Just watched Muhammad Ali vs Oscar Bonavena,Ali was close to losing!

First time I watched this fight and I did not realise how close Ali was to getting beat.

Bonavena was very crude and basic with his punches but it seemed to work as Ali could not get out of the way of his shots and got nailed many times in the fight.

Also I noted a few things about the finnish in the 15th round.The left hook that Ali put him down with has got to be one of the best single punches he ever threw.
After the first knockdown the ref lost control of the fight as not once did Ali go to a nutral corner after putting Oscar down.He was hovering close by waiting to finnish the fight.Bit like Dempsy-Willard.

And last but not least,it was a great finnish by Ali who once he had his man hurt did not let him off the hook.;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by porkypara

First time I watched this fight and I did not realise how close Ali was to getting beat.

Bonavena was very crude and basic with his punches but it seemed to work as Ali could not get out of the way of his shots and got nailed many times in the fight.

Also I noted a few things about the finnish in the 15th round.The left hook that Ali put him down with has got to be one of the best single punches he ever threw.
After the first knockdown the ref lost control of the fight as not once did Ali go to a nutral corner after putting Oscar down.He was hovering close by waiting to finnish the fight.Bit like Dempsy-Willard.

And last but not least,it was a great finnish by Ali who once he had his man hurt did not let him off the hook.;D

---

Watched it not too long ago myself and i actually stopped the dvd and rewatched the left hook 6 or 7 times before watching it several times in real time. What a peach of a punch! He was one tough cookie. Ended up being shot dead in a brothel a few years later. If you watch it again you'll notice he has Ringo down the side of his shorts, referring to his likeness to ringo starr outta the beatles. He looked no more like ringo starr than i look like robert redford

Bonavena was close to winning until he got KTFO
:LOLATYOU:

Actually a real tough guy
Gave Frazier hell twice

I never really thought Bonavena was close to winning in that fight personally but hey if you wanna see a fight were many people thought Ali lost was against Doug Jones early in his career. There was a bit of an outrage being the scoring was so biased for Ali because he was a gold medalist.I have it somewhere in my VHS collection. There are a few others I thought he could have lost.
Frazier II
Norton III
Shavers
I thought Ron Lyle was beating him until the stoppage

Bonavena was no bum and very nearly knocked out Joe Frazier in the first round, Frazier going down twice and was very shaky. Ali probably should have fought someone a little easier than Bonavena considering he fought Frazier less than 3 months later!

I think in Ali's fight with Billy Daniels, Ali was getting tore up before Daniels got cut and they stopped the fight.

So if Ali had so many close calls and less than impressive performances should he be rated so highly?

Good point Snakey, makes you think. :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakey

So if Ali had so many close calls and less than impressive performances should he be rated so highly?

---

I mean being a champion you have to be able to deal with adversity, I think Ali dealt with it pretty well.....he's still #3 for me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakey

So if Ali had so many close calls and less than impressive performances should he be rated so highly?

---

Thats what i've always said, of course he deserves praise for taking on the best and showing courage and ETC. But as i've always said to those people, had he lost his fights against Ken Norton x2, Jimmy Young, Earnie Shavers, Doug Jones.

Would he still be seen in the same light ? because i for certain think he lost to Ken Norton x2, Jimmy Young, Earnie Shavers, i thought his fight with Doug Jones was a draw, and in that fight he wasn't that far from his prime either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakey

So if Ali had so many close calls and less than impressive performances should he be rated so highly?

---

I mean being a champion you have to be able to deal with adversity, I think Ali dealt with it pretty well.....he's still #3 for me

---

Which means for normal posters he should be number 1. :)

Close to winning? He looked terrible and i had ali winning every round. This guy looked really awkward against ali.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Which means for normal posters he should be number 1. :)

---

...you have no regard for my rating system

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Which means for normal posters he should be number 1. :)

---

...you have no regard for my rating system

---

Lyle, you have a top ten list somewhere?

Actually I have Ali and Joe Louis tied for #1. For those who wonder why Louis when he had problems with 169 pound Conn, well they didn't breed these steroid wooly mammoths over in Europe like Valuev back in the 1930s. Conn moving up to heavyweight would be like say uh, Haye moving up to heavyweight from cruiserweight now.

Well I have a top 3 which are ALMOST inseperable and then there is everyone else.

