BoxRec

6 Pack ... that was a good post. Similar to a point I've tried to make in other threads. The pork that helps to produce power also absorbs it. I don't know how much difference it makes on a shot to the chin. There's no meat on the chin. But I think Foreman II's extra big body could absorb a lot of punishment. More than any lighter man taking the same shots from a bigger one.

6 Pack wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:BB, I agree with your pick but you're simply wrong when you say the older Foreman had a better chin then a younger one. Chins don't get better with age. In fact, from a physical standpoint their punch resistance would decrease as a person ages.
Have you seen the Jimmy Young fight? George was knocked off balance by a pefectly timed shot while he was exhausted. He was not hurt and not close to being knocked out. Chin is not really the issue in this fight. Both had very good chins, although I would say Foreman had the stronger chin. If you're going to go by KDs, Louis's record has many holes. KDs by Pastor, Braddock . . these guys were not devastating punchers. But Louis was not hurt and these were flash KDs. It's false thinking to look at the number of KDs and say Louis had a weak chin, just as it is to look at the Ali KO and the Lyle KDs to say that Foreman had a weak chin . .

I agree and disagree.

I do think that Foreman has since been able to pace himself better than he did in the 70's, and that while not suffering from fatigue he could take shots a lot better.

But I also think the fact that he got so much bigger and stronger also helps. It is common knowledge that a light heavyweight can take a better punch than a lightweight.

A bigger man can take a better punch. Foreman lifted alot of weights, and got a lot thicker. Never mind every one saying how fat he was. He was in great shape. When did he run out of gas in his comeback fights? He went the distance in competitive fights many times (against a prime Holyfield, KOed Moorer late).

But he was built like the strong men you see on TV pulling trucks and lifting boulders. In fact, in his training he did tow a truck (remember his training clip for the Savarese fight?).

His HUGE 250-260 lbs. frame could take it. His neck, chest, shoulders, back, and massive legs would not let him down. Like shock absorbers. Now not all big guys can take shots, we know that. But a heavyweight with a solid chin will take one better than a lightheavyweight with a solid chin, and it is that principal that I think works when comparing 70's Foreman with 90's Foreman.

Added to, like you said, he paced him self better and did not suffer from fatigue.

BTW It is true most guys took shots worst as they got older, but Foreman was not one of them. I think in his comeback he proved his aging affected him alot different than every one else.

He was fat . . .the guy couldn't take off the lbs like he had been able to b/c he was over 10 years older and had let himself get into obesity range in the early 80s (weighing over 300 lbs).
When did he fatigue in his comeback fights? Almost everyone that went the distance-Morrison, Holyfield (big time-he was sucking air by the 3rd), Schultz, Stewart etc. He did pace himself better but his stamina was not better. Watch the incredible pace he sets vs Peralta in their bout and he doesn't really tire until the last round. Foreman's conditioning was fine in the 70s his problem was just that he threw so many friggin' hard punches. Almost every fight was like Klitschko vs Brewster in there. If the older Foreman had tried to fight that way he would've collapsed . . .he HAD to pace himself better to have any success at 43-47 years old.
Foreman in the 90s was a thicker man but that will do nothing for your chin to absorb punches (he also did the car pulling show-off stuff in the 70s and reportedly lifted up an entire cow sometime in 1975). A chin is a chin-you have the same nerves and bones in there at 180 as you do at 260.

dempseyfire



Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1193

Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 10:16 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exercise and training has improved?

How?

That's a myth. Across all weight classes boxers 30 years ago could fight 15 hard rounds at a fast pace . . .today's fighters have trouble going 12.
They were showing Griffith-Paret and Chuvalo-Patterson last night on ESPN. You have to go down to 135 and below to see that kind of action and work-rate now.

Look at how the 'next big' middleweight Taylor and Tarver tired in their latest championship bouts. Compared to past champions those performances were pathetic, to be frank . . .

Ok Dempseyfire sounds like you have your answer to my question. But "knowledge" such as videos of the opponent, of what to do, how to train, nutrition and the like, has certainly improved over the years. This is an undisuptable fact. I guess your take on it is that virtually no one is taking advantage of it.

I would agree that no one is as hungry as people were back in those days and that was a motivator certainly for Braddock. It is amazing how "lack" will motivate.
I wasn't trying to pretend that I have a strong opinion here because it really could be a wash.

I'm taking it that you would give the old guys the inherent advantage.

In the end, the best trained guy is the one who has invested the most in just pure sweat and grind and hard work and sore muscles and sparring and miles and miles of roadwork and ... just a lot of hard freakin' work!!

