Could Foremans career be replicated by anyone

[The End]

:idea: Vitali Klitschko

[misterpunch]

the media in general has never had the sting that it gave tyson - compare the media, TV etc from the early/mid years of the century to tysons era??? youre joking!! ali had to contend with it yea but are you aware of tysons mental frailty? people and boxers are not all the same. some are tougher than others.. mentally/psychologically/physically, this cannot have escaped your notice. frazier was not as durable and able to recover from punishment as ali. joe fought well and courageously in the third ali fight but both of them were way off their prime. douglas's mother dying was a spur to his performance not a hinderance. i know a guy whose father died due to a brain tumour - he was on a 3 fight losing streak at the time and languishing, going downwards..he suddenly transformed himself into a european title challenger, inspired by the tragedy. this sport, more than any other, is a question of what your mind is doing.

study that idea rather than being a stats man is what i respectfully suggest.

[Ambling Alp II]

Of course the media had gotton bigger over the years. However, the attention the media has given to boxing has been in decline for some time. Boxing was not the big deal it was in the late 1980s-1990s as it was when Ali, (or Louis for that matter) fought. Ali may have been the most recognized person on the planet. Tyson was never that big.
People wanted Jack Johnson dead. Joe Louis had the weight of an entire country to deal with. Ali had all sorts of personal problems, including the whole draft issue. These guys dealt with real pressure.
As for Frazier not being able to recover from punishment as Ali, if that suppoed to be some sort of excuse it sure is weak.

As for Douglas, he responded well to his adversity. If Douglas had lost, no one would have bought it as an excuse that his mother died. If Tyson's mother died right before a fight that he lost, you never would have heard the end of it.

Part of being great is being able to handle pressure. Tyson's supposed "mental fraility" is no excuse. If a fighter can't handle it, than too bad. What counts is what you do in the ring.

[misterpunch]

i like this debate - no slanging just opinion and thats great. however i dont think you credit people with having certain vulnerabilities, certain weaknesses and strengths that scale an amazing width of human experience.

i believe boxing and sports in general cannot be understood without putting them in context and under the social microscope. it wasnt the sports media that got into bed with tyson before kicking him in the balls it was a world media. same with ali. ali must have been ridiculously strong mentally to absorb and deal with the media attention he got in the mid to late 60's. but he was very clever and a media natural. mike just wasnt. he was clueless and they made a bit of a fool of him to say the least.

the history of boxing is littered with fighters who were great until a particular bout took away their greatness. i loved joe. one of my very favourite guys in this sport and i watched him closely and my views of his career i make through that.

what a fighter does in the ring is completely linked to whats going on in his mind. compare the mentalities of marciano and floyd patterson.

[Ambling Alp II]

Glad that you have liked our discussion

I agree that being "mentally tough" or whatever you want to call is important in sports. I just don't think it's legitimate to lose and having the excuse being that you aren't mentally tough.
I also think that people tend to find excuses for when their favorite fighters lose and overlook or downplay any obstacles of that fighter's opponents, or downplay the osbstacles of a fighter that they don't like. It's is human nature I guess. ie. Someone's favorite fighter might have a record of 50-5. That person has excuse for all five of the losses, and thinks that all 50 wins are against opponents at the top of their game. (Not saying that you personally are like that.)

As for Frazier, I guess we won't agree with this. I just don't buy that he was great, had the Ali fight, then could never be great anymore. Any fighter worth his salt comes back after one great fight. He was just unlucky that Ali and Foreman were better than him and around at the same time.

I try to have strict rules for excuses that I will buy. Age and/or the punishment the fighter takes is something that is legitimate. Occasionally there is something else, (such as fighting out of their weight class, long period between fights) but rarely. By doing so, I have to accept that sometimes fighters that I like lost legitimately and may not have been as good as someone that I don't like.

Well anyway, I guess we have beat this death. If you want to have the last word, go ahead.

[gilgamesh]

I can't see any fighters coming on the scene, fighting a little more than 40 fights, becoming a Champion, retiring for 10 years and then coming back to regain the title. I don't see anybody repeating that feat in any weight class.

[misterpunch]

ok i'll have the last word - we actually agree on more than a couple of points, for instance how joe was unlucky to be around with george and muhammad and knowing when our guy gets legitimately beaten, thanks for an interesting argument

[gilgamesh]

Glad that you have liked our discussion

I agree that being "strongy tough" or whatever you want to call is important in sports. I just don't think it's legitimate to lose and having the excuse being that you aren't strong tough.
I also think that people tend to find excuses for when their favorite fighters lose and overlook or downplay any obstacles of that fighter's opponents, or downplay the osbstacles of a fighter that they don't like. It's is human nature I guess. ie. Someone's favorite fighter might have a record of 50-5. That person has excuse for all five of the losses, and thinks that all 50 wins are against opponents at the top of their game. (Not saying that you personally are like that.)

As for Frazier, I guess we won't agree with this. I just don't buy that he was great, had the Ali fight, then could never be great anymore. Any fighter worth his salt comes back after one great fight. He was just unlucky that Ali and Foreman were better than him and around at the same time.

I try to have strict rules for excuses that I will buy. Age and/or the punishment the fighter takes is something that is legitimate. Occasionally there is something else, (such as fighting out of their weight class, long period between fights) but rarely. By doing so, I have to accept that sometimes fighters that I like lost legitimately and may not have been as good as someone that I don't like.

Well anyway, I guess we have beat this death. If you want to have the last word, go ahead.

For the record, I even felt like Frazier lost the 1st Ali fight, I scored 9 rounds to 6 in Ali's favor. I actually thought the Thrilla was closer on the cards going into the 15th. I had that one 7 to 7