i believe so)
4 maybe it works. that shit talking as you call it. ali wasn't the only fighter who did it. for example charles said that archie moore called him names during all of their fights. and the best case that it worked for ali is the rumble in the jungle where george foreman got so fucked up by ali taunting :"is that all you got george ? " and so on. that he threw all these wide swinging blows so after a few rounds he was getting very tired

[Seamus]

Love-Hate, perhaps, though more love than hate. It's sort of like the band that comes along and makes such profoundly original music that a legion of bands copy the style for the next decade only to fill the airwaves with crap. Can we blame Ali for pale imitators he inspired or the shenanigans that mediocre fighters adopted from his "entertaining" style. I will say that later in his career Ali became something of self-parody, won fights he should have lost and flat-out cheated in the ring. However, Ali "the personality" was able to get away with it.

[janitor]

No it's not :lol:. He's just stating his opinion one at that time wasn't particular unpopular. If segregation and racism wasn't obvious and so blatant, why would a comment about it from either side of the race be racist? It's observationally true to a very generalized extent.

Man, why do people not have the ability to understand a simple idea of how things are much difference in the context of things. That statement is only bad in 2008.

It's like if Ali said that "No one wants a n*gger running for president let alone living next door to them." in 1966 when black people were still being lynched/killed & discriminated against. It's not racist but just obvious. Maybe not the best way to handle it.

One of the things I appreciate and liked the most was Ali's understanding of peoples perspective and beliefs. As a Muslim man he understood how people thought differently. It's rather mature of him to say that he can't be "Too mad at people who disliked him for not going to Vietnam because that's what they thought was right at the time. But now popular has opinion has changed to see that I was doing what I thought was right." As we see Ali can understand the context and perspectives well there. It seems quite paradoxical when comparing quotes to him earlier when he talks about the black way of doing things and this and that. Truthfully, he was very wise when he opened up his mind and matured as he got older. He was still just a young black kid in his 20's seeing the world mistreat his own kind. At that time, how would you have handled it? Be honest, much easier to knock on your computer.

I am seeing a lot of people mounting a defence of Ali's ocasionaly overtly racist atitudes and observations based on the period he lived in.

They may well be right to do so, but if they are then that would have to alow mitigation for some early white fighters who expressed atitudes that might be considered racist by todays standards.

[PetethePrince]

I am seeing a lot of people mounting a defence of Ali's ocasionaly overtly racist atitudes and observations based on the period he lived in.

They may well be right to do so, but if they are then that would have to alow mitigation for some early white fighters who expressed atitudes that might be considered racist by todays standards.

Indeed. But I haven't heard anything Ali do as bad as what Jeffries did when he said something like, "I'll never fight a n*gger." or something. I could be mistaken.

The thing is... because Ali is such a legend he gets knocked the most because of it. Culturally, the 60's and 70's were a wild and radical time. That in and of itself while being a black near teenage/young adult in his 20's makes me understand Ali furthermore. I can't say I wouldn't have been somewhat similar in my thinking than him. Who knows... but I don't have that life experience. And I don't think Ali was that bad. He was wily and quite wise. The worst part was his ties to the nation of islam and Elijah Muhammad. The truth is... Ali did one and said another. He didn't back Elijia is much in action but I'm not sure because Ali could've been trying to use white people for his own gain. I just don't see it as that. I think he got smarter when he was older and his leaving of the nation of islam is an admittance to this. It bothers me when people here say he isn't bright or intelligent. I mean really, then you're basically just saying all boxers are dumb. Ali was smart. Mis-guided? Sure. Manipulated? You bet. Add that to the fact that he was a rising star in the most radical time during the civil rights movement. Ali isn't just an ebodiment of himself but his times... like most men/legends. It was a lot to take. If people can make excuses for the way Tyson is and how his character was then you sure can for Ali. The difference is Ali is just revered as being a great person. He is, but of course he was far from perfect.

The worst is not giving him the benefit. He was inspirational and huge to black Americans and people of all kinds even if that wasn't his intentions. What he did in and out of the ring... he wasn't just a boxer. He transcended the sport inside and out of the ring. Some fighters will die or cheat to win and get that belt. Ali surrendered that belt to keep intact his soul. Maybe that's being over dramatic. He went through a lot, and standing up for what you believe in the face of strong sacrifice/consequence is a great principle. With Ali the good outweighs the bad.

[mr. magoo]

I am seeing a lot of people mounting a defence of Ali's ocasionaly overtly racist atitudes and observations based on the period he lived in.

They may well be right to do so, but if they are then that would have to alow mitigation for some early white fighters who expressed atitudes that might be considered racist by todays standards.


One of the things that did not help Ali, was having a direct association to Malcolm X during a time when he was mascarading around America, using reverse racism to raly young African Americans in a hate campaign. Ali picked up a lot of new words from Malcolm like " uncle Tom " which he later used on Joe Frazier. I don't know if Ali was truly a racist or if he was simply manafesting the thoughts, feelings, and attitudes of other black figures who truly WERE.....

[Chinxkid]

I am seeing a lot of people mounting a defence of Ali's ocasionaly overtly racist atitudes and observations based on the period he lived in.

They may well be right to do so, but if they are then that would have to alow mitigation for some early white fighters who expressed atitudes that might be considered racist by todays standards.

Very good point. I heard it all from both sides, and not just white vs. black or black vs. white. I grew up in a neighborhood that was mixed. We had blacks, Italians, Irish, some Jewish and Eastern European; in a given day you'd hear 'em all, d*go, k*ke, n*gger, pig shit shanty, p*lock, on and on and on until the words meant nothing anymore. Nobody liked intermarriage, nobody wanted to be a pioneer, but deep down, from what I've seen, damn few of them were actual racists. Meaning that there was no deep hatred, or a conscious, sincere superiority. We were all bottom feeders, scramblimg for our piece of the American dream. The only people that did not express opinions like this openly were the onesup in the ivory towers, the ones who were so far above the fray it needn't concern them at all.

[El Cepillo]

I respect Ali for being a great fighter, and I enjoy watching his fights. I admire the fact that he travelled all over the world, and took on all comers.

But as a person, he always seemed like a bit of a hypocrite (a "devout" Muslim that cheated on his wife with a "kaffa"), who was being manipulated by others. Some of his behavior towards Frazier in particular, was disgraceful as well.

[PetethePrince]

A great start to a deep and wide conversation ... Interesting thread, McGrain.

PetethePrince :good Context fellas, context!

Most of you weren't born yet, am I right? A lot of you weren't here in the U.S. Two criticisms surprise me so far ... Racist and Womanizer. Huh?

I would think that most of you calling him a racist are white, yes? As am I. But if you were a black man, back in the 60's, in America, especially in a Southern State, Kentucky is a Southern State, you were the target of systematic discrimination and racism. Imagine fellas, I know you all love your mothers, watching her from the time that you were old enough to understand what was going on, get treated like a 2nd or 3rd class citizen. How many times would you have to see her disrespected before it would piss you off irreparably? Not many I would guess. Segregated public rest rooms, neighborhoods, schools, water fountains. No colleges available to you other than the black ones. Few good jobs open to you. The idea of becoming a professional, more of a fantasy; and better not talk back or fight back or disrespect a white man. How 'bout this? Though legally the blacks got the right to vote in the 1930's, they were often kept out of the polls, to the extent that JFK at one point had to send troops to the South to make sure black voters were permitted to exercise their legal right. Ali a racist? That's like if you're walking down the street and someone sucker punches you ... but you getting arrested for giving him a good beating.

And the connotation of the term womanizer, implies a guy who angles and plots and deceives to get a woman in the sheets. There is something very unattractive about that guy, I agree. But Ali didn't have to try that hard. If anything he had to keep them away. A black guy bedding a lot of women, white women even, then?! Scandalous. Sex is fun. Sex with a new woman is fun. Don't you agree? Few of us would have, if given Ali's opportunities, had beautiful women throwing themselves at us, always, the character to consistently walk away, IMHO.

As a fighter, he revived the fight game. His loud mouth was more a way to build the gate, at a time when interest in the game was at a low point. His style was a breath of fresh air. A great fighter with all the skill, heart, and toughness to hold your interest, I heard old fighters at the time, fighters that didn't like his mouth, his bragadoccio, his ring calling, say that he was the best thing to happen to the game since WWII.

Great posts. I figured I didn't even need to get into the whole boxing aspect. Trash talking, picking the round, the poetry, and that speed and movement as a HW! Ali really invented rap. Which is why they came out with that ESPN Ali Rap documentary. I'M A BAD MAN! Float like a butterfly and sting like a bee, rumble young man rumble, ahhh!

:D What I don't like is saying the big hate between Ali fans and Joe fans. It's weird. The lack of respect is crazy (None of this on ESB by the way).

[Chinxkid]

Great posts. I figured I didn't even need to get into the whole boxing aspect. Trash talking, picking the round, the poetry, and that speed and movement as a HW! Ali really invented rap. Which is why they came out with that ESPN Ali Rap documentary. I'M A BAD MAN! Float like a butterfly and sting like a bee, rumble young man rumble, ahhh!

:D What I don't like is saying the big hate between Ali fans and Joe fans. It's weird. The lack of respect is crazy (None of this on ESB by the way).

Ok, I'm a kid at the time, but even then what I got out of that was Joe Frazier, by all appearances a sweet, humble man, but because he didn't take a stand, because he wasn't as eloquent as some, didn't voice an opinion as to whether he was in or out, could be seen as a sympathizer, a traitor. Again, with hindsight, we know this is not true. But how farfetched would it be to realize that a lot of black men if they found themselves in a spot to pull down some heavy bread would just keep their mouths shut and take it while the taking was good? Can we really blame them? But truthfully fellas, believe it or not, it was a heady time in America, and not just with the racial issue. Vietnam splintered this country. Young men didn't volunteer, they were dragged off to fight a war that half the country didn't believe in. Even as a kid I saw it: People took up sides, lined up on one or the other. There were few who shrugged it off and said, Hey, whatever. And if you did, and were in the public eye, you were seen as a guy that didn't have courage of your convictions. Unfair? Yes, but only in 20/20 hindsight.

[PowerPuncher]

Yes I do, he's a pure legend, that words often overused by Ali for good reason is boxings biggest legend that truly transcends the sport. He had charisma, heart, bravado, massive talent and had the bottle to take a stand on his beliefs, which few men do

As for the criticisms of his racism, well he was to a degree but you have to look at the time Ali lived in. Black people were treated like shit in the 60s and many were indoctorated by society as whole that they were lesser beings. Ali couldn't even get a drink in a cafe after winning the Gold Medal because he black.

I admire Ali's bottle for challenging those perceptions, the fact he said 'I'm pretty' challenged social norms as black was considered ugly. He clearly saw his religion as a way of empowering black people. Ofcourse the NOI has some insane theories and Ali has since converted to mainstream Islam. I suppose he rolled with.

His prior belief in segregation I ofcourse disagree with but it was something that was indoctorinated into him to a degree. I do to a level understand he may have wanted to be around his own people when growing up in a white society that treats black people as lesser beings.

As a person I certainly don't think Ali treated white people lesser due to race

[Bill Butcher]

Nobody is perfect but Ali amazed me inside the ring & made me laugh outside it & at the end of the day.....

The good of Ali >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The bad of Ali.

The End !

[MrMarvel]

He said many things that went way beyond that.

I'll quote from Thomas Hauser's book, p.188

"No intelligent black man or black man in his or her right mind wants white boys and white girls coming to their homes to marry their black sons and daughters to produce little pale half-white green-eyed blond-headed Negroes. And no intelligent white man or white woman wants black boys and black girls coming around their white sons and daughters and in return introducing their grandchildren as little mixed-up kinky-headed half-black ni*ggers"
Muhammad Ali

That's pure racism. Pure old-fashioned racism.

No, it's not racism at all. These views represent racial separatism advocated by a member of a minority group whose people have been owned and forced to interbreed with the white colonial masters. Americans Indians have likewise resisted interbreeding because of what it portends to the continued physical existence of their people.

Racism cannot be reduced to prejudice or racial separation without context, and power relations make the context. It is a completely different thing for, on the one hand, the dominant group to prevent minorities from accessing the same institutions or to forbid interracial mingling, than it is for, on the other hand, the oppressed minority to advocate racial separatism.

