Talk:Thrilla in Manila
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thrilla in Manila article.|
- 1 Frazier Photograph
- 2 Disappointment
- 3 I changed a lot
- 4 Citations Needed
- 5 Personal feelings distorting facts
- 6 Date of fight
- 7 Ali photo
- 8 Cataract?
- 9 Poster
- 10 Pro-Ali bias in article
- 11 Uncited material in need of citations
- 12 Background
- 13 Exchange with Wikipedia editor
This article has two images of Ali but no pictures of Frazier. There's a lot of new images popping up of Frazier both recently and around the time that he fought Ali, unfortunately nothing comparable in commons. If someone knows where there are free images of Frazier, they should be added to both commons and this article. Scifipete (talk) 23:10, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
I find it a bit disappointing that for a fight that many consider to be the best boxing match of the past century, very little is written about it.
There is a good account of the entire history and build-up of this fight over at www.boxingscene.com.
Link is here: http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=2105
With the continuation here: http://www.boxingscene.com/index.php?m=show&id=2086
Perhaps we could find a way to contact the writer and have his work used as a good source for a future revision for the "Thrilla in Manila" entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk • contribs)
- If you're writing a proper Wikipedia article, you should be using just the facts, which do not require permission to repeat (just proof that they're facts). If you incorporate opinion from an article, however, that should be indicated as such and properly cited. Go for it! 22.214.171.124 (talk) 19:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I changed a lot
"Ali, however, did not train as hard as he usually did for fights because he thought Frazier was washed up" "He claimed that this was the closest to dying he has ever been" Both of these can be found in Ali's autobiography, or in numerous documentaries made about Ali.-2/5/07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk • contribs)
Personal feelings distorting facts
Is it me or is this article Frazier-biased a bit much?
Calling this Fraizer-biased is an understatement.
ULTRA Frazier-biased!!! In reality, Ali beat the living snot out of Frazier! His face was totally unrecognizable after that fight!
- And Frazier beat the snot out of Ali right back. Or why do you think Ali kept saying about the fight "This must be what dying feels like, this is the closest to death I've ever been"? And folks, I'm both a big boxing fan and an Ali fan, and the article is based entirely on solid facts. Also, why does everyone keep saying it's Frazier biased? Essentially what the article says is that Ali barely trained and didn't take the fight seriously while Frazier trained and fought like a madman and Ali still beat him. How exactly is that pro-Frazier? Wandering Man
While everything in this article may be accurate, it may include an excess of facts that portray Fraizer in an admirable light while witholding as much information that may do the same for Ali.
If the Frazier bias stems from the cited ESPN article, then that should be said in the text. Much of it seems like personal opinion. The misuse of commas in many of the pro-Frazier sections seems to hint that it was all written by one person (who needs to learn how to punctuate). 188.8.131.52 (talk) 04:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
The reality is that, overall, experts view the fighters as about even in points. A number think the fight should have been a draw. Frazier looked terrible but Ali's injuries were internal and he never really recovered from the fight. His fight physician advised Ali that he ought to never fight again, advice which Ali ignored. Source: Documentary, Thrilla in Manila. the.Duke.of.URL
- Not only is the Pre-fight section not even close to NPOV (if only the facts explicitly applicable to this fight were included, this problem would be solved), it's almost entirely uncited. If anyone wishes to keep it the way it is, the LEAST they should do is include strong cites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 18:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
The.Duke.of.URL - I'm sorry but the Thrilla in Manila documentary is not a legitimate source.I am a huge boxing fan but you need not be one to smell a hatchet job and for the most part it was one.The fight was not a draw and nor should it have been one.Ali was ahead on all judges scorecards and that is a fact,Frazier's corner called it quits which means the fight is over even had Frazier been ahead on the scorecards.As for Ali and Frazier being equal in terms of their accomplishments in the ring this again isn't debatable I'm afraid - Ali and Frazier fought three times,Ali won two of the three bouts.Ali beat George Foreman and Foreman trounced Frazier twice.Ali just has the much better resume which is why he is generally regarded as the greatest heavyweight of all time —Preceding unsigned comment added by Callingdogsofthunder (talk • contribs) 08:17, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Ali's supporters can talk about how he had more wins, a longer career, beat better fighters and whatever else compared to Frazier.
But you know what ?
In the biggest fight of Ali's career (the 'Fight Of The Century'; the first time 2 undefeated heavyweight champions had met in the ring) he was thoroughly beaten -- and knocked flat on his back -- by Joe Frazier.