Not to dismiss advances in weight training and nutrition and all that. I myself am very into weight training. But it's not lost on me how much all these fancy weight machines and treadmills and supplements and such are marketed to the masses as short cuts to the perfect body. All these things are great, but in the end there's no machine that can build or replace a lack of good, old fashioned fortitude.

the training of any muscle and body movement needed for boxing was perfected by the old time trainers. Heavy weight training, which puts on excess muscle mass on a skeletal frame, has no benefit for a professional boxer. Any gains made through weights can be equally, and superiorly, gained through pull-ups, push-ups, medicine ball work, pulley machines, and free weights, all of which have been apart of boxing training for the past century.

What boxers do to train for bouts has not 'improved' over the years. Everything modern trainers do they learned . . . .from THEIR trainers. The rapid decline in gyms and quality trainers has ensured much has been lost, not gained. Show me one exercise a modern boxer does that wasn't done by anyone 50 years ago and you'll change my mind. Plyometrics? There is film of Schmeling doing it.
KP is ab. right when he says that what it really comes down to is how much WORK you want to put in. Many modern boxers look for shortcuts and in this game that road leads straight to defeat.
Nutrition is a subject that, as can be clearly seen, has been battled to death among the so-called 'experts'. Lo-carb this, muscle shake that. In the end, if you balance out what you eat, forego the cake and pork ribs, and make sure you get your vegetables and nutrients in, you have proper nutrition. The prevalance of hormone-induced produce has ensured that the majority of what people eat is LESS healthy then 50 years ago. Joe Louis was eating fresh organic greens and meats. Nowadays it's artificially inciminated for maximum growth rate and reprocessed till the cows come home, ensuring a decline in nutritional value.

I recently watched Krasniqi-Whitaker. Before that fight, Whitaker was looked upon to be a decent 'super' HW for this era, with a team of nutritionists, strength coach, etc.

My God, he looked horrible.

Friggin' Buddy Baer would have demolished him.

dempseyfire wrote:

6 Pack wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:BB, I agree with your pick but you're simply wrong when you say the older Foreman had a better chin then a younger one. Chins don't get better with age. In fact, from a physical standpoint their punch resistance would decrease as a person ages.
Have you seen the Jimmy Young fight? George was knocked off balance by a pefectly timed shot while he was exhausted. He was not hurt and not close to being knocked out. Chin is not really the issue in this fight. Both had very good chins, although I would say Foreman had the stronger chin. If you're going to go by KDs, Louis's record has many holes. KDs by Pastor, Braddock . . these guys were not devastating punchers. But Louis was not hurt and these were flash KDs. It's false thinking to look at the number of KDs and say Louis had a weak chin, just as it is to look at the Ali KO and the Lyle KDs to say that Foreman had a weak chin . .

I agree and disagree.

I do think that Foreman has since been able to pace himself better than he did in the 70's, and that while not suffering from fatigue he could take shots a lot better.

But I also think the fact that he got so much bigger and stronger also helps. It is common knowledge that a light heavyweight can take a better punch than a lightweight.

A bigger man can take a better punch. Foreman lifted alot of weights, and got a lot thicker. Never mind every one saying how fat he was. He was in great shape. When did he run out of gas in his comeback fights? He went the distance in competitive fights many times (against a prime Holyfield, KOed Moorer late).

But he was built like the strong men you see on TV pulling trucks and lifting boulders. In fact, in his training he did tow a truck (remember his training clip for the Savarese fight?).

His HUGE 250-260 lbs. frame could take it. His neck, chest, shoulders, back, and massive legs would not let him down. Like shock absorbers. Now not all big guys can take shots, we know that. But a heavyweight with a solid chin will take one better than a lightheavyweight with a solid chin, and it is that principal that I think works when comparing 70's Foreman with 90's Foreman.

Added to, like you said, he paced him self better and did not suffer from fatigue.

BTW It is true most guys took shots worst as they got older, but Foreman was not one of them. I think in his comeback he proved his aging affected him alot different than every one else.

He was fat . . .the guy couldn't take off the lbs like he had been able to b/c he was over 10 years older and had let himself get into obesity range in the early 80s (weighing over 300 lbs).
When did he fatigue in his comeback fights? Almost everyone that went the distance-Morrison, Holyfield (big time-he was sucking air by the 3rd), Schultz, Stewart etc. He did pace himself better but his stamina was not better. Watch the incredible pace he sets vs Peralta in their bout and he doesn't really tire until the last round. Foreman's conditioning was fine in the 70s his problem was just that he threw so many friggin' hard punches. Almost every fight was like Klitschko vs Brewster in there. If the older Foreman had tried to fight that way he would've collapsed . . .he HAD to pace himself better to have any success at 43-47 years old.
Foreman in the 90s was a thicker man but that will do nothing for your chin to absorb punches (he also did the car pulling show-off stuff in the 70s and reportedly lifted up an entire cow sometime in 1975). A chin is a chin-you have the same nerves and bones in there at 180 as you do at 260.