One of the methods of genocide is to assimilate a minority into the majority through interbreeding, thus physically erasing the minority. By your definition of racism, it would be racist for a people to resist complete annhilation through assimilation. If black people as a minority want to protect their numbers by resisting interbreeding, then that is part of the struggle against colonialism.

For the record, I don't agree with Ali. I don't believe in racial separatism. But that doesn't make what Ali said racist.

[McGrain]

You have a subtle underlining dislike for Ali.

Thanks for telling me.

It carries in your post especially when Frazer gets mentioned.

Even my opening post?

You go on about quotes for some obviously slanted book about what Ali said. Neither nor proven nor factual evidence yet you take the revisionism as if it's the obvious reality just to form an opinion outside the popular norm. If there's something I dislike, it's that.

Revisionism? Is this a joke? Not proven factual evidence? Are you high? I offered up around 6 independent sources of his using a racist word that you didn't even think he used (despite claims that your some sort of Ali expert) and you still try to deny he used them. Read through the thread. That sort of bullshit is exactly why people on this forum struggle to love him.

That you would bring this up again baffles me.

But really. A womanizer? Every HW champion was. If he wasn't, he would be one of the exceptions in HW history. It was a weakness for all them. But who are we to criticize without being in that position. So much easier from our desktops. :lol: Seriously though, it's the big Islam/Muslim thing that lets you give flack for it because it's hypocritical of him. Unless I have percieved that laugh as not being sarcasm. Either way you mentioning something like this out of the blue when it's a criticism you could have of any HW is percular.

Yeah, you've got this compelely wrong (again) I wasn't being sarcastic. Ali's womanising doesn't trouble me even 1%. Based on your post I would say you are far more troubled about it than I am.

The only Ali fan on this forum that thinks I am after Muhammad for something is you. Other guys who love him, Bill The Buchter especially Bokaj, will tell you how much I respect and appreciate the man.

It takes a nuthugger of stunning preportions to turn criticism of very obvious flaws into hate.

You, in other words.

[McGrain]

It's correct that his significance as a political figure is greatly overrated.

Althoug I agree with you that the muslim thing was bullshit, I'm not sure I agree with you that he is overated as a political figure. I don't think I agree with that at all. I think more meaning was heaped onto his words than was in them and I think that more significance was attatched to him as a political figure than was justifiable, but that's neither here nor there. He was a figurehead for black America at the time of the civil rights war. He was the most famous black man and American in the world. That alone is of huge significance.

And the tiny little things - at a time when black fighters - great men - tended to refer to white reporters as "sir" he took the fucking piss out of them. In spite of his militant stand on race he was a man first and a black man second. Read that sentence again, because even fucking Martin Luther King, with his preaching of Christianity and peace and togetherness couldn't pull that off all the way.

In this, I would consider him one of the most important black men in American history. He was the fulcrum upon which America turned before, during and after the Vietnam war. Whether or not he "meant it" is neither here nor there.

[McGrain]

But that doesn't make what Ali said racist.

He belonged to a radical religious group that proported to believe that white men were built by a mad sceintist, not Allah, and were therefore inferior.

[essexboy]

I liked him in the ring, who doesnt? But I cant understand why he was so loved for ridiculing his opponents, the way he treated Frazier was disgusting, I know he showed him respect later on but he should have given him more respect after he beat him in the first fight. It seemed every time he spoke about Frazier it was a backhanded compliment and I cant stand that. It endeared me to the more down to earth Frazier.

[Chinxkid]

I liked him in the ring, who doesnt? But I cant understand why he was so loved for ridiculing his opponents, the way he treated Frazier was disgusting, I know he showed him respect later on but he should have given him more respect after he beat him in the first fight. It seemed every time he spoke about Frazier it was a backhanded compliment and I cant stand that. It endeared me to the more down to earth Frazier.

I hear that, and I think we'd be missing a point if we didn't acknowledge that Ali's fame, fortune, idolatry, went to his head a little. But maybe no more than a rock 'n roll idol. A thin line I would think between the clowning and the chest pounding theatrics to ridiculing an opponent. I think he was a complex guy, an assortment of pluses and minuses.

[Seamus]

I liked him in the ring, who doesnt?

Many of his 70's efforts bore the crap out of me. He reverted to the role of entertainer too often and was one of the most blatant rulebreakers in the history of the division. Much to the over-awed judges, he would endure a merciless beating for 2 and 1/2 minutes then let fly a not-so-fast-any-longer combo of pitty pat punches and mug for the judges as though he won the round. Neither compelling entertainment nor compelling boxing, in my opinion.

[MrPR]

I loved his character..he was entertaining

[Chinxkid]

Many of his 70's efforts bore the crap out of me. He reverted to the role of entertainer too often and was one of the most blatant rulebreakers in the history of the division. Much to the over-awed judges, he would endure a merciless beating for 2 and 1/2 minutes then let fly a not-so-fast-any-longer combo of pitty pat punches and mug for the judges as though he won the round. Neither compelling entertainment nor compelling boxing, in my opinion.

This is obviously true. But by that time his persona was in the ring with him. I just don't think he had the legs after a certain point. When he pulled it off, it could be all the more amazing, and people could say, "Damn, this guy really does walk on water." It's probably also true that the refs and the judges were caught up in his celebrity too, and I'm sure he got some breaks and won some rounds others wouldn't have.

[groove]

at the end of the day, ali loved meeting and entertaining people and the majority of people in return loved him. his boxing style was original for the time cuz no one had seen a heavyweight move that fast like a lightweight around the ring. many first thought that he couldn't win against the best with his light punches and that he wouldn't be able to take good shots. he liked proving them wrong. he was the most self-confident boxer of all time and sometimes that annoys the hell outta people. his fast moving lightweight style was unique to the heavyweight division and people could relate to him as here was someone different but great to watch with unorthadox skills - he was a dancer in the ring and he danced to a different tune in the heavyweight division especially in the 1960s.

[PetethePrince]

Power puncher said it the best.

Everyone who sits hear and talks about his association to a hate group rather than seeing what he did in the moments, where he came from, and he how generally carried himself. Obviously he didn't believe that all whites were the devil and that they were "inferior." But the Nation of Islam impacted Ali, and for someone who was looking for a reason to be upset about a situation it would a be a bold athlete/star.

Everybody has different reactions to racial injustices. I don't agree with Ali and think he was wrong on a lot of things but I do feel that this is Ali holding a natural defensive reactionary position. I can't defend the man entirely. However, to simply just label him a racist when he belonged to a complex and unjust environment would be oversimplifying things to say the least. Things are far more complex then that.
He belonged to a radical religious group that proported to believe that white men were built by a mad sceintist, not Allah, and were therefore inferior.

The only Ali fan on this forum that thinks I am after Muhammad for something is you. Other guys who love him, Bill The Buchter especially Bokaj, will tell you how much I respect and appreciate the man.

It takes a nuthugger of stunning preportions to turn criticism of very obvious flaws into hate.Firstly, I'm not turning criticism into hate. You don't have to tell me what others think of you. I have an independent mind and thought to form my own views. I know from previous discussions that you think Ali was racist and poorly treated fighters. I can't deny everything. But I do know that you have a lack of understanding about the situation in which this man came up in. And it's not surprising especially when knowing your not American. Why can't you take my criticism of you about criticizing him? That's the irony of this. Look, I just don't think we CAN HONESTLY put ourselves in his shoes with his mind. I know I'd have a strong reactionary position with the injustices and racism I would have to deal with. Ali got over caught up in it with the Nation of Islam. I don't believe he believed everything. He think he got the message. The message to the Black Man. And in that message dealt with factual truths. It all gets carried away with misplaced hate and kookiness from Elijiah. However, have you seen Ali treat or carry himself with that belief on his shoulders? Did he wrongly treat whites? Anymore wrongly then the way he was treated by them? Once you ask those questions, then you understanding the perspective far more. Your lack of understanding to his perspective, position, and roots is obvious... just as obvious as Ali's flaws. The subtle negative tone you have when talking about him is obvious. You being non-American while holding such a simple view on the main is something I can understand more as well. :good You saying the Muslim thing was complete bullshit is complete bullshit and completely wrong for you to do from your arm-chair. All these critics I can tell do not come from America. Have no clue on American racial relations and have zero understanding of the Vietnam 60's/70's culture and therefore do not understand the context.

[janitor]

I admire Ali's bottle for challenging those perceptions, the fact he said 'I'm pretty' challenged social norms as black was considered ugly. He clearly saw his religion as a way of empowering black people. Ofcourse the NOI has some insane theories and Ali has since converted to mainstream Islam. I suppose he rolled with.

His prior belief in segregation I ofcourse disagree with but it was something that was indoctorinated into him to a degree. I do to a level understand he may have wanted to be around his own people when growing up in a white society that treats black people as lesser beings.

As a person I certainly don't think Ali treated white people lesser due to race

This is a good analysis.

Ali obviously saw his religeon as empowering black people and the issue of him saying "I am prety" is not something I had thought of before. Even today one of the big things of white supremacists is trying to portray black people as being ugly.

Some of the atitudes he expoused were prety obnoxious, but he was basicaly a nice kid who fell under the spell of a group of crazies who took all his money.

[Caponecartels]

Some of the atitudes he expoused were prety obnoxious, but he was basicaly a nice kid who fell under the spell of a group of crazies who took all his money.

That's exactly what I think of Ali.

[janitor]

[quote=MrMarvel;4804687]No, it's not racism at all. These views represent racial separatism advocated by a member of a minority group whose people have been owned and forced to interbreed with the white colonial masters. Americans Indians have likewise resisted interbreeding because of what it portends to the continued physical existence of their people.


So by that logic would you agree with the apartheid system in South Africa?

It was only aimed at preventing interbreeding and protecting racial purity so it wasnt racist right?


Racism cannot be reduced to prejudice or racial separation without context, and power relations make the context. It is a completely different thing for, on the one hand, the dominant group to prevent minorities from accessing the same institutions or to forbid interracial mingling, than it is for, on the other hand, the oppressed minority to advocate racial separatism.


How is it different.

Why should anybody be denied access to certain institutions or relationships with certain people based on the colour of their skin.

Why should a white man not be able to marry a black woman if they both wanted it?

One of the methods of genocide is to assimilate a minority into the majority through interbreeding, thus physically erasing the minority.

You have serious issues.

If two ethnic groups are placed together they will interbreed, and perhaps the bigger group will swamp the smaller over 1000 years, but that is not important.

What is important is the choice of the individual to asociate with whoever they choose.


By your definition of racism, it would be racist for a people to resist complete annhilation through assimilation. If black people as a minority want to protect their numbers by resisting interbreeding, then that is part of the struggle against colonialism.


It is a personal choice for each individual of that race.

If you want to avoid marrying a white woman to avoid diluting your blood line that is your choice.

If sombody else dos't that is their choice.

Your right to throw out your fist ends at my face.

[McGrain]

Everyone who sits hear and talks about his association to a hate group rather than seeing what he did in the moments, where he came from, and he how generally carried himself.

This sentence doesn't actually make any sense. I think you are trying to say we should dismiss his association with a hate group because of the way he "generally carried himself?"

Obviously he didn't believe that all whites were the devil and that they were "inferior."

Why is it obvious? Do you think the entire group didn't really believe this? Or just Ali and a few others? What are you basing this on? Secondly, even if you are correct and he secretly knew that this was all bullshit during his prolonged membership, don't you think his direct and persistant support of this seperatists group and it's preachings of racial hatred is in and of itself a racist act?




Firstly, I'm not turning criticism into hate. You don't have to tell me what others think of you. I have an independent mind and thought to form my own views.

Your own views are why I referenced these others. I want you to understand that nobody else on this forum seems to have a problem with my position on Ali. It's just you. He's one of the most widely defended fighters on the forum and I have never had an issue with a poster who thinks I have an underpinning dislike for the fighter which affects my objectivity.

I know from previous discussions that you think Ali was racist and poorly treated fighters. I can't deny everything. But I do know that you have a lack of understanding about the situation in which this man came up in.

Explian it to me please. What is it I am missing? And please read my post #48 before you do si.

And it's not surprising especially when knowing your not American.

