Ali vs Michael Parkinson

I'm just watching the Ali interview, the one in 1974 - my god does he butcher Parkinson. Starts off all light hearted, and then proceeds to destroy him intellectually.

He raises some valid points, his religion of course is of the Islamic faith which being an Atheist (no religious debate here please) I find difficult to swallow in terms of my own beliefs, but the man was devout, and he certainly has conviction (more power to him) his points being about his faith that around the time (1974) the Muslim community was vilified and such - and he, being so obviously of strong conviction was respected because of his exploits, but perhaps not because of his beliefs. My question here is has there ever been another boxer since who has embodied such a strong belief about something outside of the ring? We have our Christian boxers, like Evander Holyfield and Andre Ward, many more of course, but not that would go on a talk show and have a 20 minute rant about it. Was it a sign of the times or was it the figurehead of a sport coming out and wanting to make a change? Will we have anyone who comes out and makes such bold statements? Will Floyd Mayweather come out tomorrow and speak out against gun crime in the US? Will Ricky Hatton come forward and speak out against corruption within the governments? Its certainly a difficult question.

He also mentions about the British mentality towards its fighters, not just back then, but it applies to now - Joe Bugner had recently gone 12 rounds with him, Parkinson discounted Bugner as having no skill, Ali questioned this by countering that he'd gone 12 rounds with him "So does that mean I'm nothin'?" - he then goes on to say about how we need to get behind our fighters, how we could make our boxers a force that perhaps their talent alone doesn't allow - Ricky Hatton and Frank Bruno are rare examples of us getting behind limited boxers, but there has been a wealth of talent since that we've just not really glorified, we still now debate the career of Calzaghe, we rip apart Chris Eubank, the early career of Carl Froch, Junior Witter, Lennox Lewis - there are many more. Are we still guilty of this? Ali seemed to think we should be getting behind our boxers to make them stronger. I feel this is a valid point, and then goes on to say its people like us who push these boxers to be better, train harder (Froch being a good example here) so at what point do we draw the line between support and critique? Haye stands out here as a good example, the man went 12 rounds with the best heavyweight of the last 10 years in Wladimir Klitschko, yet we still have no time for him, we still yet say "he was a bum, he was a coward, he let us down" when in reality, if we'd have all said "Well done David, why don't you recover, fight some top ranked heavies and go for it again" whats to say he wouldn't have refused to retire, and gone for it the legitimate way? Is our expectation of absolute perfection so unrealistic?

I could say more, but I'm aware this post may be a very....lets say it'll get responses perhaps slightly racist, maybe xenophobic and certainly we'll border on the very cusp of controversial, but if at all possible, I'd like to keep this debate cultured and intelligent. My questions laid out in summary;

1) Has there been a more influential sportsperson with views that would challenge our comfort zones?
2) What mentality should we adopt when it comes to supporting our own fighters?
3) Is our expectation of boxers so high that we're too ready to critique them or is it entirely justified by their actions?
4) Have we created a model now, where boxers need to be the very best otherwise we ignore their exploits?

Cheers for reading + responding

JM

1) I think Ali was a perfect storm of the right character at a time of alot of political, social and racial unrest at a time when media was really global and boxing still a huge sport. Ali was initially quite a divisive character though. In racial and political terms I would say Jack Johnson and Joe Louis were very influential. Louis especially as he was really the first widely accepted black champion from all races and his reign oversaw the second world war in the U.S. In the context of boxing, I actually think Joe Louis arguably did more in terms of changing attitudes in America and set the foundation. Ali I feel more came along at a time when opinions were changing anyway and he was a figurehead for various movements and changing attitudes in the country. Nowadays I dont think you have anything like the same kind of personality like Ali but the likes of Pacquaio and Vitali Klitschko are obviously influential figures in politics in their own countries.

