I hate to say it, but Larry Holmes=overrated???

evndrbsn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 757
Joined: 10 Jul 2004, 13:20

Post by evndrbsn »

theone wrote:
Vs. George Foreman: "A bigger, smarter, more-at-ease-with-himself Foreman lasted 12 round against Holyfield. The angry, up-tight, smaller version doesn't stick around quite that long. Holyfield via late-TKO."
Foreman wins this one easy, ko two.
I have no problem with you saying Foreman of the 70s would win the fight, but in two rounds? The sick Holyfield of Bowe 3 at least could have made it a clone of the Ron Lyle-George Foreman bout.

My personal opinion, if it went past five, Holyfield would win ten out of ten times. Foreman of the 70s always tired late against good fighters. Example: Jimmy Young. He looked near death by the 12th round. If anything, Holyfield has always shown the ability to go rounds and Foreman hasn't. The only time he went rounds and didn't lose were against two terrible fighters and Gregorio Peralta, who is not exactly championship material ... unless you count the South American and Argentine Heavyweight Titles :lol:
evndrbsn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 757
Joined: 10 Jul 2004, 13:20

Post by evndrbsn »

The Great John L wrote:
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:"Marciano's knockout blow packs more explosive energy than an armour-piercing bullet and represents as much energy as would be required to spot lift 1000 pounds one foot off the ground."-Boxing Illustrated December 1963
Well I guess that settles it. Is that better than Ivan Drago?
Heck no! Drago was hitting at 1850 plus! And you remember that conditioning? Best 0-1 fighter ever!
theone
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1655
Joined: 13 Sep 2005, 17:12

Post by theone »

marciano, braddock, baer all have near equal chins to holyfield. only time braddock was down was when louis knocked him out cold which goes to show u about louis power. baer hadnt been off his feet before he fought louis.
You are living in fantasy land. Braddock, Baer and yes, Marciano would not have been able to take the punches Holyfield took from Tyson,Bowe, Louis or Foreman.
ouis was 10x greater puncher than bowe and a harder hitter. louis threw lethal deadly accurate and fast combos
How did you come to this calculation? Bowe fought bigger stronger men who were harder to knock out than most of the opponents louis fought.


holyfield never faced a puncher like louis. l[/quote]

Thats debateable. Whats not debatable is the fact that Louis never face a fighter like Holyfield. Someone who who could punch take his punch and outmuscle him on the inside.
louis was the greatest puncher of all time. you actually think holy can stand there and take the brown bombers punches??
Yes, alot better than Louis could take his.
Last edited by theone on 25 Oct 2005, 17:58, edited 1 time in total.
theone
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1655
Joined: 13 Sep 2005, 17:12

Post by theone »

this is starting to get wayyyy out of hand, we have the modern "big is better" clowns taking over the forum.
when all things are equal, bigger is almost always better. Not only was Marciano smaller than heavyweight Holyfield, but he was slower, had less boxing skills, and cut easy. Moore, Walcott and charles would not have been able to bust up drop and hurt Holyfield like they did Marciano. Face facts, Marciano was awesome to watch but came along at the perfect time.
evndrbsn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 757
Joined: 10 Jul 2004, 13:20

Post by evndrbsn »

theone wrote:
this is starting to get wayyyy out of hand, we have the modern "big is better" clowns taking over the forum.
when all things are equal, bigger is almost always better. Not only was Marciano smaller than heavyweight Holyfield, but he was slower, had less boxing skills, and cut easy. Moore, Walcott and charles would not have been able to bust up drop and hurt Holyfield like they did Marciano. Face facts, Marciano was awesome to watch but came along at the perfect time.
I was starting to feel singled out about Marciano after I got bashed for my opinions of The Rock. Thanks for taking the pressure off of me! I totally agree, although I think Moore, Walcott, and Charles would have given Holyfield fits (Holyfield still wins).
The Great John L
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4351
Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 19:37