So there's more validity to an American criticising Ali than a European? Are you black? Did you live through the civil rights war? Here's what I know; I know i'm more widely read in this area and in Ali generally. The gaps in your knowledge are embarrassing, I think the basis for a proper deconstrutcion should be based upon knowledge rather than race. You disagree?

Why can't you take my criticism of you about criticizing him?

I have no trouble with criticism. It's a mainstay of the forum and I have no issue with it. I do have an issue with your calling my posts "neither proven nor factual evidence". What you are refering to here, incredibly, is a disagreement about whether or not Ali had ever referred to Joe Frazier as a "******".

You said that he hadn't, I said that he had. I then provided multiple sources proving he did, from varied sources. This you refer to as "quotes from an obviously slanted book". Are you fucking stupid?

THEN, you try to deny that the quotes are valid because they "don't appear on film" which is pathetic. Finally you back down and accept that Ali used the word about Frazier.

Now you are saying my sources were bad and designed "only to form an opinion outside the norm" (i don't know where you get this shit from). That you would bring it up again, when you so ridiculed yourself is astonishing to me.

So I don't mind being criticised, but I do dislike posters lying about my input.

That's the irony of this. Look, I just don't think we CAN HONESTLY put ourselves in his shoes with his mind. I know I'd have a strong reactionary position with the injustices and racism I would have to deal with. Ali got over caught up in it with the Nation of Islam. I don't believe he believed everything. He think he got the message. The message to the Black Man. And in that message dealt with factual truths. It all gets carried away with misplaced hate and kookiness from Elijiah. However, have you seen Ali treat or carry himself with that belief on his shoulders? Did he wrongly treat whites? Anymore wrongly then the way he was treated by them? Once you ask those questions, then you understanding the perspective far more. Your lack of understanding to his perspective, position, and roots is obvious... just as obvious as Ali's flaws. The subtle negative tone you have when talking about him is obvious. You being non-American while holding such a simple view on the main is something I can understand more as well. :good

All of this holds truth.

It veers close to the "minority groups can't be racist argument" argument though, which is obviously nonsense. If you are one of the most famous men in the world, your actions have impact. If you join one of the most openly racist organisations in your country, that will have impact - and even if it doesn't, the very endorsement is a racist act. Why does this have to be hard? He was part of a repressed people and his reaction was racist. End of conversation I should say.

[IntentionalButt]

even weird people like Billy Crystal talk about him

:rofl

[McGrain]

:lol:

Seriously though, they have Billy Crystal talking about his reasons for Ali's treatment of Terrell on the Through The Eyes Of The World DVD.

"It was a difficult time."

[IntentionalButt]

I'm with you in that I'm definitely more of a Frazier fan.

I also have a deep seated loathing for all things NOI related.

I also find the relentless swagger a bit more tiresome than charming, but this can be chalked up to a generational thing as I have the luxury of its novelty having long since worn off and growing up in an age where a certain degree of clowning and self-aggrandizing is expected of most high-profile athletes.

That said, I'm manning the oar right next to you in the same boat - where every time I see tape of even an older Clay, hell even Larry's punching bag, I am a little bit awed and humbled by the considerable physical gifts and the equally impressive assuredness and discipline-borne mastery that accompanies it.

[Rock0052]

I'm indifferent/neutral towards him. I respect his accomplishments and he was a great fighter. Even the idol worship is tolerable in tiny doses, but the lengths to which his Loyal Followers go to defend every single thing he did that may be a legitimate reason for people to not be a fan is what drives me crazy.

As far as Ali himself, he seems like a decent enough guy now. But over the years? The man's given plenty of fodder to people that could offend them for one reason or another. I still think it was a real dick move for him to say what he did about Frazier and basically treating other black fighters as doormats all while ascending to the status of being a "symbol".

To continue playing devil's advocate- we've got a member of an anti-white radical group, who didn't hesitate to throw other black fighters under the bus, capitalized on his celebrity to get questionable decisions, was pro-segregation, womanized like no tomorrow, and has millions of rabid followers who think he walked on water.

Yep. I have no idea why some people might not love that. :lol:

[PetethePrince]

So there's more validity to an American criticising Ali than a European? Are you black? Did you live through the civil rights war? Here's what I know; I know i'm more widely read in this area and in Ali generally. The gaps in your knowledge are embarrassing, I think the basis for a proper deconstrutcion should be based upon knowledge rather than race. You disagree?

You can't deconstruct what you don't understand which is the main point. There's no point in my doing any lengthy response because you simply don't get it. AND NO freaking way in hell do you know more than me about American History regarding its culture and the times during the 60's & 70's. Saying so is embarrassing. Your perspective is clearly from a European. Just like you and Chris perspective on Dempsey (Although more justified). You also aren't more read in Ali. You're more read on the feud between Frazier and Ali. That's the only thing you "know."

You said something about minority groups know not being racist (To the equivalence of Ali). The difference between now and then is miles gone. Ali couldn't eat in his own town. Now, we have affirmative action which reiterates minorities getting more chances at scholarships and colleges. Obviously, most blacks are poorer and in worse position because of past grievances from whites. However, the scales have been much more balanced. At least through effort.

My point with Ali is. Do we know how we would react to racial injustice? How we would react to the teachings of the Nation of Islams preachings? The point is the times were much different. If you don't understand the context of things, you'll get a flat criticism of this and this without understanding the situation. And that's all you're doing.

[Schmapps]

I do love Muhammad Ali. Growing up I always knew who he was, and later in life I idolized him for a long time. As I gained maturity, I realized that the man wasn't perfect, in or outside the ring, the way many people would have you beleive. But so what? The fact is, in addition to making everyone from Billy Crystal to Dianna Ross want to talk about boxing, to this very day in 2009, the world takes notice when Ali makes an appearance. Rightly or wrongly, the man is arguably the most charismatic person of the 20th century. At least top 5. Love him or hate him that's saying something.

It's captivating to watch footage like thew movie When we were kings...the man is hilarious and has roomfulls of people hanging on his every word. He was blessed with unbeleivable and almost scary charisma.

[Gesta]

I like Ali the fighter as he was great and he fought the best out there.

I don't like all the nut huggery that goes with Ali, as I cannot watch an Ali fight with the sound on, cause of cunts like pecheco etc... and his constant fouling (holding the back of the head) and nothing ever happens.

I don't like Ali for the way he acted towards Frasier, as Frasier helped him out when he could not box , then was a cunt to him.

He is an egotisical cunt that had to belittle everyone else to make himself feel/look good.

[DRMULLEN]

Ali, at one time had it all. Looks, fighter, poe

[DRMULLEN]

POEMS, ETC..aLI WAS THE GREATEST.

[fists of fury]

This has been a fascinating thread in many ways.

Although I can't say I fell in love with boxing because of Ali, (I didn't get into the sport because of any one guy) Muhammad was certainly one of the boxers, probably the main boxer actually, on whom I focused a lot of my attention early on. As I said in another thread, my earliest memory of watching a fight included Ali as one of the participants.
He was on dozens of magazine covers, and the focus of hundreds of articles. Even when another boxer was the subject of an article, Ali was often mentioned somewhere. He had huge pull.

So yeah, it was easy to get to know Ali through print and video. For me back then, it was easy to see where the appeal of the man lay. He was simply one of a kind with that vibrant, bright personality, the quick wit, and that slightly mesmerizing boxing style of his. One got the sense though, that behind all the bragging and showmanship, there was a real person underneath; a deep, compassionate person who loved people. Despite all the flash, there was real substance there as well. I loved Ali as many did.

But then I slowly but surely fell out of love with Ali. Partly it was because I felt that his showmanship and larger-than-life character was overblown by the media, that his stance on racial and societal issues had been focussed on too much while the efforts of other fighters, notably Joe Louis, who did perhaps more for the black athlete and blacks in general, were virtually ignored. Ali's loud mouth got him a lot of attention, whereas quieter types like Joe didn't garner anything near the same attention.
Partly it was because I was just getting sick of seeing reruns of his fights on TV, whilst footage of other gifted boxers was barely ever shown. I was also tired of everyone just loving the guy, pretty much.
As McGrain pointed out earlier, google Sonny Liston images and what do you get? Ali standing over Liston, Ali punching Liston, Liston retiring in his corner...it's Ali, Ali, Ali.
You can do the same for Foreman, Frazier and others who Ali fought and it's much the same.
Seriously, it gets irksome to say the least. It's almost as if these guys only have any significance because they fought Ali, and it's total rubbish.
So for many years when the subect of Ali came up, my eyes would almost automatically shift to another thread, or I'd turn the page if I was reading a magazine or book. I'd had my fill of Ali.

Oddly enough, just as I slowly and almost imperceptably fell out of love with Ali, my interest in him has slowly been re-awakened, but with a new, less naive perception of him. I'm aware of his faults as a man and a fighter, but that has humanised him all the more to me.

In Ali, boxing has an icon, a true legend. One reporter once likened meeting Ali to having an audience with God. Ali simply has a mystique about him that probably no other fighter in history can match. Ali hasn't got many years left on this earth, so we really should try and appreciate just what we've got before it's too late.

[Godfather]

Not a huge fan.

Since he retired I like him more

I like Frazier a lot more. I dont like the way Ali verbally bullied Frazier and was praised for it. Ali's antics in the lead up to their first fight was downright shameful

I also hate the way the media says he is the greatest fighter of all time (Although theres not a lot he can do about that)

[Neverchair]

You can't not like Ali for everything he achieved in and out of the ring.

My only gripe is his affiliation with the NOI. That group turned him into a really twisted human being.

However I do believe that Ali wasnt as clever as people make out and was quite malleable at that time. He allowed them to use him for their own purposes.

Like a lot of NOI members he appears to be over all that these days and a better person for it.

Also, a lot of his quotes seem to come out of innocence rather than real intelligence.

[McGrain]

You can't deconstruct what you don't understand which is the main point.

So you've said. The main point to you seems to be that having a position about a position you don't have direct experience off is unjustifiable and invalid. Kind of makes you wonder what we are all doing here discussing world class boxers having never fought for titles oruselves.

There's no point in my doing any lengthy response because you simply don't get it.

And because there's no way for you to justify a) your total mis-understanding of the original point that got us into this fruitless conversation (or even acknoledge it, apparently) and b) your dismissal of my sources as "unproven" and taken from "one biased book". Is that a joke? I empoyed multiple sources and you tried to dismiss them because they didn't agree with your view. I've never seen you do any referenced work on this forum, you're just another poster with an impassioned position backed by opinion. The only Ali suorce you've mentioned is his autobiography, ghost writen by a member of the racist organisation to which Ali belonged and the most skewed book about Ali available in print. In this thread, alone, iv'e referenced two films and one contemporary Ring report. You probably don't acknowledge the Ring report because it's "not filmed", a direct quote, and some of the most pitiful reaching i've ever seen on ESB (saying something given what goes on in general).

AND NO freaking way in hell do you know more than me about American History regarding its culture and the times during the 60's & 70's. Saying so is embarrassing.

In regards specifically to Ali? Maybe that's true, but all I have is yoru word. I've yet to see anything posted by yourself to support this opinion, which you seem to think is enough. I can only judge you on what you post, which is nothing of interest. Maybe you have secret knowledge you're not willing to share, but how would that impact my opinion of your posts? You can't just turn up, claim knowledege you haven't proven (and that I dont think for one moment you have - nobody with knowledge of the situation would allow their ass to be shown in the way you have) and expect everyone to believe you. Surely you know that?

Your perspective is clearly from a European. Just like you and Chris perspective on Dempsey (Although more justified).

The position of myself and Chris is described by contemporary sources on the fighter and the situation on the ground at that time. Again, all you've shown is opinion. You've appeared on the forum, offered your opinions as gospel and backed this up by claiming Europeans can't understand like Americans. What a jip.

You also aren't more read in Ali. You're more read on the feud between Frazier and Ali. That's the only thing you "know."


Maybe you are, but you haven't shown it, at all. You've shown embarrassing gaps in understanding, little more.

You said something about minority groups know not being racist (To the equivalence of Ali). The difference between now and then is miles gone.


Again, nothing but cheesy moral reletavism. You seem to think that because Ali suffered in a way most posters have not, most posters can't achieve a balanced opinion on the situation. This position renders the study of history invalid. It's nonsense.

My point with Ali is. Do we know how we would react to racial injustice?