2. Ive never bought into the idea that Brits dont back their own. There is a media and tabloid culture which has a vindictive streak but I dont think its representative of the people as a whole. I mean Lewis and Calzaghe were hardly unpopular. They enjoyed alot of support here. When it comes to critiquing a career or evaluating a fighter then I think it normal to recognise various criticisms but I dont think that equates to them being unpopular or lacking support as a whole. Theres a line between supporting a fighter and trying to be objective about them. Personally I have never been one to blindly support a fighter based on nationality in any event and tend to support fighters more based on other things. Ive never really seen boxing as representative of a nation as its more indivdualistic by nature. Froch for instance is my favourite current British fighter and I go to his fights when I can in support. But at the same time Im not going buy into that he would beat Ward in Nottingham for instance. I would hope he would win, but I cant see him managing it. I dont consider that lacking support, but more just my honest opinion trying to be objective.

3. I wouldnt say so for the most part. Sport generates debate by nature. The greater the boxer, the higher standards they are held by usually. Sometimes it might seen a bit easy to criticise one fighter or another from the comfort of an armchair but I think its generally held within the acknowledgement that its a tough sport and that goes without saying usually. The rest is just discussion.

4. I wouldnt really say so. I think its usually been the case where the best fighters get the most attention and they are generally the ones people are most familiar with which makes them more topical.

JabMachineMK2 wrote: My question here is has there ever been another boxer since who has embodied such a strong belief about something outside of the ring?

Whilst people don't like the bloke or his views, which are pretty repugnant to be fair you would have to say Anthony Smalls is committed. Has basically killed his career on the back of his views and comments to a point where he could not buy a fight nowadays. Horrible, loathsome individual but got to say the guy means it.

Anthony Smalls...dear me Jeff we're not starting the whole Hayes, Smalls, Eubanks thing again are we

Good example though.

Excellent article by the way, JM. We should back our fighters more, certainly, and it is a little daft that we criticise non-perfection yet get right on the back of those that gain success and show a little arrogance/ambition (delete as applicable) in the process.

Good post and original questions JM.

Great, great article, Jab Machine. I take my hat off to you.

I certainly agree with Manos, insofar as I think Louis should be remembered as a greater 'man' than Ali in that sense. It's incredible just how against him the cards were stacked in 1930s America. When Ali emerged, things were slowly changing and had been for a while, but his bombast, personality, showmanship and charm made him the perfect mouth piece for it all.

As Mark Kram demonstrates nicely in 'Ghosts of Manila', Ali's later day beautification is something of a "sham" in a lot of ways. I can't really subscribe to the idea that he was devout in his following of Islam - some of his statements during the peak of his fame were outrageously racist, and he chased women of all colours / creeds vociferously, even during his multiple marriages. Louis did the latter too, of course, but he isn't retrospectively held up by all and sundry as a God-like figure and a freedom fighter the way Ali is.

Ali's spirit and oratory skills make him a key figure in that decade of change and revolution, but in terms of lasting influence I think it can be argued that Louis, in his own way, has had just as great an impact, and he did it in a more commendable way too, for me.

Alexis Argullio had obviously strong political views about his country Nicaragua that he personally got involved in the civil war which interupted his career. He became a hero to his country but in later years his political status and his drug problems would play a part in his death.

Nice article, probably worth differentiating Ali's "nation of Islam" faith from the "Islamic" faith. Elijah muhammad it turned out, was not a profit, just a very naughty boy.

Tyson Fury's twitter homepage:

God Loves us all so much. Trust in Him

(I had correct his grammar of course)

i think the british public are weary getting behind their boxers, once they have then they are quite unfaultering in their support. kell brook sold 10,000 tickets in his own town and had yet to fight anyone of real note. that shows he do get behind fighters who we perceive have talent.

I've always been extremely wary of the notion that one should "get behind" a boxer simply because of where he was born or lives.

In the first place, my four grandparents were of different nationalities, I was schooled here and now reside here, but have spent ages in various other parts of the world. Questions of nationality or origin are thus rather complicated for me.