That's a fact.
In fact under modern scoring Frazier's win would have been even more emphatic as he had 2 10-8 rounds and many present day referees would have stopped it in the 11th round when Ali was taking heavy punishment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 22:10, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Date of fight
When did the fight take place? The article says "October 1, 10:45 a.m.". I assume this means Manila time (UTC+8). Why does the poster say "September 30"? Does it refer to an American timezone? (19:45 = 7:45 p.m. Eastern Time, 16:45=4.45 p.m Pacific) --The very model of a minor general 18:07, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
The post-retirement photo of Ali seems to really stick out in the article, and has nothing to do with what is being discussed. It should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SergeantLuke (talk • contribs) 04:08, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't believe for 1 second that the WBx would have allowed Frazier to fight with a Cataract !! This is all stuff that came from Joe himself in recent times to make excuses for the result. Can anyone give a contemporary 1975 source for this cataract claim ?? There is also similar BS in the Joe Frazier section, where Joe said he had been partially sighted in his left eye since 1965, all of it nonsense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 07:54, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
State boxing commissions sanction fights. It is their physicians who do the examinations. They have a financial incentive to allow fighters to enter the ring even if they have severe maladies just so long as the fighter provides a marketable attraction for events to be held in that state. What is more, the commissions are run and populated by hacks who are given patronage jobs. During the Pataki Administration's tenure in NY, Floyd Patterson held the top post while suffering a severe case of dementia. The dynamic of a race to the bottom is also prevalent- the idea being "if we don't sanction it, someone else will." Frazier's recounting of the eye chart tests he received in his autobiography are compelling as well. I suggest that any skeptic should read his account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LawrenceJayM (talk • contribs) 23:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
If Cleveland Williams was permitted to fight Ali in 1966 with a shriveled leg, 10ft of small intestine missing and kidney damage (he'd been shot at point blank range by a cop a year before) then they'd probably let a cataract pass! In any event, only Frazier and his close aides knew about the injury. He didn't have the cataract removed until 1975, and had his final fight with George Foreman wearing contact lenses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 19:13, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
When discussing the pre-fight mood, it talks about Al's camp being jovial and one reason listed for this is the relative ease that Ali beat Frazier in their second fight. This statement is absolutely wrong. That second fight was very close and Ali won it by split decision. I personally watched the fight and I thought Frazier won it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 19:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Pro-Ali bias in article
This article is extremely biased towards Ali. I am extremely neutral on this subject and came here to change one small sentence I saw, wherein the writer (not a good one, because of his hyperbole) used extremely colorful speech to describe the actual fight. Saying things such as, "Ali threw a blistering combination" and "sent Frazier's mouthpiece FLYING into the crowd." Now, I can understand trying to make it sound fun -- that's understandable -- but to literally lie about something is very, very unethical on an encyclopedia. The mouth-guard never flew into the audience or anything similar. The mouth-gard was simply knocked out of Frazier's mouth and most likely landed, literally, no more than five feet from him (on the canvas). So, again, I don't even have the time to fully edit this article, but I did edit that one exaggerated sentence. I'm not a boxing fan at all, but recently watched this particular fight and disagree with a lot that was said about it here. If you're going to edit an article, do it honorably. People saying Frazier's face was unrecognizable are lying. I watched the fight and recognized him very well immediately after the fight. People who say he was blind during the 14th round were lying, you can see his eyes swollen, but not fully closed, during the fight. People saying Ali collapsed for blank period of time right after the 14th round -- not true. He was even able to give a very well-spoken interview right after the fight. He was clearly still energized (as well as Frazier). That's all. LogicalCreator (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:43, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Article may well be biased towards Ali, but Frazier's mouthpiece was sent flying out of the ring in the 13th round, and it gave Ali the impetus to unleash a furious attack on Frazier because he became convinced that he could knock him out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LawrenceJayM (talk • contribs) 23:47, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Uncited material in need of citations
I fact-tagged the following material over a month ago, in the hopes that someone would add appropriate citations. That has not happened, so I'm moving here until citations can be added.