I don't know. That doesn't mean i can't come to understand the situation through learning and come to a balanced opinion.

How we would react to the teachings of the Nation of Islams preachings?.

Are you kidding? I might not know how I would react to social injustice, but I know how I would react if a preacher told me aliens were going to come down in spaceships (currenly in orbit, no less), pick me up and take me to the promised land whilst the other races of the earth were consumed by holocost because they are less than human.

I would tell him to fuck off.

You're entire position boils down to "you're not American and black and being subjected to racial prejudice so you can't have an opinion". Which is fucking nonsense.

[Stevie G]

You can't deconstruct what you don't understand which is the main point. There's no point in my doing any lengthy response because you simply don't get it. AND NO freaking way in hell do you know more than me about American History regarding its culture and the times during the 60's & 70's. Saying so is embarrassing. Your perspective is clearly from a European. Just like you and Chris perspective on Dempsey (Although more justified). You also aren't more read in Ali. You're more read on the feud between Frazier and Ali. That's the only thing you "know."

You said something about minority groups know not being racist (To the equivalence of Ali). The difference between now and then is miles gone. Ali couldn't eat in his own town. Now, we have affirmative action which reiterates minorities getting more chances at scholarships and colleges. Obviously, most blacks are poorer and in worse position because of past grievances from whites. However, the scales have been much more balanced. At least through effort.

My point with Ali is. Do we know how we would react to racial injustice? How we would react to the teachings of the Nation of Islams preachings? The point is the times were much different. If you don't understand the context of things, you'll get a flat criticism of this and this without understanding the situation. And that's all you're doing.
The thing with the Nation Of Islam,is that while it was an organisation with one dismensional views,it did make a lot of black people feel good about themselves. Muhammad Ali discovered it when he needed something like it to express his views about certain things. And no,I do n't believe that he was ever racist. All things along those lines,that he came out with,were in reactionary response to the racism that he encountered,as a black man growing up in the North America of the time. Look at how many whites he had in his camp. Angie Dundee,Ferdie Pacheco and Gene Kilroy for a start.

[McGrain]

For me back then, it was easy to see where the appeal of the man lay. He was simply one of a kind with that vibrant, bright personality, the quick wit, and that slightly mesmerizing boxing style of his.

I think you've hit the nail on the head as to why the seemingly frustrated hardcore should maybe appreciate him a bit more. He's unique. When you're as into boxing history as much as we, as a whole, tend to be, then that's a real treat.

[Unforgiven]

No, it's not racism at all. These views represent racial separatism advocated by a member of a minority group whose people have been owned and forced to interbreed with the white colonial masters. Americans Indians have likewise resisted interbreeding because of what it portends to the continued physical existence of their people.

Racism cannot be reduced to prejudice or racial separation without context, and power relations make the context. It is a completely different thing for, on the one hand, the dominant group to prevent minorities from accessing the same institutions or to forbid interracial mingling, than it is for, on the other hand, the oppressed minority to advocate racial separatism.

One of the methods of genocide is to assimilate a minority into the majority through interbreeding, thus physically erasing the minority. By your definition of racism, it would be racist for a people to resist complete annhilation through assimilation. If black people as a minority want to protect their numbers by resisting interbreeding, then that is part of the struggle against colonialism.

For the record, I don't agree with Ali. I don't believe in racial separatism. But that doesn't make what Ali said racist.

No, what he's impying is that the offspring of mixed-racial couples should be viewed as physically and socially undesirable by their "intelligent" grandparents.

And he makes no distinction between the oppressor majority and the oppressed minority in his argument.

Whereas you say :

It is a completely different thing for, on the one hand, the dominant group to prevent minorities from accessing the same institutions or to forbid interracial mingling, than it is for, on the other hand, the oppressed minority to advocate racial separatism.

Ali says :
And no intelligent white man or white woman in his right mind wants black boys and black girls coming around their homes to marry their white sons and daughters and in return introducing their grandchildren as little mixed-up kinky-headed half-black n*iggers. You want your child to look like you.

For Ali this isn't an intellectual argument for anti-colonial struggle. For him it applies to whites as well as blacks, and he supports the views of the "intelligent white man in his right mind" who would be horrified by his grandchildren being of mixed race, the white man who would forbid it. And presumably the white man who has pride in "white blood" and the "purity of the white race" and a disdain for race-mixing in general would be holding the "correct view" by Ali's argument.

And that's not surprising, because it is a matter of record that "The Honorable" Elijah Muhammad was a admirer of The American Nazi Party, and once invited the notorious self-styled "Fuhrer" of that organization to address his followers.

And Elijah Muhammad preached that all races should stay seperated from one another.
And if you do the research you will find that this "prophet's" views on race-mixing weren't sanitized with semi-intellectual or partially defensible theories of anti-colonial struggle.
He viewed different "races" as different "species" and believed God had forbidden the mixing of races, rather than it just being an imperative related to the socio-political context of the times.
But then again, this same guy preached some crazy stuff, he was a nut. And to understand Muhammad Ali it's right that we accurately depict what the ideology of the NOI under Elijah Muhammad was, and not dress it up in the more sophisticated categories of anti-colonial or black liberation theory.

This is just one of the articles Elijah wrote "The Shame of Intermixing Races" :

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[McGrain]

The fact that Ali had 22 fights after Zaire baffles me in the extreme. What a career. Like Mailer says though, he hurt himself in those fights. I wish he had packed it in after rematching Frazier. OK, that win wasn't overwhelming, but Jesus. What a career it would have been. And maybe he would have been OK.

[fists of fury]

The fact that Ali had 22 fights after Zaire baffles me in the extreme. What a career. Like Mailer says though, he hurt himself in those fights. I wish he had packed it in after rematching Frazier. OK, that win wasn't overwhelming, but Jesus. What a career it would have been. And maybe he would have been OK.

I suppose it was simply another case of the fghter not wanting to let go. Maybe he feared fading away from people's memories...who knows?

[Stevie G]

I suppose it was simply another case of the fghter not wanting to let go. Maybe he feared fading away from people's memories...who knows?
Moth to the flame syndrome. Boxing was where he did his thing. The perfect time for him to have gone was after Zaire.

[Smith]

Yeah, that's a cracking post gets right to the nub of the thing. Trying to explain to people why anyone other than maybe Robinson (who they only heard off because Ali spoke about him) is greater than Ali is like explaing why fucking is fun to the Pope.Precisely, it's infuriating.

Not a week went by back when I was a student did I not see a Ali poster on some common room/lounge wall or in some hall room. Thats all very well and I liked seeing it, but I learnt to bite my tongue when these poster bearers would tell me that he was the best ever, no one was remotely close to him in history and yes, he was never beaten :yep - (except by one guy chris who was in my hall that said ali only lost to one man, Tyson :twisted:, of course I had to do the right thing and share some knowledge with this character)


The thing with Ali is everyone knows him.

My Grandad who never watched boxing loved watching Ali. Im sure you guys will know someone like that True, my great grandma back in the day when I was wee used to love him, speak about him, say he was the best, didnt have a clue about other boxing other than the Scots contingent, and best of all, was deeply racist against blacks due to her upbringing in secluded Scotland. And thats the best bit, it didnt matter he was black to her, not one bit, because he was Ali.

Nobody is perfect but Ali amazed me inside the ring & made me laugh outside it & at the end of the day.....

The good of Ali >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The bad of Ali.

The End !This sums the man up after all that though.

[Chinxkid]

You know, we all get smarter with age. We're able to sort out truth from the false perceptions we had in our youth. This is the natural order of maturing, this is the final stage of our personal philosophy. But ... when our final act is stolen from us due to fault of our own or not, then all we are left with and all we leave is the song that we had on repeat when we left the house. I wonder how Ali would have balanced his views for our consideration in his old age. We are judging him largely by his impressionable, headstrong youth.

How would we feel about him if he'd had the chance to correct himself and communicate those views, if we believe that he's grown.

[Chinxkid]

For those keying on Ali's rant against intermarriage and interbreeding, ask yourselves this ... If for hundreds of years the majority race that you and your minority race share a country with, had consistently cordoned you and yours off into segregated neighborhoods, had shunned your race to the point that any sexual contact with you by one of their females was seen as her kiss of death, had treated you like you were unclean to the point that they had to give you your own water fountains would you then not get to the point where you said, Well, fuck you then. You don't want me, you don't want to sit next to me at a lunch counter, you have made generations of my people feel like there is something wrong with us to the point that it's imbedded in our cultural character, part of who we are now, how we see ourselves, something that will take as many generations going as it's been coming, then no, you're right, we don't want to marry you either. If that doesn't move you, put in these simple terms ... You've been trying to convince a dame for weeks that you are the one for her and vice versa. But she just won't go. If you're anything like me sooner or later your pride kicks in, right?

[Bokaj]

The fact that Ali had 22 fights after Zaire baffles me in the extreme. What a career. Like Mailer says though, he hurt himself in those fights. I wish he had packed it in after rematching Frazier. OK, that win wasn't overwhelming, but Jesus. What a career it would have been. And maybe he would have been OK.

You'd want him to quit before Zaire? That would have been very anticlimatic. Or did you perhaps mean after Manilla?

IMO he should have retired after Zaire at the earliest and after Manilla at the latest.

[Arka]

No particular hate or love for the man outside the ring.

[PetethePrince]

The thing with the Nation Of Islam,is that while it was an organisation with one dismensional views,it did make a lot of black people feel good about themselves. Muhammad Ali discovered it when he needed something like it to express his views about certain things. And no,I do n't believe that he was ever racist. All things along those lines,that he came out with,were in reactionary response to the racism that he encountered,as a black man growing up in the North America of the time. Look at how many whites he had in his camp. Angie Dundee,Ferdie Pacheco and Gene Kilroy for a start.

Bingo.

All aside, I can't justify everything. Ali's actions never showed he believed anything about space shape Aliens. He treated the whites around him fairly. It's a reactionary position. Join the NAI is radical but a position I can understand.

[ChrisPontius]

Just like you and Chris perspective on Dempsey (Although more justified).

Could you expand on this? It would've been more appropriate if you called me on this directly and on the topic, but now i'm too curious not to ask, especially considering i've repeatedly quoted and even posted articles and other primary sources of the time.




Ali's behaviour in one word can be described as dualism. He'd always say one thing and do the other. He'd say he was going to dance circles around Foreman, but did the most extreme opposite. He'd make statement about women that shouldn't wear short skirt, but would cheat on his wife and be a womanizer in general. He often said blatantly racist things, but you'll often see him treat white individuals nicely.

I recently saw a Dutch documentary from a visit in 1976, when he was promoting an autobiography that was released here. He was very generous and nice to Rudi Lubbers (a white man), and saying that Rudy would be champ after he retired, but in a funny way. Brilliant stuff.

[PetethePrince]

So you've said. The main point to you seems to be that having a position about a position you don't have direct experience off is unjustifiable and invalid. Kind of makes you wonder what we are all doing here discussing world class boxers having never fought for titles oruselves.

Obviously not, therefore my opinion would be invalid/void as well.

The only Ali suorce you've mentioned is his autobiography, ghost writen by a member of the racist organisation to which Ali belonged and the most skewed book about Ali available in print.

It's an autobiography. What autobiography isn't biased? Is Joe Frazier's autobiography not skewed?

In this thread, alone, iv'e referenced two films and one contemporary Ring report. You probably don't acknowledge the Ring report because it's "not filmed", a direct quote, and some of the most pitiful reaching i've ever seen on ESB (saying something given what goes on in general).

What does this have to do with anything? You seem to think that grabbing at sources validates an opinion. In the end it's an opinion. I haven't seen you do any referencing in this thread either way. So what does that have to do with your position? What is your position again? Love and hate Ali? You barely explained why, I just sense a tone of dislike for the man when you mention him. That's what started this whole charade. You couldn't take that so you start mentioning members here that would disagree. WHO GIVES A FUCK about these testimonials, members, and references. You always are trying to validate what you believe or have to say. I've never seen such a pathetic defensive oriented poster before.

In regards specifically to Ali? Maybe that's true, but all I have is yoru word. I've yet to see anything posted by yourself to support this opinion, which you seem to think is enough.