Secondly, as one grows up and takes an interest in the sport, one's heroes come from all over the place - it's entirely natural. In boxing, my first heroes were Buchanan, Conteh, Ali, Frazier, Jofre, Arguello and Monzon. I hated the idea of any of those guys getting beaten. I didn't want Buchanan to lose to Duran and I would have roared myself hoarse for Monzon were he to have fought Kevin Finnegan, for example. I was thrilled when Hagler did a number on Minter because I preferred Marv as a boxer and a person.

Nationality doesn't come into boxing for me. One of the best things about the sport is that it's the supreme test of an athlete, stripping an individual down to his rawest essence. I admire that greatly, no matter what the nationality involved may be. I loathe people who use boxing (or any other sport) as a crutch for their xenophobia, thinly disguised as patriotism. I'm not accusing any on this thread of that, but I am saying that it happens a lot and it's nauseating.

As for Ali himself, by far the most significant sportsman who has ever lived. Louis may have been more admirable and Johnson may have shaken barriers in the sport, but a peasant in Communist China or the Andes hadn't a clue who Jack Johnson or Joe Louis were. Ali is the only sportsman that world leaders have made time in their schedules to talk to about issues of real importance. Pele was a global legend, but he never transcended football, he embodied it. Ali went beyond sport, leave alone boxing.

Thanks for the positive response guys, means a lot!

I suppose I can understand the idea that Joe Louis was a greater man, however his exploits although a positive for so many black athletes, the same as Jesse Owens almost in terms of triumph against adversity - I feel don't measure up to the size of Ali's (albeit somewhat misguided) contribution. Whether positive or negative, I can't help but notice the fact that the Captain touches a very valid point that Ali transcended the sport, he wasn't just famous for being the best boxer - he was famous for being a face of change, the spokesperson of the black muslim in America and rightfully or wrongfully that isn't something that we can hide from.

I don't think personally, that we'll have someone that influential - the Klitschkos are attempting to go into politics, that much is true, but what do we hear about the struggles of the Ukranian people? What do we hear about their wanting change in peoples viewpoints? Nothing. Same with Manny Pacquiao. The man ISN'T just a boxer, he sings, he dances and he's going to more than likely - step into being the next President/Prime Minister of the Phillipenes. We don't however hear the reason why, and how.

Is this the limit of us caring? or is it that the exploits that have followed Ali are far too ordinary for us to care?

Great article JabMachine!

What I don't get about the beatification of Ali in all of this is how so many huge political figures came to be so influenced by a man that had failed his draft medicals due to worryingly low levels of intelligence? I understand he became a figurehead for the NOI but how could people in such high political positions be influenced and taken under what seems like a spell due to his personality combined with such extremist views?

As they say, it's the people with the brightest imaginations who tend to inspire people, rather than people with the highest IQs.

I understand that, Chris. However, surely there has to be a line and Ali's behaviour could not have been completely ignored at that time by so many people in power? I never understood just how he was so successful in getting so many black people to turn on one of their own in Frazier? A man who had a much tougher upbringing than Ali. Don't mean to derail the thread, sorry.

I understand that, Chris. However, surely there has to be a line and Ali's behaviour could not have been completely ignored at that time by so many people in power? I never understood just how he was so successful in getting so many black people to turn on one of their own in Frazier? A man who had a much tougher upbringing than Ali. Don't mean to derail the thread, sorry.

Should I join this thread?

Initially Ali was pretty unpopular. He was stripped of his title, arrested and found guilty of draft evasion and sentenced to 5 years in prison. However it went through so many appeals that by the time it was to go back to court public opinion had turned so much against the Vietnam War that Ali had become a symbol of resistance to it and the pressure to convict him waned. I think it was a bit later when Alis more extreme views had softened somewhat and his status as a champion had grown that he began to evolve into the sort of worshipped figure he is held today.

If you're going to add something to it, az.