So you are saying your average 180 pounder can take a punch just as good as your average 260 pounder?

Sorry man, but years of watching boxing lead me to a different conclusion. Why do you think they have weight classes? A chin is not a chin no matter the size of the body?!!! A 135 pound lightweight CAN NOT stand and trade with a heavyweight. WHy, because the heavyweight can take any thing the lightweight sends at him with a smile, and the lightweight will fold after taking a few heavy hands from the heavyweight.

If you don't recognize this, we are on two different pages, and further arguing will go no where.

dnahar32 wrote

Tommy Farr took all of Louis's best shots, so somebody definitely could take Louis's punches.

just to let u know, louis hurt his right hand in the 3rd round hitting it off tommys skull, and louis himself said he woulld have knocked tommy within 5 if he hadnt hurt his right hand. it was basically useless the rest of the night. he had no power behind it the next 12 rounds.

I'm not sure how this "nutrition" shit keeps coming up...

Suppliments don't make up for eating the crap we eat these days.

We've learned tons about nutrition over the years...not that it's beneficially used...

It isn't used, and shouldn't be mentioned.

How many boxers do you think eat all "health food"? Few?

How many boxers do you think eat junk food regularly? Most?

Ricky Hatton doesn't gain 30lbs in 7 weeks from eating a baked (skinless) chicken breast, bean sprouts, whole grain rice, and a side of spinach, that's for sure.

6 Pack wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:

6 Pack wrote: I agree and disagree.

I do think that Foreman has since been able to pace himself better than he did in the 70's, and that while not suffering from fatigue he could take shots a lot better.

But I also think the fact that he got so much bigger and stronger also helps. It is common knowledge that a light heavyweight can take a better punch than a lightweight.

A bigger man can take a better punch. Foreman lifted alot of weights, and got a lot thicker. Never mind every one saying how fat he was. He was in great shape. When did he run out of gas in his comeback fights? He went the distance in competitive fights many times (against a prime Holyfield, KOed Moorer late).

But he was built like the strong men you see on TV pulling trucks and lifting boulders. In fact, in his training he did tow a truck (remember his training clip for the Savarese fight?).

His HUGE 250-260 lbs. frame could take it. His neck, chest, shoulders, back, and massive legs would not let him down. Like shock absorbers. Now not all big guys can take shots, we know that. But a heavyweight with a solid chin will take one better than a lightheavyweight with a solid chin, and it is that principal that I think works when comparing 70's Foreman with 90's Foreman.

Added to, like you said, he paced him self better and did not suffer from fatigue.

BTW It is true most guys took shots worst as they got older, but Foreman was not one of them. I think in his comeback he proved his aging affected him alot different than every one else.

He was fat . . .the guy couldn't take off the lbs like he had been able to b/c he was over 10 years older and had let himself get into obesity range in the early 80s (weighing over 300 lbs).
When did he fatigue in his comeback fights? Almost everyone that went the distance-Morrison, Holyfield (big time-he was sucking air by the 3rd), Schultz, Stewart etc. He did pace himself better but his stamina was not better. Watch the incredible pace he sets vs Peralta in their bout and he doesn't really tire until the last round. Foreman's conditioning was fine in the 70s his problem was just that he threw so many friggin' hard punches. Almost every fight was like Klitschko vs Brewster in there. If the older Foreman had tried to fight that way he would've collapsed . . .he HAD to pace himself better to have any success at 43-47 years old.
Foreman in the 90s was a thicker man but that will do nothing for your chin to absorb punches (he also did the car pulling show-off stuff in the 70s and reportedly lifted up an entire cow sometime in 1975). A chin is a chin-you have the same nerves and bones in there at 180 as you do at 260.

So you are saying your average 180 pounder can take a punch just as good as your average 260 pounder?

Sorry man, but years of watching boxing lead me to a different conclusion. Why do you think they have weight classes? A chin is not a chin no matter the size of the body?!!! A 135 pound lightweight CAN NOT stand and trade with a heavyweight. WHy, because the heavyweight can take any thing the lightweight sends at him with a smile, and the lightweight will fold after taking a few heavy hands from the heavyweight.

If you don't recognize this, we are on two different pages, and further arguing will go no where.

On the chin? Pretty much.