There is nothing I can source to further validate my opinion. What do I know about Ali? His autobiography, a biography that I believe James Lipton wrote (I can search amazon to further remember the title. I read it awhile ago) and all the films I've seen of him. Documentaries, etc. Some would include the Ali Rap, Ali Dozen, Ali Ringside, Ali ABC Documentary, Thrilla in Manilla, etc.


The position of myself and Chris is described by contemporary sources on the fighter and the situation on the ground at that time. Again, all you've shown is opinion.

These sources are opinions. So you're using an opinion to further validate your opinion. Good job :good :lol:.

You've appeared on the forum, offered your opinions as gospel and backed this up by claiming Europeans can't understand like Americans. What a jip.

It's no suprise nor coincidence that Dempsey's hardest critics are non-Americans. I can admit American loves him. I can admit American are biased on Dempsey. I can also understand the complicated racial situations in America. You seem to oversimplify these things and their context. You just take A fighter avoided B fighter when there is far more to it. Whether it's reasonable is justifiable and debatable. But 1910's race-related sports aren't comparable to more modern day situations.

I'll give you another example. Did you see the Documentary that came out on HBO Called Assault in the Ring? Having a perspective that showed little sympathy or understanding would be saying that Resto is mostly to blame. He wore the gloves while knowing something was happening, and he kept going and furthering punishing his opponent unfairly. I could bash and bash Lou. However, my perspective would be rather oversimplistic to a more complicated matter. Resto is a boxer. Boxers fight to win. In order to win they pummel the other fighter without getting pummeled. That's boxing in its simplest form. Resto did what most boxers would do. Lewis put him in an uncomfortable and akward position. He's at his moment to win. He's shot has come and he will do what he is told and what his corner told him. That's what boxers are supposed to do. Now, the conscious should come in to play. Most observers and outsiders would say "WHY DIDN't he stop. Saying something was wrong with his gloves." The police man asked the same thing to Resto. Resto said, "Because boxers don't quit. We do what our trainer tells us to do. We keep going on."

Some may consider Resto a scapegoat, a victim in his own right. Others might slander him and criticism him mercilessly. A lot of non-boxing fans to hear the story would wonder why he didn't stop and just tell the ref. His sons wonder the same thing... his sons said he would that if he it were truth.


Maybe you are, but you haven't shown it, at all. You've shown embarrassing gaps in understanding, little more.

How haven't I. How have you shown more? How have I shown little understanding? And not you?


Again, nothing but cheesy moral reletavism. You seem to think that because Ali suffered in a way most posters have not, most posters can't achieve a balanced opinion on the situation. This position renders the study of history invalid. It's nonsense.

I don't even know your opinion. You're the one really trying to find something to argue at this point. I don't think you have a balanced perspective on the subject. I'm saying some people need to understand context and be realistic with their opinions. I'm saying judge slowly, that is all. Exactly the opposite. Study more, criticize less. You can't put your thoughts, your mind, and say this and this is wrong. Morality isn't absolute in these circumstances. Ali did a lot of good and some wrong. We can criticize things, but we should at the very least have an understanding of WHY he would join the NIA and what he experienced and how they shaped his beliefs and why he reacted to things.

I don't know. That doesn't mean i can't come to understand the situation through learning and come to a balanced opinion.

You can

but...

"but I know how I would react if a preacher told me aliens were going to come down in spaceships (currenly in orbit, no less), pick me up and take me to the promised land whilst the other races of the earth were consumed by holocost because they are less than human.

I would tell him to fuck off."

Can you really absolute put your own I perspective on the subject? And we don't know to what lengths Ali believed these details. Can you prove he did? I think he just believed the core message that NIA offered to the black man.


You're entire position boils down to "you're not American and black and being subjected to racial prejudice so you can't have an opinion". Which is fucking nonsense.

No, but it seems that most of the Americans have more understanding of the context of the situation because they have a better understanding of the times in America. Do you have an understanding of this cultural time? To what extent? I don't even know your absolute opinion on this entire subject, but it seems that your opinion comes from a perspective that lacks a little bit of understanding on this subject... or at least believed these justifications and reasons are overstated. That's fine. I just think the more you know and understand of Ali's position and situation the less you would be so critical. I'm critical, more so for his actions than anything else. But I comprehend his situation and mindset and why he came to all of that...

[PetethePrince]

Could you expand on this? It would've been more appropriate if you called me on this directly and on the topic, but now i'm too curious not to ask, especially considering i've repeatedly quoted and even posted articles and other primary sources of the time.

Alright. I respect your opinion greatly as I do McGrain. I know you guys are far more informed than me on most boxing related subjects, especially pre 1930's fighters (Specifically the fighters in and of themselves).

I made a post about it in the thread. I thought people in general were being too hard on Dempsey, I've noticed that most of the people who seemed hardest on Dempsey were non-Americans. I also noticed that more of a percentage of them had a unfavorably position on him as a fighter. I can understand this. However, I just feel it's no coincidence that Americans give him a bit more leniency on the race-related subjects dealing with the color line and fighting black fighters. I'm not saying he shouldn't get criticized, nor am I saying his legacy isn't tarnished for him. I'm just saying that there should be some understanding as to why that would more likely happen during Dempsey's time rather than years following. People can label it an excuse. They're entitled to that. I however do think it's quite that simple. For example, I like Bummy's position on Dempsey.

Now let me ask you. Do you think it's a concidence that the hardest critics of Dempsey are non-American? Both come from different perspectives. I feel Americans are somewhat biased towards the man (He has a fanbase) while I do feel that Americans understand the complicated race relations that happened in this country better than non-American do, thus aren't as flat out negative towards this part of his legacy.

Ali's behaviour in one word can be described as dualism. He'd always say one thing and do the other. He'd dance circles around Foreman, but did the most extreme opposite. He'd make statement about women that shouldn't wear short skirt, but would cheat on his wife and be a womanizer in general. He often said blatantly racist things, but you'll often see him treat white individuals nicely. That's incredibly accurate and fair of a statement. Maybe he was internally conflicted the NIA and it's radical teachings. His actions and words don't compound to each other as closely as they should. A lot of people say one thing and do another, but Ali seemed to be another level with this. Now, I particular like your assessment.

If it's any constellation I think non-Americans are more fair toward rating Harry Willis. But at the same time that's why they're harder on Dempsey. The first is more fair though.

[ChrisPontius]

Alright. I respect your opinion greatly as I do McGrain. I know you guys are far more informed than me on most boxing related subjects, especially pre 1930's fighters (Specifically the fighters in and of themselves).

I made a post about it in the thread. I thought people in general were being too hard on Dempsey, I've noticed that most of the people who seemed hardest on Dempsey were non-Americans. I also noticed that more of a percentage of them had a unfavorably position on him as a fighter. I can understand this. However, I just feel it's no coincidence that Americans give him a bit more leniency on the race-related subjects dealing with the color line and fighting black fighters. I'm not saying he shouldn't get criticized, nor am I saying his legacy isn't tarnished for him. I'm just saying that there should be some understanding as to why that would more likely happen during Dempsey's time rather than years following. People can label it an excuse. They're entitled to that. I however do think it's quite that simple. For example, I like Bummy's position on Dempsey.


Alright. I respect Bummy's position on Dempsey as well, even if it's different from me. :good The man has deep knowledge of the game and particularly New York's boxing scene in the 70's-80's.


Now let me ask you. Do you think it's a concidence that the hardest critics of Dempsey are non-American? Both come from different perspectives. I feel Americans are somewhat biased towards the man (He has a fanbase) while I do feel that Americans understand the complicated race relations that happened in this country better than non-American do, thus aren't as flat out negative towards this part of his legacy.


To be honest, i've never noticed a clear correlation between Dempsey critics and nationality. There are several knowledgeable American posters, for instance, OLD FOGEY, who have made a few critical yet nuanced notes on Jack's career. And on the other side, for instance, there is janitor who is British, and usually has a good argument in favor of Dempsey.


But even if what you say is true, then i'd consider it an enrichment rather than a demotion, to see both sides of the coin. And then there are plenty who are on the fence.



That's incredibly accurate and fair of a statement. Maybe he was internally conflicted the NIA and it's radical teachings. His actions and words don't compound to each other as closely as they should. A lot of people say one thing and do another, but Ali seemed to be another level with this. Now, I particular like your assessment.


As much as i like Ali, he wasn't the smartest of men.... in terms of IQ-smartness, anyway. He even admitted as much himself. The NOI used him, but that doesn't erase the fact that he has made blatantly racist comments. Even if he didn't really believe it or didn't act like it (which is the case, in fact), he still said those words.



If it's any constellation I think non-Americans are more fair toward rating Harry Willis. But at the same time that's why they're harder on Dempsey. The first is more fair though.

It's actually interesting to draw a parrallel here --- because of the media's endless Ali blessing, Frazier seems to have become a bit of a scapegoat, with the Thrilla in Manilla constantly shown, but their most important first fight almost boycotted.

The same, in a sense, is true about Wills: People love Dempsey and don't want to hear about severe holes in his resume or career, and as a consequence, Wills is pushed to the background. The man has every right to be in the top15, arguably top12, but rarely even rates in "historians" top20's.

[Bokaj]

I think ChrisP speaks a lot of sense. I think Ali has to take reponsibility for vile things he said as a grown man, but I also think it wasn't a true expression of his character (which, in a way, makes it even more embarassing for him).

But I do think that the reason FOTC is not shown has to with owner's right more than anything else. I'm pretty sure ESPN doesn't have the rights to it.

[Danny]

I love Ali because, imo, he brought sports to the frontline. He made your average man & woman want to participate in sports, rather than just live the life of work, then go home, etc. He not only put Boxing on the map, but sports in general!

IMO, he's without question the greatest sports person in history. If he was around today, he would be receiving more money than any other sports person, he would have commercials coming out of his ass. He would be an amazing commodity. Forget about guys like Tiger Woods, David Beckham, etc.

Ali was a wonderful boxer, a great entertainer & someone who made you laugh! I've seen footage of him visiting Hatton's gym yesterday & I was very sad seeing him like that! As much as I love Boxing, he did fight on way too long & consequently, then results are there for us all to witness! Ali should have packed in it after Frazier 3, certainly after Norton 3, that's for sure!

His voice, his quotes, his legend, etc, will live on forever! Ali is boxing. If you ask your average person on the street to name a boxer past or present, they will either say Tyson or Ali!

[McGrain]

You'd want him to quit before Zaire? That would have been very anticlimatic. Or did you perhaps mean after Manilla?

IMO he should have retired after Zaire at the earliest and after Manilla at the latest.


I mean I love Zaire and everything but he definitely hurt himself in those fights. I suppose he had to match Foreman.

[McGrain]

It's an autobiography. What autobiography isn't biased? Is Joe Frazier's autobiography not skewed?

Exactly my point...



What does this have to do with anything? You seem to think that grabbing at sources validates an opinion.

:lol:

It's the opposite, of course! Sources inform opinions.

In the end it's an opinion. I haven't seen you do any referencing in this thread either way.

Would it matter? You're perfectly happy to toss out sources that don't speak to you opinion. I've seen you do it. You did it in a Frazier-Ali thread, finally accepted it as truth and then weeks later you've told a flat out lie about the same sources and tried to toss them out again.

What is your position again? Love and hate Ali? You barely explained why, I just sense a tone of dislike for the man when you mention him.

:lol:

Yeah, we know, you sense dislike for Ali everywhere you look, evern when I say that a point raised by another poster is NOT a reason to dislike him, you jump on me for not liking him. It's crazy paranoia.

That's what started this whole charade. You couldn't take that so you start mentioning members here that would disagree. WHO GIVES A FUCK about these testimonials, members, and references. You always are trying to validate what you believe or have to say. I've never seen such a pathetic defensive oriented poster before.

:lol:

It's "pathetic" that I try to validate what I say? It's pathetic that I use shared knowledge to describe my position rather than just say what I want to believe? What should I do? Blindly believe to the point where I ignore properly sourced material that contradicts my position? Like you have?



There is nothing I can source to further validate my opinion. What do I know about Ali? His autobiography, a biography that I believe James Lipton wrote (I can search amazon to further remember the title. I read it awhile ago) and all the films I've seen of him. Documentaries, etc. Some would include the Ali Rap, Ali Dozen, Ali Ringside, Ali ABC Documentary, Thrilla in Manilla, etc.