When Ali was stripped of the title in 1967 over his refusal to join the armed forces when drafted during the Vietnam War, Frazier had petitioned President Nixon to restore Ali's right to box and even lent Ali money. When Ali finally got his license back, they first met in the bout promoters called The Fight of the Century, marking the first time that two undefeated heavyweight champions had met in the ring. The mutual enmity emerged in the build up to the fight, when Ali turned on Frazier, describing him as an "Uncle Tom", and a "white man's champion". Frazier in turn riled Ali by referring to him by his birth name, Clay. The fight itself was a classic. Frazier won by unanimous decision in a fast-paced, brutal 15 round bout, with Smokin' Joe scoring the fight's (and the trilogy's) only knockdown at the beginning of the final round.
Afterwards the pair continued to trade insults, but by the time they met in 1974 for a rematch, neither was champion; Frazier had lost his title to George Foreman and Ali had recently been beaten by Ken Norton. In a promotional appearance before their second fight, the two had an infamous brawl in a TV studio while being interviewed by Howard Cosell. The rematch itself was a boring, poorly refereed affair. In the 2nd round, Ali stung Frazier with a hard right hand, which backed him up. Referee Tony Peres inexplicably stepped in between the fighters, signifying the end of the round, even though there were about 25 seconds left, giving Frazier precious time to regain his bearings and continue fighting. Peres also utterly failed to contain Ali's tactic of illegally holding and pulling down his opponent's neck in the clinches - which helped Ali to smother Frazier, and gain him the decision. This became a major issue in selecting the referee for the Manila bout.
In September 1975, Muhammad Ali, having regained his title with a stunning knockout of George Foreman the prior year, thought a third fight with Frazier at this stage would represent an easy payday against a big-name challenger who would be unable to live up to his billing in the ring.
Pre-fight promotions and training
The training methods of the two fighters illustrated the contrast between the two men. In Ali's camp, the learned preparations of a brilliant champion and his legendary trainer, Angelo Dundee, ran concurrently with the famed "Ali Circus" which consisted of a king-sized entourage of friends, hangers-on, and anyone who caught Ali's fancy and wanted to join in the fun. All of this was business as usual for the champion, and claims that he did not prepare for the fight are belied by the herculean effort Ali was able to deliver in the ring, as well as the pre-fight observations of legendary boxing writer A.J. Liebling, who covered the match for The Washington Post. Despite carrying a small layer of excess fat, in training sessions, Ali moved well, and his punches from both hands were sharp, showing both crispness and accuracy.
Don King, amused by the gesture, agreed to hold the fight at the Araneta Coliseum in Quezon City. Produced by King and broadcast to many countries worldwide with HBO's antenna, The Thrilla in Manila had a tremendous media following.
At 10:45 am, with a morning fight to coincide with international TV audiences, the bell for Round 1 rang. Ali had previously told his trainers that he was going to "put a whuppin'" on Joe Frazier, and his aggression at the start of the fight seemed to bear this out. Frazier was known for starting fights slowly, and Ali came out looking to use that to his advantage. Ali won the early rounds, largely remaining flat footed in place of his familiar dancing style and unleashed flurries of combinations on Frazier. Frazier was hurt a number of times by Ali's onslaught, including being backed up by Ali several times in the first two rounds. However, to the amazement of Ali and many watching, Frazier continued to come forward, intent on punishing Ali's body at close range despite having to take more and more of the withering punishment Ali was dishing out. According to Pacheco, Ali, who wanted to make it a short fight, grew so frustrated with Frazier's refusal to go down or stop coming forward that he screamed "You stupid chump, you!" at Frazier in the fourth round.
By the fourth round Ali began to tire from all the energy he had expended in the searing heat and Frazier turned up his own offense and began punishing Ali to the body and the head with his trademark hooks. By the sixth round, Frazier had staggered him in turn and seemed to be gaining control of the bout. At the beginning of the seventh round, Ali reportedly whispered in Frazier's ear, "Joe, they told me you was all washed up" Frazier growled back, "They told you wrong, pretty boy."
Frazier seemed to dominate the middle rounds. Ali tried to fend Frazier off with occasional furious flurries of punches, spurts of manic activity, and even unsuccessfully tried to use the rope-a-dope technique that had defeated George Foreman nearly a year earlier, but it was all negated by Frazier's relentless assault and power. Ali's camp seemed to have overlooked the fact that Frazier's smothering fighting style, which employed great numbers of left hooks, was in many ways, the perfect foil for Ali. Between the heat inside the stadium, Frazier's assault and his own nonchalant training, it began to seem that Ali would lose.