The skeletal and internal structure of a man who weighs 130-140 and a man who weighs 180 is much more extreme then a man who weighs 190 and a 260 lb man.

After about 185 lbs, the playing field equalizes considerably. These are all 'big men' who can punch with force to knock out another man. If 6'6 260 lb guys can all take punches better then how come the number of glass chinned giants far outweighs the number of iron jawed men who were 5'10-6'2, 190-220?? Tua, Tyson, Chuvalo, and Marciano all took much better shots then W. Klitschko, Jefferson, Grant, Fields, and the multitude of larger stiffs who never made it.

dempseyfire wrote:

6 Pack wrote:

dempseyfire wrote: He was fat . . .the guy couldn't take off the lbs like he had been able to b/c he was over 10 years older and had let himself get into obesity range in the early 80s (weighing over 300 lbs).
When did he fatigue in his comeback fights? Almost everyone that went the distance-Morrison, Holyfield (big time-he was sucking air by the 3rd), Schultz, Stewart etc. He did pace himself better but his stamina was not better. Watch the incredible pace he sets vs Peralta in their bout and he doesn't really tire until the last round. Foreman's conditioning was fine in the 70s his problem was just that he threw so many friggin' hard punches. Almost every fight was like Klitschko vs Brewster in there. If the older Foreman had tried to fight that way he would've collapsed . . .he HAD to pace himself better to have any success at 43-47 years old.
Foreman in the 90s was a thicker man but that will do nothing for your chin to absorb punches (he also did the car pulling show-off stuff in the 70s and reportedly lifted up an entire cow sometime in 1975). A chin is a chin-you have the same nerves and bones in there at 180 as you do at 260.

So you are saying your average 180 pounder can take a punch just as good as your average 260 pounder?

Sorry man, but years of watching boxing lead me to a different conclusion. Why do you think they have weight classes? A chin is not a chin no matter the size of the body?!!! A 135 pound lightweight CAN NOT stand and trade with a heavyweight. WHy, because the heavyweight can take any thing the lightweight sends at him with a smile, and the lightweight will fold after taking a few heavy hands from the heavyweight.

If you don't recognize this, we are on two different pages, and further arguing will go no where.

On the chin? Pretty much.

The skeletal and internal structure of a man who weighs 130-140 and a man who weighs 180 is much more extreme then a man who weighs 190 and a 260 lb man.

After about 185 lbs, the playing field equalizes considerably. These are all 'big men' who can punch with force to knock out another man. If 6'6 260 lb guys can all take punches better then how come the number of glass chinned giants far outweighs the number of iron jawed men who were 5'10-6'2, 190-220?? Tua, Tyson, Chuvalo, and Marciano all took much better shots then W. Klitschko, Jefferson, Grant, Fields, and the multitude of larger stiffs who never made it.

Are you serious?

Tua weighs as much as a truck! Tyson is built like a rock. Rocky's best competition was other small men (Charles and Walcott) and you know that. Let's not try and pull up stereo types.

Chuvalo was a big heavyweight for his day too, by no means was he a small heavyweight, weighing in the 210s.

What are you trying to pull?

Put it this way...you telling me Bob Foster had a better chin then Chuvalo? How about Sugar Ray Leonard better than Evander Holyfield? ANd what is this, chins to body size are only relavent up until around 185? You make that up yourself? So physical make ups change after that?

You can cite big guys with no chin all you want, but for every big guy there is a small guy too (Floyd Patterson, Roy Jones).

The fact is the bigger boys take better shots. If not, then why the need for the weight classes?

6 Pack wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:

6 Pack wrote: So you are saying your average 180 pounder can take a punch just as good as your average 260 pounder?

Sorry man, but years of watching boxing lead me to a different conclusion. Why do you think they have weight classes? A chin is not a chin no matter the size of the body?!!! A 135 pound lightweight CAN NOT stand and trade with a heavyweight. WHy, because the heavyweight can take any thing the lightweight sends at him with a smile, and the lightweight will fold after taking a few heavy hands from the heavyweight.

If you don't recognize this, we are on two different pages, and further arguing will go no where.

On the chin? Pretty much.

The skeletal and internal structure of a man who weighs 130-140 and a man who weighs 180 is much more extreme then a man who weighs 190 and a 260 lb man.

After about 185 lbs, the playing field equalizes considerably. These are all 'big men' who can punch with force to knock out another man. If 6'6 260 lb guys can all take punches better then how come the number of glass chinned giants far outweighs the number of iron jawed men who were 5'10-6'2, 190-220?? Tua, Tyson, Chuvalo, and Marciano all took much better shots then W. Klitschko, Jefferson, Grant, Fields, and the multitude of larger stiffs who never made it.