1. Joe Louis - 25 successful title defenses, HOLDS A RECORD
2. Rocky Marciano - never defeated, HOLDS A RECORD
3. Muhammad Ali - the top of one of the greatest heavyweight eras, WAS LUCKY TO FIGHT IN A CERTAIN ERA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Well I have a top 3 which are ALMOST inseperable and then there is everyone else.

1. Joe Louis - 25 successful title defenses, HOLDS A RECORD
2. Rocky Marciano - never defeated, HOLDS A RECORD
3. Muhammad Ali - the top of one of the greatest heavyweight eras, WAS LUCKY TO FIGHT IN A CERTAIN ERA

---

That era being one with potentially the best heavyweights in history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Well I have a top 3 which are ALMOST inseperable and then there is everyone else.

1. Joe Louis - 25 successful title defenses, HOLDS A RECORD
2. Rocky Marciano - never defeated, HOLDS A RECORD
3. Muhammad Ali - the top of one of the greatest heavyweight eras, WAS LUCKY TO FIGHT IN A CERTAIN ERA

---

Could you elaborate on that last part about Ali?

Well fighters can PERSONALLY affect a lot of things but they cannot pick and choose which era they are in...Ali got a deep era and ended up at the top of it and on account of that his record is very flashy, loads of big names on there, hall of famers. Who is to say someone like Larry Holmes couldn't have done that, if he was given that level of competition?

Also Ali had big personality....meanwhile Joe Louis was VERY restricted in what he could and could not do, otherwise he might have had a bit more charismatic. Ali earned "cultural icon" status for his brashness and his political views...and I think calling him the greatest based on his success in the ring paired with how adored he is, is doing a great disservice to the likes of Louis, Marciano, and a load of others

I just really can't see the argument for Louis being number 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OumaFan

I just really can't see the argument for Louis being number 1.

---

That's fine, but see that's the deal with opinions, you see things a certain way and I see them different, I see tangible records and accomplishments vs celebrity, politics, and being lucky enough to have a division graced with other great fighters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Well fighters can PERSONALLY affect a lot of things but they cannot pick and choose which era they are in...Ali got a deep era and ended up at the top of it and on account of that his record is very flashy, loads of big names on there, hall of famers. Who is to say someone like Larry Holmes couldn't have done that, if he was given that level of competition?

Also Ali had big personality....meanwhile Joe Louis was VERY restricted in what he could and could not do, otherwise he might have had a bit more charismatic. Ali earned "cultural icon" status for his brashness and his political views...and I think calling him the greatest based on his success in the ring paired with how adored he is, is doing a great disservice to the likes of Louis, Marciano, and a load of others

---

No you are doing a dis-service to the feats of Ali in the ring and we are not dis-respecting Louis and others by stating what Ali did in coming out top in the 60's and 70's.

I don't disservice Ali, he was great, but he didn't accomplish what Louis and Rocky did

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

I don't disservice Ali, he was great, but he didn't accomplish what Louis and Rocky did

---

I agree that you should punish a fighter for something he couldnt control eg his era. Louis and Marciano did awesome in a weak era, whats to say they wouldnt of been around the top in the 70s?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

I don't disservice Ali, he was great, but he didn't accomplish what Louis and Rocky did

---

I agree that you should punish a fighter for something he couldnt control eg his era. Louis and Marciano did awesome in a weak era, whats to say they wouldnt of been around the top in the 70s?

---

With all due respect Louis and Marciano would not have accomplished what Ali did in the ring in the 60's and 70's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

With all due respect Louis and Marciano would not have accomplished what Ali did in the ring in the 60's and 70's.

---

Yes but see I disagree with that and you take offense like I just slapped your mama and you post this and expect us to say "Oh well that makes perfect sense, very well then"

I see it the way I see it, I have perfectly valid reasons for it and that's that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

With all due respect Louis and Marciano would not have accomplished what Ali did in the ring in the 60's and 70's.

---

Yes but see I disagree with that and you take offense like I just slapped your mama and you post this and expect us to say "Oh well that makes perfect sense, very well then"

I see it the way I see it, I have perfectly valid reasons for it and that's that

---

You are the one taking offence and not providing any perfectly valid reason for it. :)

You can't even compare marciano with heavyweights nowadays because he is way too small to be considered anywhere near heavyweight. You would have to give him the average heavyweight of today's body statistics to make any comparison acceptable. If marciano was at least 6 foot with a 76" wingspan and a career fighting weight of around 225 pounds, then you could make a comparison. But using rocky's physical stats from yesteryear is meaningless. He is listed as 5'10", with a wingspan of 67 inches and fought most of his fights at or around 185 pounds.