Breitbart didn't "rope-a-dope" the media

Glenn Reynolds linked to Jim Treacher's piece on The DC entitled, "Andrew Breitbart, master of the rope-a-dope," which says,

If you’re too young to remember Ali vs. Foreman — which most of the people I work with are — Ali used something he called the rope-a-dope to win. Basically, he let Foreman beat the snip out of him until Foreman got tired, and then Ali swabbed the canvas with him. “Rope-a-dope” has now become shorthand for any strategy where you let your opponent think he’s winning, as you bide your time until you’re ready to strike back.

Breitbart used this technique to great effect during the ACORN sting. He predicted exactly what his opponent was going to do — make statements of fact that they knew not to be true — and allowed it. Then he made his countermove by proving them wrong with hard evidence. He did this over and over, and they fell for it every time.

Well, no. I do remember Ali's rope-a-dope ploy and what Mr. Treacher does not. Ali was cheating while Foreman fought fair. The occasion was the "rumble in the jungle" fight held in Zaire (Congo) on Oct. 30, 1974.

Ali called the "technique" rope-a-dope because he literally used the ropes of the ring as part of the trickery. He had the fight organizers loosen them significantly. His tactic was indeed to let Foreman exhaust himself hitting on him, but not even Muhammed Ali wanted to take Foreman's jab straight to the head. So over and over again he backed up against the ropes, which were loosened so much he could darn near lie down on them. Foreman could not get a straight hit onto Ali except on his midsection, but Ali had probably the toughest abdomen in boxing at the time.

Other boxers have used the rope-a-dope tactic, of course, but without Ali's covert advantage. It's considered quite a risky thing to do since it involves, you know, getting pummeled in the hope of outlasting the opponent.

In politics, the term has come to mean opening an apparent advantage to one's opponents in the hope they won't see the trap laid for them. Chess players, of course, use this ploy all time, sacrificing pieces to gain positional advantage or to capture more valuable pieces in return. So in that sense I see what Mr. Treacher is trying to say about Andrew Breitbart. Rope-a-dope's inherent risk is worth taking only if one's opponent is highly predictable. And when it comes to the media, there's no problem there.