BoxRec

Big Bad John wrote:Actually, we were talking about boxing, and you changed subjects 30 seconds after I completely owned you.

:) owned me. Indeed.

YOu claimed Tyson was scared of Holyfield. I HATE it with a passion
when armchair experts proclaim a fighters fears and self doubts simply
by assuming.

I bet you have never known the feeling of training to face another
man before your peers, and strangers the out come in doubt, walking
down that long aisle ready to face another man...

But thats ok...I know just how easy it is to say something with out
doing anything.

Holyfield was the number one contender for some time, and deservingly
so. I wish he faced Tyson earlier. BUt to say that he and Tyson never
fought was due to cowardice on Tyson's part is for you to say.

Good for you/

He sure ducked Holyfield in his early career. Maybe before he died, Cus D'amato gave Tyson a list of heavyweights he should avoid at all cost, like Cus did with Floyd Patterson. For some reason, Tyson didn't fight Holyfield, even though he should have.

Cus built up Sonny Liston to such mythical proportions that Patterson was beat before he even entered the ring...

I feel like we are going around in circles.

Did Mike Tyson lose to Buster Douglas, Evander Holyfield (twice), Lenox Lewis, Kevin McBride, and Danny Williams because they were not intimidated by him or did he lose because they were just better boxers?*

Does it really matter?

A boxer with such a checkered record does not deserve to be in the company of the sport's great participants...


*Tyson was the favorite in every fight he had except the Lewis one...

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

funso banjo baby wrote:yeah that first round with foreman was amazing...toe to toe Ali throwing big bombs

In Foreman's first fight with Frazier, instead of keeping Frazier at bay with jabs, Big George literally pushed Frazier...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpEuGaRp9l8

Yes, Mercante let Foreman get away with murder with the push offs.

Frazier was not allowed to fight his fight.

wouter wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote: 3) The Ali who fought Frazier in 1971 was not the same Muhammad Ali who knocked out Zora Folley in 1967 before his three and one half year banishment from boxing...Most analysts have said he didn't have the same legs anymore...He could "dance" but not as long...It was only when Ali stopped "dancing" that Joe was able to score...

I'd pick the 71 model over that of 67 and Joe Frazier over both of them.

You are my new hero.

yancey wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

funso banjo baby wrote:yeah that first round with foreman was amazing...toe to toe Ali throwing big bombs

In Foreman's first fight with Frazier, instead of keeping Frazier at bay with jabs, Big George literally pushed Frazier...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpEuGaRp9l8

Yes, Mercante let Foreman get away with murder with the push offs.

Frazier was not allowed to fight his fight.

Mercante was right in letting Foreman block the clinch. A lot of the time, he was just pushing Frazier's arms down. If someone had just gotten Tyson to watch that fight before facing Holyfield, it would've been a lot more interesting.

Yes, 70s Ali was better than 60s Ali, and Foreman only beat Frazier because of his pushing. And Marvis Frazier was a dominant Heavyweight.

Marvin Frazier beat Mike Tyson!

Styles make fight and pushing or no pushing George Foreman had the style to beat Joe Frazier just as Frazier's and Norton's styles flummoxed Muhammad Ali...The difference was Ali was able to make adjustments...These adjustments didn't allow Ali to dominate these men but it did give him the wherewithall to edge them...

Back to Big George...Go to the 4:15 mark and see what happens when the ref done pissed Big George off when he penalized him for pushing and then look at the 4:35 mark where he wanted to kill Joe:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpEuGaRp9l8

I agree. While Foreman didn't beat a prime Frazier, Foreman was good at two things - controlling the distance and inflicting pain. You couldn't run from Foreman. You couldn't pressure him. You just had to try to survive. Foreman didn't have too much in the way of stamina. In his second career, the candle didn't burn quite as bright, but it burned twice as long. A lot of people confuse the two careers, imagine that they existed at once, which they didn't. I'd like to see a prime Frazier take on a prime Foreman, and try to take Big George into the later rounds. I'd still pick Foreman, but it'd be a hell of a fight.