Very good. If you USE these sources to support your position rather than just saying "your European, you don't know what you're talking about" you'll get along better.




These sources are opinions. So you're using an opinion to further validate your opinion. Good job :good :lol:.

:lol:

How is a source my opinion???! Varied sources FORM my opinion! How else should the thing work? What are you talking about?



It's no suprise nor coincidence that Dempsey's hardest critics are non-Americans. I can admit American loves him. I can admit American are biased on Dempsey

:lol:

So Americans are biased on Demspey, in your words, but Europeans have a less valid opinion?! Americans are NOT biased on Dempsey!! His harshest critics on this forum are myself and Chris and OLD FOGEY. A Scotsman, a Dutchman and an American. Valid opinions are nothing to do with nationality. Okay?

. I can also understand the complicated racial situations in America. You seem to oversimplify these things and their context. You just take A fighter avoided B fighter when there is far more to it. Whether it's reasonable is justifiable and debatable. But 1910's race-related sports aren't comparable to more modern day situations.

THAT's why we, on this forum, try to take MULTIPLE sources into account and come to a reasonable opinion. According to you "the source is [my] opinion. You couldn't be more wrong. You're so wrong about this I can't even believe it.

How haven't I. How have you shown more? How have I shown little understanding? And not you?

Your background on Ali is apologetic in the extreme and even when presented with hard facts properly referenced you try to deny reality. You come with a derth of knoweldge and when someone takes the trouble to point out your mistakes with sourced material you try to throw it out because it is "not filmed". That's as blinkered as i've ever seen.




You're the one really trying to find something to argue at this point.

If you say to me "you dislike Ali because you are being sarcastic about his womanising" and I am not I am going to correct you. If you tell me that the work I did on the subject is "unrpoven" and "all drawn from one biased book" I am going to correct you. Okay?

I don't think you have a balanced perspective on the subject. I'm saying some people need to understand context and be realistic with their opinions. I'm saying judge slowly, that is all. Exactly the opposite. Study more, criticize less.

:lol:

You must be kididng. You think people should post less on the forum? Look, I feel like I know plenty about Ali's place in the civil rights struggle. I've given him more credit for this work than any other poster in this thread. If you think I don't know what I am talking about, however, you are entitled to your opinion. But please keep in mind that I am entitled to mine.

You can't put your thoughts, your mind, and say this and this is wrong.

Yeah, I can actually.

Ali was wrong to join a racist organisation. It was the wrong thing to do.


You can

but...

"but I know how I would react if a preacher told me aliens were going to come down in spaceships (currenly in orbit, no less), pick me up and take me to the promised land whilst the other races of the earth were consumed by holocost because they are less than human.

I would tell him to fuck off."

Can you really absolute put your own I perspective on the subject? And we don't know to what lengths Ali believed these details. Can you prove he did? I think he just believed the core message that NIA offered to the black man.

:lol:

Yeah, i'm absolutley sure that if a man told me aliens were coming to take me to paradise I would tell him to fuck off. 100%. Certain.




No, but it seems that most of the Americans have more understanding of the context of the situation because they have a better understanding of the times in America. Do you have an understanding of this cultural time? To what extent? I don't even know your absolute opinion on this entire subject, but it seems that your opinion comes from a perspective that lacks a little bit of understanding on this subject... or at least believed these justifications and reasons are overstated. That's fine. I just think the more you know and understand of Ali's position and situation the less you would be so critical. I'm critical, more so for his actions than anything else. But I comprehend his situation and mindset and why he came to all of that...

Again, you've claimed you know more about this situation than me. But there is NOTHING in ANY of your posts apart from moral reletavism. I am inving you to explain what it is that excuses Ali's decision to join a racist organisation. Explain your "cultural understanding of the times".

[McGrain]

I've noticed that most of the people who seemed hardest on Dempsey were non-Americans. I also noticed that more of a percentage of them had a unfavorably position on him as a fighter. I can understand this. However, I just feel it's no coincidence that Americans give him a bit more leniency on the race-related subjects dealing with the color line and fighting black fighters.

Now let me ask you. Do you think it's a concidence that the hardest critics of Dempsey are non-American?

If it's any constellation I think non-Americans are more fair toward rating Harry Willis..

Dempsey's harshest critic for his failure to match Wills is an American. OLD FOGEY has done excellent work in this area.

As Chris and I are trying to explain to you, there's little corolation between nationality and analysis. It's in your head.

[DUNNERS_2009]

I feel Ali persona in boxing transcended the sport of boxing, he was a brilliant showman as he could talk the talk and he could walk the walk, he was picking rounds when he would finish opponents... If he didn't KO/TKO the opponent he would have a witty remark to why he didn't KO/TKO an opponent...

You look at other boxers and promoters, how they try and hype a fight, I believe Muhammed Ali layed the ground work for boxing.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Here's Antonio Tarver trading insults which is sorta similar to Ali with the whole pretty as a girl thing.

You also have the likes of Ricardo Mayorga, James Toney and Floyd Mayweather Jr.

Ali stood up for principles what he believed in with the Vietnam war and for continuing to be a practicing member of the Nation of Islam. Unfortunately it stopped him boxing and he probably lost his peak years.

Whilst racism is wrong, at the time the word was a much more segregated place at that time, times have changed when B-Hop said he wouldn't get beat by a white guy, alot of people called B-Hop a racist or when Mundine said I would never get beat by a Christian.

As documented on the 1st page of this thread Ali had personal problems, like a normal human person, this does not make him a bad person (unless your his ex wife/s)

I have read Ali's book withe Thomas Hauser and its a good read, tells alot about his personal life and how he got started in the Nation of Islam

[essexboy]

Many of his 70's efforts bore the crap out of me. He reverted to the role of entertainer too often and was one of the most blatant rulebreakers in the history of the division. Much to the over-awed judges, he would endure a merciless beating for 2 and 1/2 minutes then let fly a not-so-fast-any-longer combo of pitty pat punches and mug for the judges as though he won the round. Neither compelling entertainment nor compelling boxing, in my opinion.

Thats pretty harsh considering he provided us with the rumble in the jungle and the thrilla in manilla in the seventies. I did prefer him in the sixties though, he was amazing, an athletic phenomenon. You have to admire the way he adapted when he came back though, he had to learn to fight on the inside and take a punch and did so magnificantly. Should have called it a day after the thrilla in manilla though, his career started getting a bit ridiculous after that.

[PetethePrince]

It's the opposite, of course! Sources inform opinions.

What have I been uninformed about? Where have I been incorrect? What can you dispute? Nothing in this thread... clear that I'm informed though. Doesn't mean I have to go citing like a lunatic to prove my worth :lol:

It's "pathetic" that I try to validate what I say? It's pathetic that I use shared knowledge to describe my position rather than just say what I want to believe? What should I do? Blindly believe to the point where I ignore properly sourced material that contradicts my position? Like you have?

Get over that one Frazier-Ali thread moment. After that, this whole baloney hysteria that I don't know what I'm talking about is false. You haven't disputed ONE thing I've said in this thread as being factually incorrect. Yet you suggest I'm not citing enough. You have to do the work if you have a problem with something I've said that you believe to not be true. What contradicts what? If you don't answer. You're trolling and I'll just put you on my ignore list.

Very good. If you USE these sources to support your position rather than just saying "your European, you don't know what you're talking about" you'll get along better.

:patsch I'm not a cite freak like you. Nobody else is for the majority unless it reporting articles on old fights. My theory is simply observation. Of course you're overly sensitive and defensive you can't take it. Deal with it.


How is a source my opinion???! Varied sources FORM my opinion! How else should the thing work? What are you talking about?

The accounts of what others think about Ali is an opinion. What Ali did is an in absolute terms a fact. You been talking about knowing what he and she said. We all know what Ali did/said/stands for since it's all right there.

So Americans are biased on Demspey, in your words, but Europeans have a less valid opinion?! Americans are NOT biased on Dempsey!! His harshest critics on this forum are myself and Chris and OLD FOGEY. A Scotsman, a Dutchman and an American. Valid opinions are nothing to do with nationality. Okay?

You truly are an idiot. Where did you go to school? Your comprehension skills are for shit. On ESB we are tough on Dempsey. In general, though, Americans seem to love Dempsey (The Bert Sugar, experts, etc). He ranks much higher for them then he ever does/will on ESB. This is no coincidence. I never said Europeans have a less valid opinion. Where do you come up with this shit? It's just a different perspective, one with a bit less understanding for the 1900's race related American climate. 2/3 of his harshest critics are non-Americans. I would say that Americans comprise at least 50% of the Classic section (An estimate). So, therefore you agree with me... or agree it's a coincidence.

THAT's why we, on this forum, try to take MULTIPLE sources into account and come to a reasonable opinion. According to you "the source is [my] opinion. You couldn't be more wrong. You're so wrong about this I can't even believe it.

You have poor comprehension skills. It's as simple as that.

Your background on Ali is apologetic in the extreme and even when presented with hard facts properly referenced you try to deny reality. You come with a derth of knoweldge and when someone takes the trouble to point out your mistakes with sourced material you try to throw it out because it is "not filmed". That's as blinkered as i've ever seen.

Still won't get over it. My opinion on Ali is better than yours because I understand the dynamics and culture of the 60's in America better than you do. This is why Chinx agreed with me on the emphasis of context. You act like a just say shit for the fun of it when you can't admit that I have valid and truthful assessments of things.

You must be kididng. You think people should post less on the forum? Look, I feel like I know plenty about Ali's place in the civil rights struggle. I've given him more credit for this work than any other poster in this thread. If you think I don't know what I am talking about, however, you are entitled to your opinion. But please keep in mind that I am entitled to mine.

HOLY SHIT. Folks, he can't comprehend for shit. If you're going to go on unrelated tangents that don't respond to what I'm getting at then I'm done with this. You either suck at comprehending or I'm just so terribly at writing/getting my point across. Maybe it's a combination, but I think I put the share of blame on you.


Yeah, I can actually.

Ali was wrong to join a racist organisation. It was the wrong thing to do.

Not sure what the full quote was. I think I was getting at you can't just say it's unjustifiable when not having been in his mind/thoughts while dealing with racial injustices and such.


Yeah, i'm absolutley sure that if a man told me aliens were coming to take me to paradise I would tell him to fuck off. 100%. Certain.

Ali's mind & situation--------------------------------- McGrain's Mind and situation

Point well taken! :good

[PetethePrince]

Alright. I respect Bummy's position on Dempsey as well, even if it's different from me. :good The man has deep knowledge of the game and particularly New York's boxing scene in the 70's-80's.

Indeed :good

To be honest, i've never noticed a clear correlation between Dempsey critics and nationality. There are several knowledgeable American posters, for instance, OLD FOGEY, who have made a few critical yet nuanced notes on Jack's career. And on the other side, for instance, there is janitor who is British, and usually has a good argument in favor of Dempsey.

Like most things it's not 100%. But I think if there was a poll with Americans rating the best HW and non-Americans (Europeans) that Dempsey would do noticeably better in the American one. Old Fogey is a very honest poster. I think most of Dempsey die-hard fans on ESB are American, I would suspect. Truth is I don't know all of the posters as there location isn't mentioned. However, from what I've seen I think there is a link (It's nothing major).

But even if what you say is true, then i'd consider it an enrichment rather than a demotion, to see both sides of the coin. And then there are plenty who are on the fence.

Exactly. Really, Europeans would check Dempsey in check whatever the subject comes if Americans were ever lenient on him. The difference isn't major, but he seems to make quite a bit of most peoples top 10 rankings. Less of a case with non-Americans I think. It would be interesting to actually conduct an entire poll on it though but from observation I've noticed this.

As much as i like Ali, he wasn't the smartest of men.... in terms of IQ-smartness, anyway. He even admitted as much himself. The NOI used him, but that doesn't erase the fact that he has made blatantly racist comments. Even if he didn't really believe it or didn't act like it (which is the case, in fact), he still said those words.

I don't know. There are plenty of very IQ smart people that could be manipulated. I'm not sure if his ability to get used makes him not very smart. In fact, I think a part of that may be street smart related. It's not like scientists don't get constantly ripped off from (Within discoveries, papers, inventions due to be tricked).