Post by The Great John L »

evndrbsn wrote:Heck no! Drago was hitting at 1850 plus! And you remember that conditioning? Best 0-1 fighter ever!
Wasn't he 1-1? Remember he killed Blocky's friend Apollo. Or was that just an exhibition fight?
theone
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1655
Joined: 13 Sep 2005, 17:12

Post by theone »

Wasn't he 1-1? Remember he killed Blocky's friend Apollo. Or was that just an exhibition fight?
Yeah, it was an exhibition. Why didnt he keep fighting? He would have destroyed Tommy Gunn!
Rory McCloskey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1042
Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 13:11

Post by Rory McCloskey »

evndrbsn wrote:
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:question to boxred,


since when did we get these hot heads newbies????

they remind me of myself when i first joined. :P :roll:



i would love to see ur top 10 heavyweight rankings of all time, i would love to see how u sit on the gleam of things :TU:
All you need is to look at the above post for my top 10 heavyweights.
you have all those people over dempsey? and marciano that low. evander 5th? and jack johnson not in the top 7. what a joke. BB is right. he's quoting ring magazine and he is showing proof of his opinion, i dont know where ur extroadinary information is coming from
BrocktonBlockbuster49
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4900
Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32

Post by BrocktonBlockbuster49 »

the one, ur severely underating joe louis punching ability. most historians and writers will say joe louis was the greatest puncher of all time. joe louis threw lethal deadly combinations that were pin point accurate plus had tons of snap in them. holyfield would not be able to take those, and louis will hit holyfield, who didnt have the best defense and liked to slug it out time to time. joe louis had one of th greatest jabs also and would bust up holyfields face and leave him looking like a car wreck.


- holyfield always loved to slug it out when he had the chance, and he wouldnt survive slugging it out with marciano and dempsey.

marciano faced defensive masterminds and yet he was still able to land hard punches on them . watch marcianos fights vs layne, louis and walcott, he didnt have slow handspeed. it wasnt the best, but his short reach actually gained him a lot of leverage in punches at times. if your punches are so much shorter, traveling only a few inches, your velocity is incredible!

i also give the stamina edge to marciano over holyfield.


as for dempsey, he will have an even easier time with holyfield. dempsey had faster handspeed, was more mobile and faster on his feet, more power and greater puncher. holyfield will be bludgeoned in a slug out. dempsey threw fast deadly combinations with KO power in eitehr hand and he was more aggresive than holyfield.

fact is punching power is natural. There's an axiom in boxing that says "You can’t teach power. Either a fighter is born with it or not."
marciano and dempsey were blessed wit han incredible power for there size, power greater than men much bigger than them.



and holyfield would NOT beat jack johnson. johnson was stronger than holyfield in fact. in clinches no way does holy move johnson around. were talking a counterpuncher vs the best counter puncher in history. johnson would outbox him and then catch him with uppercuts which is what holy was susceptile to.




u can make all the exuses u want, but holfield was staggered an given a tough fight by a way past his prime foreman, outboxed early by a shot holmes, nearly knocked out by a journeyman bert cooper, lost to riddick bowe twice and michael moorer. how the hell from that right there could u possibly rank him 4th????
Rory McCloskey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1042
Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 13:11

Post by Rory McCloskey »

it seems a little silly to me, that BB is voicing his opinion, which has many good points , great points. and is backed up by sources and all, ye all you guys sit back and just say oh well is ivan drago this or appollo better then him. you guys obviously have nothing to fire back with so u use someone else's joke and run with it.
theone
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1655
Joined: 13 Sep 2005, 17:12

Post by theone »

the one, ur severely underating joe louis punching ability. most historians and writers will say joe louis was the greatest puncher of all time.
He also went down alot from fighters who had nowhere near Holyfields power.
marciano faced defensive masterminds and yet he was still able to land hard punches on them . watch marcianos fights vs layne, louis and walcott,
Yeah i saw him struggle with ordinary Layne, batter shot Louis and struggle with over achieving Walcott.
. holyfield would not be able to take those, and louis will hit holyfield, who didnt have the best defense and liked to slug it out time to time. joe louis had one of th greatest jabs also and would bust up holyfields face and leave him looking like a car wreck.
And what would Holyfield be doing while Louis pounded away? He would be punching Louis back harder than anyone has ever hit him. he would be taking his punches better than anyone ever did. He would be using his supirior strenght to keep Louis on his heels for as long as it lasted.