Still Repetitive I see boss I think Ali's exile and subsequent return put a gloss on ali that could not be viewed subjectively until many years later. Thus as Alis popularity went up he was the golden goose for politicians. In the aftermath of Vietnam they were scrambling for his approval and his international acclaim only made him something special to exploit. Frazier kept his mouth shut - so no profile just a tough tough man to be looked upon an admired but nothing to gain out of him. So an influential black leader supported Ali's Assertion and promoted the black is beautiful - without ever considering the consequences for joe.

I read that he was also dyslexic. An IQ test is not a test of intelligence that is universal. An IQ test made for aboriginals in the outback of Oz will produced varied results if taken by urban Australians.

Ali was popular because he had the courage of his convictions and was real. He talked the talk in and out of the ring and walked the walk in and out of the ring. His views were a product of his time where blacks were liked when they were silent, humble and certainly not uppity.

Ali came at the right place and time when a cultural revolution was sweeping across America, where silent voices suddenly began to be heard. Where fear was replaced with pride in self. He would not be denied. And of course for most of the time he was 100% correct.

if your good enough you can do what you want. mayweather got a jailed sentence moved for a fight that made him millions of dollars, and that was to avoid further charges.

people love talent reguardless

Regardless of what?

The point is, az, that the social and cultural revolution was sweeping across the world, and Ali was seen as a torch-bearer, not just by black America, but by the global dispossessed.

Had the 60s just been an American phenomenon, you would have been able to file Ali in the same cabinet as someone like Jackie Robinson; of immense significance in one country, but not a sportsman, and man, of incalculable global influence.

Whom do we remember as the icons of the era? Probably Guevara, the Beatles, the Kennedys, a variety of other left of centre folk, including the Situationists of Paris, and just one sportsman - Ali.

Smith and Carlos made arguably the most important single sporting gesture of that time, but Ali's whole career, from 1964 onwards, was full of them. He wasn't, pace az, 100% correct most of the time, but there was generally at least a grain of truth in most of what he said.

azania wrote:Regardless of what?

reguardless of whethter your a woman beater, a r***ist or whatever else.

Spot on Capt. Excellent post.

I don't think Ali did what he wanted because he was a good boxer. It gave him a platform. He did what he did because he believed it.

Shah, that's the problem of living in the countryside and posting from my phone.
Az, never heard about the dyslexia before and was just makiing the generalised point about the draft test. Not 100 percent on the details.

Just to clarify, I respect Ali's strength of convictions, courage and boxing ability, I just don't completely agree with his almost saintlike status and see him as a bit of a bully. Having not lived through the times I can only go by what I've read and the suffering he caused for Frazier and his family doesn't sit well with me.

I think thats something he himself would acknowledge - Manos described it most accurately I think. The ali of now is held to be the ali of then - when he wasnt the man he is now. "The man who views the world at 50 the same as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life" From his own mouth

For me the man is greater than the boxer. He took on all of America and won. But importantly, no 1 man is perfect.

I didn't live through the times, but my in-laws did. They marched until their shoes wore out. They were patient. Ali wasn't. He wanted what most Americans took for granted.......freedom. He got it on his own terms. He won. America won in the end. He did more for civil rights that an other sportsman. And his human rights achievements are many. He even went to Iraq and came back with hundreds of freed hostages.

Fair does Shah. Might just be a bit of boxing snobbery from myself due to most of my mates doing the usual, "Ali and Tyson are the best" so I'm a smokin' Joe fan haha.

Funny thins is, my father in law was a Frazier fan. He wanted him to shut the big mouth up. But he always respected Ali's conviction and courage in what he stood for. Just didn't like the wa he said it. They are more of the MLK type than the more radical elements.

Az, respect for all of that. Probably confusing my point as its been a long day but I have the utmost respect for what he achieved. I agree that he is the most influential sportsman of all time and his courage is unbelievable but as a younger man he was far from the saint that he is sometimes portrayed as most have alluded to already.

Az, it seems your father in law might have felt the same way as me long before I was born. That was the jist of what I meant.