It's actually interesting to draw a parrallel here --- because of the media's endless Ali blessing, Frazier seems to have become a bit of a scapegoat, with the Thrilla in Manilla constantly shown, but their most important first fight almost boycotted.

The same, in a sense, is true about Wills: People love Dempsey and don't want to hear about severe holes in his resume or career, and as a consequence, Wills is pushed to the background. The man has every right to be in the top15, arguably top12, but rarely even rates in "historians" top20's.

Well said. Although I do think part of the third fights popular is the fact that Ali won. I do think it's a better or more popular fight. More action-packed and both fighters were at a point where they would get to each other more.

Willis is strangely highly ignored. He's most known for being the #1 contender that Dempsey avoided from 7 years. While Sam Langford is looked at highly. This was a time when Jack Johnson held the thrown. Another black man that's highly ranked but doesn't steal the shadow away from Langford's achievement (Though he did a lot in a lot of divisions). Willis was in the shadow of a white man. Dempsey who was America's first superstar and hero. According to Bert Sugar, "Babe Ruth was jealous of him!" Dempsey gets revered, Willis ignored.

[PetethePrince]

Dempsey's harshest critic for his failure to match Wills is an American. OLD FOGEY has done excellent work in this area.

As Chris and I are trying to explain to you, there's little corolation between nationality and analysis. It's in your head.

I think there is some correlation. I bet a poll would have Americans on this site ranking him higher. Not to mention all the boxing experts and Bert Sugar's that revere him and place him in the top 3. Also the Cox's of the worlds too.

[COULDHAVEBEEN]

Was a teenager when Ali was in his prime. The hype even amongst non-fight-fans was huge, and Ali was THE king!

Ali bomaye!, Ali bomaye!, Ali bomaye!

Saw the 14th round of Ali v Frazier III again last night - Ali, though battered and tired, was just on fire!

[McGrain]

What have I been uninformed about? Where have I been incorrect? What can you dispute? Nothing in this thread... clear that I'm informed though. Doesn't mean I have to go citing like a lunatic to prove my worth :lol:

I think the most ridiculous thing you said in this thread are that "Americans are biased on Jack Dempsey" and that Europeans can't understand American fighers as well as Americans.




Get over that one Frazier-Ali thread moment.

I'm completely over it. YOU are the one that raised it again.

After that, this whole baloney hysteria that I don't know what I'm talking about is false. You haven't disputed ONE thing I've said in this thread as being factually incorrect. Yet you suggest I'm not citing enough. You have to do the work if you have a problem with something I've said that you believe to not be true. What contradicts what? If you don't answer. You're trolling and I'll just put you on my ignore list.

My problem, for the seventh time, is

a) you told me I disliked Ali beause I didn't like his womanising. This is not true. The OPPOSITE is true. You haven't acknowledged this.

b) you said that my sources from a previous discussion (that YOU raised and then told me to "get over for one moment" in this post) are "not factual" and "drawn from one biased book". This is untrue and you haven't acknowledged this.

d) your saying that I attacked Ali for womanising "out of the blue" when I was responding to another poster's raising of the issue. You haven't acknowledged this.

Please don't make me tell you this again, i've told you multiple times.



:patsch I'm not a cite freak like you. Nobody else is for the majority unless it reporting articles on old fights. My theory is simply observation. Of course you're overly sensitive and defensive you can't take it. Deal with it.

I deal with it EVERY day. I have no problem with it at all. My problem is outlined above.




The accounts of what others think about Ali is an opinion. What Ali did is an in absolute terms a fact.

Having not been, say, in Manilla, I have to take into account opinions of those who were there in order to understand the "absolute facts" of what he did. Obviously. How else does it work?


On ESB we are tough on Dempsey. In general, though, Americans seem to love Dempsey (The Bert Sugar, experts, etc). He ranks much higher for them then he ever does/will on ESB. This is no coincidence.

Jack Dempsey's biggest fans on the forum are Brits. Dempsey's biggist critic on the forum is a European.

I never said Europeans have a less valid opinion. Where do you come up with this shit?

"American's have more understanding of the context of the situation because they have a better understanding of the times in America."

"American's understand the complicated race relations better than non-American's do."

"You clearly have the perspective of a European."

So come up with that shit based upon your posts.

It's just a different perspective, one with a bit less understanding for the 1900's race related American climate.

And here it is again. It's just not true. People come to understand the period by studying it, not by being born in a certain country. Don't they?


Still won't get over it. My opinion on Ali is better than yours because I understand the dynamics and culture of the 60's in America better than you do.

You've said this over and over again, but you have to show it.

This is why Chinx agreed with me on the emphasis of context.

I agree with you concerning context too. We are not arguing about the context of the times. I've already pointed out to you that I've given more credit to Ali for the civil rights struggle than any other poster in this thread. We are not arguing about the "context of the times". We are arguing about your opinion that American's have a more valid opinion on better fighters, and the other issues i've listed for you above and explained to you previously.

If you're going to go on unrelated tangents that don't respond to what I'm getting at then I'm done with this.

You said that people should "study more and criticise less". That either means you think people should say less on subjects you feel they don't understand, or that supportive positions are more valid than critical ones. Both points are nonsense.

And I don't understand why you are getting so upset about this "tangent", which you raised with the original remark about "study". I'm only responding to something you wrote.

[Stevie G]

I feel Ali persona in boxing transcended the sport of boxing, he was a brilliant showman as he could talk the talk and he could walk the walk, he was picking rounds when he would finish opponents... If he didn't KO/TKO the opponent he would have a witty remark to why he didn't KO/TKO an opponent...

You look at other boxers and promoters, how they try and hype a fight, I believe Muhammed Ali layed the ground work for boxing.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Here's Antonio Tarver trading insults which is sorta similar to Ali with the whole pretty as a girl thing.

You also have the likes of Ricardo Mayorga, James Toney and Floyd Mayweather Jr.

Ali stood up for principles what he believed in with the Vietnam war and for continuing to be a practicing member of the Nation of Islam. Unfortunately it stopped him boxing and he probably lost his peak years.

Whilst racism is wrong, at the time the word was a much more segregated place at that time, times have changed when B-Hop said he wouldn't get beat by a white guy, alot of people called B-Hop a racist or when Mundine said I would never get beat by a Christian.

As documented on the 1st page of this thread Ali had personal problems, like a normal human person, this does not make him a bad person (unless your his ex wife/s)

I have read Ali's book withe Thomas Hauser and its a good read, tells alot about his personal life and how he got started in the Nation of Islam
I totally agree with this post. Another thing,when other fighters tried to imitate Ali's 'pretty as a girl' thing,they just sounded stupid. Another reason why Muhammad was unique. He did all that stuff brilliantly.

[Stevie G]

Was a teenager when Ali was in his prime. The hype even amongst non-fight-fans was huge, and Ali was THE king!

Ali bomaye!, Ali bomaye!, Ali bomaye!

Saw the 14th round of Ali v Frazier III again last night - Ali, though battered and tired, was just on fire!
Yeah,that fight showed Muhammad's toughness,if anyone still needed to be convinced of it.

[Bummy Davis]

Ali was a great fighter but during his era every non-boxing fan was his fan and a lot of them thought he could walk on water...and Fly....He was great against the big slow heavys but had trouble with the pressure fighter and swarmers. I think he was a great personality but some of his fans are out of touch with reality

[JohnThomas1]

Ali was a great fighter but during his era every non-boxing fan was his fan and a lot of them thought he could walk on water...and Fly....He was great against the big slow heavys but had trouble with the pressure fighter and swarmers. I think he was a great personality but some of his fans are out of touch with reality

To be fair he didn't face the aforementioned pressure fighters and swarmers at his absolute peak. We never seen his peak, really. He was just hitting it when exiled.

One of these swarmers was utterly great, and the other just incredibly effective vs boxers. Louis, Marciano, et al all had their drama's with different styles. On a shallow level one could say Louis coudn't handle boxers per his Conn fight. Marciano had some big problems too vs certain fighters. They are human, it happens.

[Bummy Davis]

To be fair he didn't face the aforementioned pressure fighters and swarmers at his absolute peak. We never seen his peak, really. He was just hitting it when exiled.

One of these swarmers was utterly great, and the other just incredibly effective vs boxers. Louis, Marciano, et al all had their drama's with different styles. On a shallow level one could say Louis coudn't handle boxers per his Conn fight. Marciano had some big problems too vs certain fighters. They are human, it happens.


Oh exactly and that is my point, a lot of Ali fans put him above human...all of the great had there weaknesses. In regard to him fighting pressure fighter after his prime, if you are in the opinion that he was a better fighter before his 3 yr exile then I would have to say there were no Fraziers or Nortons or Bonevena's around at that point the closest was Jones and Cooper as far as puting on pressure. Ali had the toughest opposition on his return IMO and I am not sure the pre-exile version was a strong but thats just my opinion.

[PetethePrince]

I think the most ridiculous thing you said in this thread are that "Americans are biased on Jack Dempsey" and that Europeans can't understand American fighers as well as Americans.

Well get over it because its not. Even Chris agrees that Americans seem to love Dempsey.

I'm completely over it. YOU are the one that raised it again.Yes but you can't drop it.

My problem, for the seventh time, is

a) you told me I disliked Ali beause I didn't like his womanising. This is not true. The OPPOSITE is true. You haven't acknowledged this.

b) you said that my sources from a previous discussion (that YOU raised and then told me to "get over for one moment" in this post) are "not factual" and "drawn from one biased book". This is untrue and you haven't acknowledged this.

d) your saying that I attacked Ali for womanising "out of the blue" when I was responding to another poster's raising of the issue. You haven't acknowledged this.

Please don't make me tell you this again, i've told you multiple times.Don't talk about telling someone multiple times. :lol: The womanizing isn't really how this discussion took place. I brought it up within a paragraph making a point that all champs were womanizers. I just said what I felt. I admit it was unnecessary but I don't hold back. I said I think there's a subtle dislike of Ali with you. You of course flipped out causing a huge rawkus because you can't take any bit of criticism or commentary regarding your opinions. It's like if you say I'm clear a biased Marciano fan. How the hell can I deny that? It's like me saying I think you favor Sonny Liston as a fighter. I think that's true, you rank him high and we all know your a Liston fan. That would be like you getting defensive about that and saying I'm truthful and your just an opinion spouting.

Lastly, comprehension 101. I seem to only have communication problems with you on this site.

I deal with it EVERY day. I have no problem with it at all. My problem is outlined above.The only point from above is B. The rest is a misinterpretation on your part. My opinion still stands because you take the bad reports on Ali and everything else is just a slanted book on him. The Ali autobiography was still the best read I had on the man. You can disagree I guess, but I value my ability to dissect his actual thoughts rather than what the other ten millions say on him. There reporting is important, though.

Having not been, say, in Manilla, I have to take into account opinions of those who were there in order to understand the "absolute facts" of what he did. Obviously. How else does it work?Right, the same goes about reading/watching about it.

Jack Dempsey's biggest fans on the forum are Brits. Dempsey's biggist critic on the forum is a European.How do you know this? Maybe my theory is out the door. I don't think so. Either way why would observation bother you so much? Want me to take a poll and record all the facts before I make a comment like that?

"American's have more understanding of the context of the situation because they have a better understanding of the times in America."

"American's understand the complicated race relations better than non-American's do."

"You clearly have the perspective of a European."

So come up with that shit based upon your posts.Right, it's about perspective. I'm saying that I believe Americans know our times better than Europeans do, naturally, so we have leniency on his legacy. You've just jumped to conclusions that I'm saying Europeans have an invalid opinion. You do this all the time, it doesn't make me look like an ass but you. I feel that non-Americans from what I've seen in general have less leniency and more of a tendency to be critical on his legacy. With good reasons, of course. No opinion is better than the other or more right. Both opinions are good in balance. Having said that, I do personally feel that when some people oversimplify things with their criticisms of Dempsey. Maybe I'm complicating things. Again, it's perspective. Naturally, you could say the same for the way Americans view the Klit brothers. Europeans (Especially Eastern ones) seem to think of him much highly and will probably rank him better than Americans. That is perspective.

See it's not that Europeans thoughts are invalid. It's more about how our opinion can be more favoring, whether it be more excuse than justified.