- holyfield always loved to slug it out when he had the chance, and he wouldnt survive slugging it out with marciano and dempsey.
Marciano and Dempsey would get beaten in half the time Holyfield beat Tyson . Tyson was bigger stronger faster and had a much better chin than those two, and looked how that came out.
nd holyfield would NOT beat jack johnson. johnson was stronger than holyfield in fact. in clinches no way does holy move johnson around. were talking a counterpuncher vs the best counter puncher in history. johnson would outbox him and then catch him with uppercuts which is what holy was susceptile to
Holyfield was one of the strongest heavyweights of all time. how do you come to the conclusion that Johnson was stronger? most of the fighters Johnson fought were much smaller than him While Holyfield made a career out of fighting much bigger fighters.
u can make all the exuses u want, but holfield was staggered an given a tough fight by a way past his prime foreman, outboxed early by a shot holmes, nearly knocked out by a journeyman bert cooper, lost to riddick bowe twice and michael moorer


All those fighter were better comp than Johnson Marciano or Dempsey ever faced.
BrocktonBlockbuster49
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4900
Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32

Post by BrocktonBlockbuster49 »

theone wrote
Yeah i saw him struggle with ordinary Layne

what fight were u watching, marciano dominated layne winning most of the rounds, then knocked out layne with one right hand that "sheered laynes front teeth off at the nubs".


the one wrote
He also went down alot from fighters who had nowhere near Holyfields power.
max schmeling had just as much power in his right hand as holyfield did in any punch and it took schmeling 12 rounds and many rounds to finally put away the 21 year old louis.

louis was knocked down by fighters who are all in THE RINGS TOP 100 GREATEST PUNCHERS

Evander is rated 77th by the RING

in comparison, these guys that knocked louis down

Max schmeling was rated 55
Jersey Joe walcott was rated 66
buddy baer was rated 69
rocky marciano was rated 14

not counting marciano, louis in his prime were knocked down by guys like schmeling, buddy baer, walcott who all hit as hard or harder than holyfield.

- walcott knockdowns or knockouts were all one punch, he didnt need combos like holy did. he put u down with either hand and needed only one punch

- buddy baer 6'7 250lbs was a hard hitter, harder than holy

- tony galento 233lbs had a very hard left hook

- i might add joe louis took a couple of hard max baers punches who was a class above holy in punching power





struggle with over achieving Walcott.
name me one modern heavy who has the boxing skills, defense, and incredible slick moves like jersey joe walcott?
And what would Holyfield be doing while Louis pounded away? He would be punching Louis back harder than anyone has ever hit him. he would be taking his punches better than anyone ever did. He would be using his supirior strenght to keep Louis on his heels for as long as it lasted.
max baer??? and like i said walcott, b. baer, schmeling, all hit as hard or harder than holyfield.

- joe louis was as big as holyfield. louis was 6'2 205lbs, holy was 208lbs. joe louis was very strong!!!!!!! LOUIS DURING A CLINCH EVEN LIFTED 270LB HEAVY PRIMO CARNERA IN THE AIR


Marciano and Dempsey would get beaten in half the time Holyfield beat Tyson . Tyson was bigger stronger faster and had a much better chin than those two, and looked how that came out.

ur using a washed up no heart tyson as a reason marciano and dempsey would lose to holy??? :roll:

Holyfield was one of the strongest heavyweights of all time. how do you come to the conclusion that Johnson was stronger? most of the fighters Johnson fought were much smaller than him While Holyfield made a career out of fighting much bigger fighters.