Finally, in the tenth round, Frazier began to slow down and tire, and Ali slowly turned the tide. In the 11th round he used his speed to dance more, and to unload a series of fast combinations on Frazier, which severely bruised his face by the end of the round, swelling Frazier's eyes to the point that nothing but a tiny slit remained open. Throughout round 12 Ali continued to turn the momentum, increasingly overwhelming Frazier, and using the fact that Frazier could no longer see Ali's right hand coming to hit Frazier with one hard right after another. About a minute into Round 13, Ali landed another combination on Frazier, knocking Frazier's mouth-guard out of his mouth and onto the canvas. During the next two minutes Ali relentlessly kept after Frazier, the mouthguard not being replaced until the bell, hitting Frazier with hard combinations when Frazier wasn't throwing punches, and when Frazier did throw, Ali used the openings left to inflict yet more damage. Frazier's mouth was badly cut by the end of this round.
In round 14, Frazier was almost blind as he stepped in, and was met once more with punishing blows from Ali. With the punishment from Ali closing his right eye, Frazier was effectively fighting blind in the last rounds of the fight. By the 14th round Frazier was virtually helpless, and although Ali was desperately tired and hurting, he was able to summon the energy once again to give Frazier a fierce beating, and once again Frazier was staggered and nearly knocked down before the bell ended the round.
[Ali] stated, "Joe Frazier, I'll tell the world right now, brings out the best in me. I'm gonna tell ya, that's one helluva man, and God bless him." In a brief post-fight interview with one of the commentators, Ali announced, "He is the greatest fighter of all times, next to me."
AftermathIn 1999 ESPN's SportsCentury ranked the fight as the fifth greatest sporting event of the 20th century.
- I just removed a chunk of what was left, but as a copyright violation (see my edit summary) not for lack of sourcing. Since it's a copyvio, it cannot be moved here. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 19:22, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Exchange with Wikipedia editor
Hi. Please do not add or restore unsourced material to articles, as you did with these edits to Thrilla in Manila, as this violates Wikipedia's Verifiability policy. That material was moved to the talk page for a valid reason: Wikipedia requires that the material in its articles be accompanied by reliable, verifiable (usually secondary) sources explicitly cited in the text in the form of an inline citation, which you can learn to make here. The fact that you think such material is "the requirement of this encyclopedia" does not mitigate the need to adhere to those policies.
In addition, please do not add notes to the reader or arbitrary indentations in the body of articles, as you did with the above edits.
If you ever have any other questions about editing, or need help regarding the site's policies, just let me know by leaving a message for me in a new section at the bottom of my talk page. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 16:33, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- thank you very much, Nightscream.
- I placed the added information on rounds 9 – 14 because there was no description of them in the article which led to the last round, round 14, and particularly round 14. I am by no means a fight follower but a general reader and on behalf of other general readers I took what was on the talk page to the article page.
- Presently there is no description of those rounds and a paragreaph begins as it had before
- Seeing the results of round 14, Eddie Futch decided to stop the fight
- Well, thanks very much, I said to myself, what happened in round 14?
- So that the reader of the article would know what the quality of the new information was from the talk page there was added by me the information to keep the reader alert and the indentation was intended to give further clarity to the, by Wikipedia standards, second grade information. ( which information gave the reason for the Frazier trainer Eddie Futch to call the end to the bout.) --Laurencebeck (talk) 20:26, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- but a general reader and on behalf of other general readers I took what was on the talk page to the article page.
- Thus undoing what I did back in January when I moved that material from the article to the talk page in the first place. Again, did it not occur to you that it was moved here for a reason? Did you not read what that reason was at the top of the section I began for it above?
- Seeing yourself as acting "on behalf of other general readers" does not allow us to violate Wikipedia policies, including the Verifiability, Citation and Reliable Sources policies, which require that material in Wikipedia articles be accompanied by citations of reliable, verifiable sources. Nor does it justify bad formatting or addition of notes to the reader. The information in question was not "new", as it had been removed from the article almost a year earlier, and your note had no bearing on its "quality". The quality of material included in articles is predicated on its verifiability, its support by inline citations, its proper weight, and the quality of its writing and its presentation/composition. Indenting a chunk of the article and placing a note above it stating that it was previously on the talk page does not ensure its quality; it lowers the quality of the article.
Verify that now is added: Not exactly bridge work from rounds 8,9 to 13,14 but rounds 13,14 given description from the Daily Mirror sports writer of the day. --Laurencebeck (talk) 01:48, 21 December 2013 (UTC)