And here it is again. It's just not true. People come to understand the period by studying it, not by being born in a certain country. Don't they? Yes, but it boils down to how much you study the fighter & fighter(s) rather than their culture and period. Non-Americans can be just as knowledgeable and exposed about American racial climate than Americans. What I've said can be largely an assumption. However, naturally we'll understand the times more first hand because it's been all around us. From history in schools, to opinions of writers, to experiences through others.

The question here is really. Do you think Americans are slightly more favorable on Dempsey? And do you think that non-Americans rate him as highly as Americans do. I think there's a different, not a major difference. If you think there's no correlation then my theory/observation goes out the window. On classic you see a hole lot less of this. This ain't general.

You've said this over and over again, but you have to show it.Fair enough.

I agree with you concerning context too. We are not arguing about the context of the times. I've already pointed out to you that I've given more credit to Ali for the civil rights struggle than any other poster in this thread. We are not arguing about the "context of the times". We are arguing about your opinion that American's have a more valid opinion on better fighters, and the other issues i've listed for you above and explained to you previously.The American's comment was more regarding the context. Naturally they would understand Vietnam 60's culture in America. I mean... my parents lived then and I see it on my TV much more than non-Americans would. It's not about non-Americans knowing more its about them being more exposed. The discussion began with me talking about the context of the times.

You said that people should "study more and criticise less". That either means you think people should say less on subjects you feel they don't understand, or that supportive positions are more valid than critical ones. Both points are nonsense.Right. It's better to gain information than to just criticize. With more information, you have a more balanced understanding to draw your conclusions on. People should talk all they want on the subjects, that's their prerogative. However, the ones who want to knock a fighter repeatedly should take a step back and look at the big picture. Judge slowly. Whether Ali it's far from a simple "racist" or not racist.

Anyway I'm done with this topic. It's gone so off point into some semantics/nationality argument. We'll just leave our differences behind and leave it at that.

[McGrain]

Well get over it because its not. Even Chris agrees that Americans seem to love Dempsey.

"Even Chris", huh? I thought mentioning the opinions of others to support our posistions was "pathetic"?

It doesn't matter if some or even most Americans are biased towards Jack Dempsey. The nationality of a given poster doesn't affect the value of what he has said. It doesn't matter. At all.

Yes but you can't drop it.

You re-raised it, why should I drop it? You've told a lie, one you persist with below.

The womanizing isn't really how this discussion took place.

No. It's exactly how it took place. You can try to toss out evidence that doesn't suit your position, but please don't try to change what happened a few pages ago on this thread, I can look at it. I said:

"I guess i'm the only guy who doesn't think of his womanising as a weakness :lol:"

You quoted this line and said:

"You have a subtle dislike for Ali...you have mentioned this out of the blue when it's a criticism you could have of any HW."

So it's exactly how this conversation started. I corrected you, "i wasn't being sarcastic" and here, something like 5 pages later, you are finally acknowledging the mistake...

I admit it was unnecessary

...which could have saved a lot of grief. Thank you for admitting this.

but I don't hold back.

And neither do I. But you seem genuinely upset that I have reacted strongly. You have criticised work i've done on Dempsey based upon my nationality, and attacked sources I produced on Ali based upon nothing. You have more to say on the matter below! You also jumped on me for having a "dislike for Ali" using a post where I was defending him as proof. You must understand that sourcing material takes time. When people attack it as "pathetic" and try to toss it out as apropo of nothing, you will get a reaction.

I said I think there's a subtle dislike of Ali with you. You of course flipped out causing a huge rawkus because you can't take any bit of criticism or commentary regarding your opinions.

No. That is not fair at all. I objected to

a - your attack upon my sourced work and

b - your misinterpretation of my original post, which it has taken you five pages and many posts to finally acknowledge.


The only point from above is B. The rest is a misinterpretation on your part. My opinion still stands because you take the bad reports on Ali and everything else is just a slanted book on him.

That's bullshit. There were two seperate book souces, one reporting two different stories witnessed by seperate people. The other was a newspaper report. It took time to organise that material. You tried to throw it out at the time because it "wasn't film". Then you admitted that you accepted the sources. Now, a few weeks later, because you've misunderstood a post i've made about Ali, you've tried to toss the sources out again, for whatever reason, to the point where you're lying about what they were. I don't understand it, and I won't stand for it.

The Ali autobiography was still the best read I had on the man.

It's pricelss. The conversation between Ali and Frazier for example. But a lot of what is in that book has been debunked, even by the friendly sources (Hauser, for example).

How do you know this? Maybe my theory is out the door. I don't think so. Either way why would observation bother you so much? Want me to take a poll and record all the facts before I make a comment like that?

I know through experience. I know because of protracted debates I've engaged in ont he forum over a period of years. Demspey's biggest champions here are My2Sense (US), Janitor (UK) and McVey (UK).

It's whipping a dead horse, but nationality of the poster is the LAST thing on my mind when I'm discussing boxing, it's the quality of the technical analysis/material sourced and that is all. There's no way it should be any other way.

Right, it's about perspective. I'm saying that I believe Americans know our times better than Europeans do, naturally, so we have leniency on his legacy.

But it's nonsense, shite. If someone spends four years studying a specific period of American history and they are compared to a person born in Texas who has rudementary education, the first will be the better source on that period of American history.

Your statement is meaningless because many of us on this forum have taken the time to do some of that work. It doesn't matter two cents where a poster is from. What matters is the quality of the data. You've mentioned Chris and myself. I am happy to tell you that Chris's work int his area is generally exceptional and worth neither more or less based upon where he is from; it's irrelevant; entirely.

You've just jumped to conclusions that I'm saying Europeans have an invalid opinion.

I quoted you in the previous post proving with your own words that you feel nationality can undermine opinion.

I feel that non-Americans from what I've seen in general have less leniency and more of a tendency to be critical on his legacy.

But your general observations are worthless as far as the specifics of this forum goes. When you mention posters by name you are dealing with specific cases, not "general" or "tendancy".

Both opinions are good in balance.

There is no "both opinions" based upon nationality! There is no divide. Haven't you been paying attention? OLD FOGEY - American, biggest critic of Demspey. McVey, Brit, Dempsey's biggest champion. You have to let it drop. The nationality of the posters in question are in no way releveant to their opinions. Almost everyone who posts in these threads on teh Classic forum have gone WAY beyond that type of parrot analysis.

Having said that, I do personally feel that when some people oversimplify things with their criticisms of Dempsey.

On the contrary. Those of us who have actually tried to unpick the issue COMPLICATE the issue, trying to take as much of what went on into consideration as possible. You can be dismissive of sources, but I think you have to respect the opinions of guys who go into bat and try to understand based on information available.

Naturally, you could say the same for the way Americans view the Klit brothers. Europeans (Especially Eastern ones) seem to think of him much highly and will probably rank him better than Americans. That is perspective.

Sorry to harp on, but the General forum's most voracious Klit fan is Widdow, an American. On Classic, it's Mendoza, an American.

What I've said can be largely an assumption.

It is, and not a helpful one.

The American's comment was more regarding the context. Naturally they would understand Vietnam 60's culture in America.

But non neccessiarly better than a non-Americna who has taken time and effort to learn. Obviously.


Right. It's better to gain information than to just criticize. With more information, you have a more balanced understanding to draw your conclusions on. People should talk all they want on the subjects, that's their prerogative. However, the ones who want to knock a fighter repeatedly should take a step back and look at the big picture. Judge slowly. Whether Ali it's far from a simple "racist" or not racist.

My opinion is: Ali joined a racist organisation.

My oponion is: joining a racist organistiona is a racist act.

My opinion is: That's a reasonable opinion.

My opinion is: I'm qualified to make that judgement.

After all, none of that is rocket science.

[Titan1]

I got a love-hate relationship with the guy. I love watching him fight, even the washed up version, but I don't tend to seek out his fights any more. Having said that, when I see him fight, like in a HW highlights package or something, or here on the forum, I feel a little hypnotised. What a mover.

I like his talk too.

"I saw Sonny the other day and -,"

"Ain't he ugly?"

That is funny when you see it, he's quick like that.

I also like the mythology. I like reading about him, Mailer and all that there, and I used to love all the documentaries, hearing people, even weird people like Billy Crystal talk about him - boxing is my thing and it seems like Ali makes everybody love it just a little bit. Anyway. I watched When We Were Kings again the other day and I just fell in love with the mad bastard all over again, who he was, what he did...the man and the fighter. I can't see it taken away from him. He whipped Uncle Sam. "Only man that ever did it." On the other hand, I was reading an old Ring the other day (the one I lifted that Jeffries interview from) and they are talking about how soft Washington was on him...and the stolen bike and just everything. It's all cool.

When I really started getting into it all, I loved him, but I love Frazier more now and I don't like the way Ali came off in all that. I wish Frazier had won in Manilla. Also, I'm a big Sonny fan, and it bothers me that when I google Liston all I get is Ali, Ali, Ali everywhere. So I got mixed feelings.

How about you?

I love Ali, because of his charisma, skills, and his fearlessness.However, he could make dumb statements, and his love of the extramarital pootang( something he shared with Frazier), brings him down a couple of notches.

[round15]

Ali is one of the greatest fighters in the history of the sport, any weight class, no doubt. He was a beautiful athlete in his prime to watch even though his technique has hurt the generations after him who try to emulate him. Nobody has his reflexes, timing and foot speed, pound for pound. I can honestly say the closest athletes that can compare athletically to Ali are fighters Ray Robinson, Roy Jones, Floyd Mayweather, and Michael Jordan, who's basketball skills and footwork mirror that in terms of Ali, but from a different sporting perspective. Dennis Rodman had great reflexes as well as a basketball player, but I don't think they compare to Ali. Barry Sanders and Deion Sanders can compare in terms of overall athletic speed and reflexes, but again from different sports.

Some say his ugly treatment of Frazier was to sell tickets but that's pure garbage as far as I'm concerned. Like I've said before, there's nothing positive, redeeming or encouraging when one black person calls another black person a Gorilla, and for that, Ali will always lose points as a person in my book. I don't think he intended to make the FOTC a race war, but his mouth made it for him by saying all the stuff about Frazier being the "white man's champion" and that blacks who supported Frazier are "Uncle Toms." If Ali really knew what an Uncle Tom was, using those words to describe the same black race who supported Frazier in the FOTC is cheap and racist. To a lesser extent, the same can be said about his "politely racist" confrontations with Floyd Patterson and Ernie Terrell, but then again, some say those fighters earned Ali's wrath in the ring for continuing to call him Clay.

I believe Ali really didn't know what he was getting into when he made the stand against the Viet Cong and the war in Viet Nam. Certainly the man was dead set against going to travel X many miles to have a gun put in his hand to fight for other peoples freedoms around the world, when during the 60's as a black man, he practically still wasn't free from Jim Crow. His advisors probably told him that him taking his stand against Viet Nam, not totally understanding the war itself, would be one of the greatest political and inspirational choices by a public figure.

He should have quit the game after Manilla. There was no need for him to fight Spinks, Holmes or Shavers for that matter.

[john garfield]

I guess i'm the only guy who doesn't think of his womanising as a weakness :lol: at all.

AMEN! Mc. He liked pussy, and lots of it...And the awful part of that is what?

[raiderjay]

It is quite a comment on the state of our society that there is even a discussion of the good and bad sides of Ali.

As far as I'm concerned the man was literally a genious inside the ring with as much heart as anyone you will see.

Outside of the ring he was obviously only concerned with himself, had absolutely no class what so ever. In fact he may be the most classless person that the public has seen reach the heights of stardom that he did. His words of hate and self promotion say everything for themselves as to what a loathsome individual he is.

Anything Ali ever said or did was solely to better himself and not others. He was the direct benefactor of other people's suffering due to his very own selfish actions.

The man (if you can call him that) is possibly the greatest fraud and myth of the 20th century that was built up by a degraded society that continues to haunt us today. The generation that built him up are now the ones in power, and we can all see where that has lead us.

It was during this generation that he lead the charge for people to behave in a way that is now commonplace. Most of the people posting in this thread grew up after Ali, when self promotion and boasting was common and not looked down upon. That is why you see the defense of this despicable man on this board to be so strong.

[McGrain]

AMEN! Mc. He liked pussy, and lots of it...And the awful part of that is what?


If he was wrong I don't want to be right.