Johnson had no problem pushing around guys like

6'2 227lb james jeffries

214lb tony ross

6'7 over 200lb denver ed martin

6'1 over 200lb hank griffin

6'7 230lb jess willard- for 20 rounds, a past his prime johnson had no trouble pushing willard around

210lb HOF Sam Mcvey - i have a pciture of him, HES JACKED ALL MUSCLE

6'1 over 200lbs joe butler

there are more, but ill LEAVE THAT TO SHERLOCK

and a old shot johnson in his 40s beat many fighters over 230lbs


- fact is johnson was just as big as holyfield .

johnson 6'2 205lbs holy 6'2 210lbs



theone wrote



All those fighter were better comp than Johnson Marciano or Dempsey ever faced.

- bert cooper was a journeyman, i would pick guys like roland laztarza, rex layne, old joe louis, carl morris, fred fulton, firpo, billy miske over cooper easy

- charles, walcott, moore, tunney, gibbons, sharkey would have all beat michael moorer

- bowe is unpredictable, i can seee charles and walcott, tunney outboxing bowe.

- an old past his prime 45 year old foreman would lose badly to charles and walcott, tunney and i think moore would outbox 45 year old foreman who didnt have his once deadly power. i would also pick guys like sharkey, fulton, over the old foreman who cant even beat alex stewart :roll:
Rory McCloskey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1042
Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 13:11

Post by Rory McCloskey »

aww brockton you left braddock out of the pppl who knocked down joe louis list.
BrocktonBlockbuster49
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4900
Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32

Post by BrocktonBlockbuster49 »

no i only included people who i thought hit harder than holyfield

- i though holy hit harder than braddick, braddock wasnt a big puncher, but he could hit. braddock was more a boxer.

people always think braddock was a brawler with no power, but in fact braddock was a good boxer who packed some power.
Rory McCloskey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1042
Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 13:11

Post by Rory McCloskey »

ohh alright gotcha bb... yeah ur right, but people never seem to care to listen ive realized
theone
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1655
Joined: 13 Sep 2005, 17:12

Post by theone »

schmeling, buddy baer, walcott who all hit as hard or harder than holyfield.

Where is your evidence of this? because the ring said so? If you really believe Schmeling could punch harder than Holyfield you are really delierious.
- buddy baer 6'7 250lbs was a hard hitter, harder than holy
Besides Abe Simons, who was another lumbering frankenstein like fighter, what figher of note did Baer knockout to lead you to believe he hit harder than Holyfield?
- tony galento 233lbs had a very hard left hook
Ok...and?

Lets say Max Baer, Buddy Baer and even two ton punched as hard as Holyfield. Because of the difference in skill and chin, they wouldnt land half the punches Holyfield would on Louis.
name me one modern heavy who has the boxing skills, defense, and incredible slick moves like jersey joe walcott?
For every great win on Walcotts record theres a loss to someone he should have beaten if he was as great as you think he is.
joe louis was as big as holyfield. louis was 6'2 205lbs, holy was 208lbs. joe louis was very strong!!!!
Not as strong as Holyfield. Holyfield weight trained extensively and was strong enough to stand in there with good big men, not the big slow moving plodders Louis fought.
ur using a washed up no heart tyson as a reason marciano and dempsey would lose to holy???
That Tyson was still good enough to soundly batter Marciano and Dempsey to sleep.
Johnson had no problem pushing around guys like
6'2 227lb james jeffries- should not have been in the ring.

214lb tony ross- This guy was a bum johnson couldnt knockout in a newspaper decision. he lost almost as much as he won.

6'7 over 200lb denver ed martin- If this guy was 6'7 200 pds, then he was skinny. Doesnt matter, he wasnt a good fighter either.

6'1 over 200lb hank griffin- Another mediocre fighter.

6'7 230lb jess willard- the epitome of what big men were in Johnsons time. A big circus freak who took up boxing late in life and manage to take Johnsons best before knocking him out.

210lb HOF Sam Mcvey - Great fighter. Johnson had a real rough time with him the three times they fought. John was already an eight year veteran and Mcvey was only in his 2nd year when they fought! Why didnt Johnson fight him later on when he had matured?