Big Bad John wrote:I agree. While Foreman didn't beat a prime Frazier, Foreman was good at two things - controlling the distance and inflicting pain. You couldn't run from Foreman. You couldn't pressure him. You just had to try to survive. Foreman didn't have too much in the way of stamina. In his second career, the candle didn't burn quite as bright, but it burned twice as long. A lot of people confuse the two careers, imagine that they existed at once, which they didn't. I'd like to see a prime Frazier take on a prime Foreman, and try to take Big George into the later rounds. I'd still pick Foreman, but it'd be a hell of a fight.

So, when Ali came out throwing those right hands he wasn't pressuring Foreman?

Your knowledge of what happens in a boxing ring is what I'd expect from a sweaty, balding middle-aged woman............. and you haven't let me down, Zac.

PS Have you done any housework today?

There certainly are a lot of rivalries on this board... The only rival I have is granberry aka John Galt...He seems to know a lot about the old timers but his affection for them clouds his judgement when it comes to more recent fighters...I also can tell he dislikes Ali because of Ali's politics and sees his boxing career through that prism...

The Rumble In The Jungle was on ESPN Friday night...It was like a treat just for me...Man, did Ali have a cast iron mid section...IMHO,there are few fighters who could have beat George using the rope-a-dope even if that was their intention...Ali was very strong...He could take a punch...He had great hand speed...And he could get in an opponent's head...

It wasn't as easy as letting Big George punch himself out...

John Galt and Granberry are two different people.

Besides that they have differing opinions on several
key areas. Though they do share similar view points
on others.

Robinson wrote:John Galt and Granberry are two different people.

Besides that they have differing opinions on several
key areas. Though they do share similar view points
on others.

I think it's the same person but the less troubled "Galt" incarnation is just after the nurse has treated his haemmorroids and emptied his bag.

Collins2000 wrote:

Robinson wrote:John Galt and Granberry are two different people.

Besides that they have differing opinions on several
key areas. Though they do share similar view points
on others.

I think it's the same person but the less troubled "Galt" incarnation is just after the nurse has treated his haemmorroids and emptied his bag.

I believe they are the same person...It's the writing style, the political ideology of the posters that is revealed in their writing when the topic touchs on politics, and the animus to certain fighters...

There are people who are trained to evaluate writing, usually in plagiarism cases, and if they saw galt's and granny's writing they would conclude they are the same person...

I know for a FACT its not the same person :)

Robinson wrote:I know for a FACT its not the same person :)

I hope to God you're not one of them...

Nope. Im not that talented a computer whizz to bother
at doing such a thing.
Check my IP address and you can see it be not me.

Robinson wrote:Nope. Im not that talented a computer whizz to bother
at doing such a thing.
Check my IP address and you can see it be not me.

I just breathed a sigh of relief...How can you know for certain it's not the same person?

They can post at the same time to erase any suspicion...

Both hate Ali...

Both are right wingers...

Both have an affection for the old timers ...

Both use sophisty in their arguments...

John Galt does not have an affection for the old
timers.

Robinson wrote:John Galt does not have an affection for the old
timers.

That's just to throw you off his track...See how sly he is...

I don't think Galt's Granberry, either. I think you're taking his comment about Ali out of context. He wasn't implying that Ali wasn't good; he was implying that Tyson was almost as good as Ali.

This bickering among you all has ruined another thread. I will be using my dictatorship powers to delete posts that are not about the topic at hand but are instead more of this crap.

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote: The Rumble In The Jungle was on ESPN Friday night...It was like a treat just for me...Man, did Ali have a cast iron mid section...IMHO,there are few fighters who could have beat George using the rope-a-dope even if that was their intention...Ali was very strong...He could take a punch...He had great hand speed...And he could get in an opponent's head..

I've had a little too many Ali related posts today, but reading this I would like to say that a) I think Ali may have taken body shots better than any other fighter, pound for pound, and b) if you asked who the physically strongest Heavyweight champion was, Foreman would be on the top of a lot of people's lists; but Ali seemed to be the stronger fighter in that match. He seemed to bully Foreman in the clinches. I remember Ken Norton was asked in an interview who the stronger fighter was, Ali or Holmes, and Norton said "Ali definitely" and that Ali was very strong physically, and that this is underlooked because Ali didn't hit hard. Which I think is true in a lot of cases; Tyson hit harder than Holyfield, but Holyfield was clearly physically stronger in their fight, and his wrestling Tyson was part of his winning that fight.