Y'all don't know [censored] about boxing

Tim Mullin said:

crazy! So a little history lesson is in order. Pay
attention, class.

Way back in 1974, Muhammad stepped into the ring as a 7-1
underdog. He wasn't in the best of shape. His opponent,
George Foreman was unbeaten in 40 fights--a fierce, far
cry from the smiling grill and muffler salesman we know
today--had dispatched Joe Frazier and Ken Norton (both had
beaten Ali) in only two rounds. There were those seriously
concerned for Ali's safety.

As he stepped into the ring, no one, other than Ali,
expected he could win. "You think the world was shocked
when Nixon resigned?" Ali said. "Wait till I whup George
Foreman's behind."

For the first round, Ali did what was expected of him. He
danced around, showed his speed, and even taunted Foreman
a little. The second round saw the debut the "rope-a-
dope." Ali covered his head, lay back against the ropes,
and motioned for Foreman to come and get him. For the next
four rounds, brutalized Ali, hammering his un protected
ribs and gut. Much of the time the ropes were the only
thing keeping Ali upright. It

Quoted message said:

in the seventh round Foreman began to tire from his
effort, and Ali leaned against him and said, "Is that all
you got, George?" Apparently, it was. At the begining of
the eighth round Ali did not not retreat to the ropes,
instead launching a viscious attack on the exhausted
Foreman,

Quoted message said:

Ali wasn't playing some head game with his opponent....he
was winning the only way he could. Had he come out and
faced Forman head-to-head in the early rounds, he would
have been killed. It was a very risky strategy, but he
really didn't have any other options.

It should be noted that the strategy is brilliant only if
it works. Had Ali lost, it would all seem so stupid.

Is Armstrong playing head games here? Perhaps....or maybe
not. I don't really care. What pisses me off is when the
rope-a-dope is compared to a head game, `cause it's not
the same thing. If you don't win, it doesnt count. And 2
minutes down on GC clearly isn't winning.

Jesus Christ, people....Armstrong said he's not here to
win, so what's the problem? What's the point of making all
the excuses? It sounds like

Quoted message said:

invincable....but only when he's supposed or wants to be.

There's an excellent film of this fight and Rope-A-Dope was
only half of Ali's strategy. The other half was a 'head
game'. Ali talked trash about Foreman to work him up, get
him good and mad so George would have on his mind in the
ring was clobbering Ali.

Tim Mullin <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

crazy! So a little history lesson is in order. Pay
attention, class.

Way back in 1974, Muhammad stepped into the ring as a 7-1
underdog. He wasn't in the best of shape.

IMO of all the post reinstatement bouts Ali is in better
physical shape than this one for Frazier I only. The
Kinshasha fight had been delayed for six? weeks due to
Foreman getting cut in sparring, both med had meen in
serious training for three months and it was contested in
very high heat and humidity. If I'm not mistaken Ali would
be nearly ten pounds heavier for every fight thereafter.

I agree with most of what you're saying but I think you are
influenced by the "Rope-a-Dope" being extensively used in
later fights when Ali clearly wasn't in very good shape but
even then the way he would come out in the last thirty
seconds and steal the round on the judges cards was
exquisite. FWIW the combination of power and hand speed in
the first Frazier fight is transcendant.

The other strategic coup versus Foreman was understanding
from the get-go that Foreman was adept enough at "cutting
off the ring" that Ali would have had to dance like 1966 to
stay away from him, and this is very well documented in
"When We Were Kings."

I haven't read all the background material but just last
week I did read "Facing Ali" and I would recommend that book
to anyone.