6'1 over 200lbs joe butler- Are you serious with this guy? he is just another big bum you picked out of Johnsons record because he had some size to him. Your trying to pass them off as top big man that Johnson beat, to prove your point.
bert cooper was a journeyman, i would pick guys like roland laztarza, rex layne, old joe louis, carl morris, fred fulton, firpo, billy miske over cooper easy
Of coarse you would. Based on nothing. Cooper at his best was just as viable a contender as any one of them.
charles, walcott, moore, tunney, gibbons, sharkey would have all beat michael moorer
Tunney would be the only one i would agree with you. The others would have been outboxed or knocked out by Moorer at his best.
bowe is unpredictable, i can seee charles and walcott, tunney outboxing bowe.

Unpredictable? Whose career was more unpredictable than Walcotts? Either way this is redicules, Bowe VERY EASILY beats them. He fought as well as them plus was bigger stronger and hit alot harder.
an old past his prime 45 year old foreman would lose badly to charles and walcott, tunney and i think moore would outbox 45 year old foreman who didnt have his once deadly power. i would also pick guys like sharkey, fulton, over the old foreman who cant even beat alex stewart
Charles, Tunney and walcott would have gotten knocked out worse than Moorer if they fought old George. They couldnt afford to get too close to him mount any kind of offense. And if they did, Goerge probably would have launched them out the ring.
Sharkey got knocked out by the worst champion in heavyweight history. old Foreman would have done the same. Fulton is a joke.
Tantum
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1916
Joined: 05 Jul 2002, 17:57

Post by Tantum »

Sharkey would have beaten Moorer? Don't make me piss my pants. :lol:
BrocktonBlockbuster49
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4900
Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32

Post by BrocktonBlockbuster49 »

charles was just as good a boxer as tunney, so was walcott IMO. all 3 of them would have given michael moorer a boxing lesson. michael moorer couldnt even outbox axel shulz :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:



theone wrote
Charles, Tunney and walcott would have gotten knocked out worse than Moorer if they fought old George. They couldnt afford to get too close to him mount any kind of offense. And if they did, Goerge probably would have launched them out the ring.
Sharkey got knocked out by the worst champion in heavyweight history. old Foreman would have done the same. Fulton is a joke


umm im talking about the old fat 45 year old formean, not the lethal deadly 25 year old foreman.

so a 45 year old george would launch walcott, tunney, charles out of the ring when he couldnt even beat or knockdown alex stewart, lou saverese, axel shulz, shannon briggs, crawford grimsley, glass jaw tommy morrison? :roll: :roll: :roll:

u are living in fantasy my friend, trhe old foreman would not win one round vs tunney, charles, walcott who would stay away and outbox the fat slow old man for the entire fight.


but i guess alex stewart, lou saverae, tommy morrison, shannon briggs, axel shulz were better fighters than charles, walcott, and tunney :roll:
BrocktonBlockbuster49
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4900
Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32

Post by BrocktonBlockbuster49 »

theone wrote
That Tyson was still good enough to soundly batter Marciano and Dempsey to sleep

yes im sure the washed up no heart dirty mike tyson who couldnt beat holyfield, and struggled badly with frans botha would put dempsey and marciano to sleep :roll:

a washed up 96 tyson would be knocked out badly by dempsey and marciano


u seem to love these big slow uncoordinated out of shape fat 90s heavies.



how the hell is moorer gonna oubox charles and walcott :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
dempseyfire
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5534
Joined: 29 Oct 2003, 22:56

Post by dempseyfire »

theone wrote:
marciano, braddock, baer all have near equal chins to holyfield. only time braddock was down was when louis knocked him out cold which goes to show u about louis power. baer hadnt been off his feet before he fought louis.
You are living in fantasy land. Braddock, Baer and yes, Marciano would not have been able to take the punches Holyfield took from Tyson,Bowe, Louis or Foreman.
ouis was 10x greater puncher than bowe and a harder hitter. louis threw lethal deadly accurate and fast combos
How did you come to this calculation? Bowe fought bigger stronger men who were harder to knock out than most of the opponents louis fought.


holyfield never faced a puncher like louis. l
.[/quote]



Yeah, Bowe fought really iron chinned guys . . . .Bruce Seldon, Herbie Hide, Jorge Luis Gonzales . . . . .Joe Louis would've really struggled with them . . . :-?