No he didn't.

What?

Let me elaborate. He respected Ali. Didn't like his self praise too much. Preferred Frazier because of hi style. Didn't agree with Ali's religion but respected it in that it was his choice and his Truth. It's just the mouth on Ali which he didn't take too kindly. His politics is another matter. He didn't agree 100% (who would) but understood where and why it came about.

You would have to be almost saint like not to react. But people had been conditioned to accept their lot and slowly when voices began to raise, Ali came about and shouted from the rooftops.

King was the moral authority. Malcolm X was the rage and Ali was shouting for all to hear. Whether you liked him or not, he was heard and listened to.

Well that's basically what I've been trying to say so I didn't understand you're "No he didn't" comment. I respect Ali, but prefer Frazier. Respect his opionions, but disagree with how he went about publicising them. Respect his boxing ability but don't agree with the castigation of my preferred Frazier.

Top 5 ATG boxer and the most influential sportsman of all time regardless of political allegiances.

The Boss wrote:Well that's basically what I've been trying to say so I didn't understand you're "No he didn't" comment. I respect Ali, but prefer Frazier. Respect his opionions, but disagree with how he went about publicising them. Respect his boxing ability but don't agree with the castigation of my preferred Frazier.

Top 5 ATG boxer and the most influential sportsman of all time regardless of political allegiances.

True.

Just watched 'When We Were Kings' yet again and ending up wondering if Ali/Foreman was the only World Heavyweight Title fight ever that didn't have an undercard. I'm sure it has been.

EdWoodjr wrote:Just watched 'When We Were Kings' yet again and ending up wondering if Ali/Foreman was the only World Heavyweight Title fight ever that didn't have an undercard. I'm sure it has been.

James Brown did a pre-fight concert.

There was certainly an undercard scheduled I believe. Read Larry Holmes’ autobiography and he tells a story about a guy called Roy Williams who was a sparring partner of Ali’s and fringe contender who was scheduled to appear on the undercard, when for whatever reason the fight did not happen he blamed Ali and said he owed him the $5000 he had lost.

Apparently when they got back to Deer Lake he would not let it lie and started tearing into Ali calling him every name under the sun and pestering him for the money. They apparently went back and forth and ended up in the ring over it for ten rounds, Williams apparently gave Ali all he could handle, so much so they had another ten rounds the next day with Williams again giving Ali as good as he got as well as insulting him left right and centre during the sessions. Ali ended up kicking him out of the camp but did pay him the money before he left.

That roy guy was outclassed by richard dunn if i remember correctly. Holmes just being his usual bitter self I think

Holmes speaks well of him as a fighter Shah, says he was his toughest opponent, Holmes' opinion was he was a good fighter who just never got the breaks and got a bit ground down by the politics and BS of the game. Sounds a genuinely odd guy though, Larry says he was at ringside for one of Roy's fights when they were both Ali's sparring partners and he was shouting encouragement to Roy only for Williams to turn round to him mid round and tell him to shut the f up.

rowley wrote:There was certainly an undercard scheduled I believe. Read Larry Holmes’ autobiography and he tells a story about a guy called Roy Williams who was a sparring partner of Ali’s and fringe contender who was scheduled to appear on the undercard, when for whatever reason the fight did not happen he blamed Ali and said he owed him the $5000 he had lost.

Apparently when they got back to Deer Lake he would not let it lie and started tearing into Ali calling him every name under the sun and pestering him for the money. They apparently went back and forth and ended up in the ring over it for ten rounds, Williams apparently gave Ali all he could handle, so much so they had another ten rounds the next day with Williams again giving Ali as good as he got as well as insulting him left right and centre during the sessions. Ali ended up kicking him out of the camp but did pay him the money before he left.

Stuff like this is why I'm a member of these boards.

I'd love it if you were a regular down my local, I'd probably become an alcoholic but the wealth of boxing talk I get it mainly current and I can't really find much time to gain knowledge like this.