Holyfield was a good but not great puncher. This is accepted knowledge. Schmeling, the Bear brothers, Nova, Galento etc. all hit harder then Evander.

Sharkey beat Moorer . . .um yes you wise-ass. I bet you've never seen Sharkey against Dempsey, Schmeling etc. He was a superb boxer with a stiff jab and beautiful combination puncher. Certainly a much more rounded fighter then the one-dimensional Moorer, with a better chin to boot.
BrocktonBlockbuster49
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4900
Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32

Post by BrocktonBlockbuster49 »

silkov, what do u think holmes prime started and lasted till??

IMO holmes prime started in the first shavers fight-cooney fight, i noticed signs of aging aftet that, and in the witherspoon fight.


what was holmes peaak fight??? IMO either leon spinks, or trevor berbick fight . he took apart a tough berbick dominated him winning 13 rounds on my card, then after they both almost got in a street fight :lol: :lol:


- i was talking with my dad about holmess and he said what separates holmes from other champions and what makes him an all tim great wasthe mental part. he said holmes went out there knowing he was gonna win, just that absolute confidence that no matter what ur gonna win. every time holmes when out there he got the job done, even on his worst days. and he said only few greaat heavyweight champsions had that absolute confidence and warrior mentality like like marciano, frazier, louis, ali. he said it was holmes warrior mentality and amazing hert that made him an all time great. he said holmes had all the skill in the world, but without the heart he wouldnt have been able to get through the rough times like weaver, norton, shavers, snipes. it was the mental part as well as the physical part that enabled him to be one of the best. he rates holmes in the top 5.
Tantum
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1916
Joined: 05 Jul 2002, 17:57

Post by Tantum »

Michael Moorer was one dimensional? Wow, you learn something new every day. :lol:
dempseyfire
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5534
Joined: 29 Oct 2003, 22:56

Post by dempseyfire »

Moorer was a decent boxer but yes he wasn't mr. adaptation. His supposed career performance vs Foreman up to the KO is not very impressive-Holyfield outboxed a better George much more decisively. Moorer's defense was open, and his shaky chin ensured that was a constant problem. He could put quick combos together but his slow feet ensured he was in target range after he threw. He didn't have good horizontal movement. If he couldn't force you backwards (and he didn't face too many guys in his career who he couldn't backup . . lucky he didn't face Ruddock, Mercer, Lewis, Tyson etc.) he brawled, and that only worked vs the Bert Coopers and Alex Stewarts . . .great fights, but Moorer was in serious trouble in both.

Jack Sharkey fought the swift counterpunchers (Schmeling, Stribling, Loughran) and the big punchers (Willis, Godfrey, Dempsey) and had success-he was only stopped a few times in his career, only once in his prime controversially to Jack while complaining about a foul. Against Schmeling and Dempsey you can see Sharkey could counterpunch on the backfoot, lead with quick combinations to the body and head, fire out a piston jab, fight upright or from a crouch, showed brilliant head movement against the ropes . . . .Moorer was not NEARLY as versatile.
evndrbsn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 757
Joined: 10 Jul 2004, 13:20

Post by evndrbsn »

dempseyfire wrote:Moorer was a decent boxer but yes he wasn't mr. adaptation. His supposed career performance vs Foreman up to the KO is not very impressive-Holyfield outboxed a better George much more decisively.
Moorer-Foreman wasn't even competitive up to the KO, so I don't see how "up to the KO" his performance was less impressive than Holyfield's, who was fighting a spirited battle with Foreman. I think sweeping the cards is more decisive (that 85-86 score was right in line with the Axel Schulz scoring).
dempseyfire
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5534
Joined: 29 Oct 2003, 22:56

Post by dempseyfire »

Holyfield was showing Foreman more angles and hurting him occasionally.

Moorer outpunched Foreman but George always got in a few good shots. And this was a Foreman slower then the one who fought Evander.
Post Reply