Are you serious?

Tua weighs as much as a truck! Tyson is built like a rock. Rocky's best competition was other small men (Charles and Walcott) and you know that. Let's not try and pull up stereo types.

Chuvalo was a big heavyweight for his day too, by no means was he a small heavyweight, weighing in the 210s.

What are you trying to pull?

Put it this way...you telling me Bob Foster had a better chin then Chuvalo? How about Sugar Ray Leonard better than Evander Holyfield? ANd what is this, chins to body size are only relavent up until around 185? You make that up yourself? So physical make ups change after that?

You can cite big guys with no chin all you want, but for every big guy there is a small guy too (Floyd Patterson, Roy Jones).

The fact is the bigger boys take better shots. If not, then why the need for the weight classes?

Tua weighed a lot when he was a fat whale. In shape he'd be 210-215. Did Tua show more of an iron jaw weighing 244 then 220? And please explain the MULTITUDE of glass chinned giants. The skeletal structure of grown adults evens out more or less after people's healthy weight reaches around 185. I can't explain to you the scientific details of this as I'm not a scientist.
Chins have nothing to do with weight-they are a combination of natural God given shock resistance, skeletal structure, and a little bit of intangibles. There are many smaller men who can take much better shots then their much larger counterparts. Former middleweight James Toney is one clear cut modern example.

dempseyfire wrote:

6 Pack wrote:

dempseyfire wrote: On the chin? Pretty much.

The skeletal and internal structure of a man who weighs 130-140 and a man who weighs 180 is much more extreme then a man who weighs 190 and a 260 lb man.

After about 185 lbs, the playing field equalizes considerably. These are all 'big men' who can punch with force to knock out another man. If 6'6 260 lb guys can all take punches better then how come the number of glass chinned giants far outweighs the number of iron jawed men who were 5'10-6'2, 190-220?? Tua, Tyson, Chuvalo, and Marciano all took much better shots then W. Klitschko, Jefferson, Grant, Fields, and the multitude of larger stiffs who never made it.

Are you serious?

Tua weighs as much as a truck! Tyson is built like a rock. Rocky's best competition was other small men (Charles and Walcott) and you know that. Let's not try and pull up stereo types.

Chuvalo was a big heavyweight for his day too, by no means was he a small heavyweight, weighing in the 210s.

What are you trying to pull?

Put it this way...you telling me Bob Foster had a better chin then Chuvalo? How about Sugar Ray Leonard better than Evander Holyfield? ANd what is this, chins to body size are only relavent up until around 185? You make that up yourself? So physical make ups change after that?

You can cite big guys with no chin all you want, but for every big guy there is a small guy too (Floyd Patterson, Roy Jones).

The fact is the bigger boys take better shots. If not, then why the need for the weight classes?

Tua weighed a lot when he was a fat whale. In shape he'd be 210-215. Did Tua show more of an iron jaw weighing 244 then 220? And please explain the MULTITUDE of glass chinned giants. The skeletal structure of grown adults evens out more or less after people's healthy weight reaches around 185. I can't explain to you the scientific details of this as I'm not a scientist.
Chins have nothing to do with weight-they are a combination of natural God given shock resistance, skeletal structure, and a little bit of intangibles. There are many smaller men who can take much better shots then their much larger counterparts. Former middleweight James Toney is one clear cut modern example.

Actually Tua has not weighed less than 220 pounds since the mid 90's! And he is roughly 5'9"! You don't think that is stocky as hell?

Look man, Toney at middleweight can not take a shot as good as Toney as a Heavyweight, adn you would be VERY hard pressed to find many boxing buffs to dispute that.

I got nothing more to say. I thought it was common knowledge the higher the weight class the bigger the punch and punch resistance. We can argue this back and forth but we are going no where.

You will never waver, and neither will I in this subject. Lets agree to disagree.

Wlad Klitschko isn't built like a truck?

Tough one, this.

It's the battle of the jabs, although I think Louis' was better.

Foreman had one of the all time great chins & Louis never fought anybody as good as Foreman (in his peak), so I say Foreman, although curiously, I rate Louis higher in my all time HW list!

Hey if your rating a guy who can beat another guy lower on your list of all time greats then that is a Syntax Error. But it's ok they make erasers and you rewrite the list.

Tantum wrote:Wlad Klitschko isn't built like a truck?

I am not gonna get into it again, but look at VItaly, never off his feet.

BUt in reality, neither Klitschko is super thick, just super tall. A lot of these guys shorter are actually the same weight.

Height is not size.

Tua and Wlad weigh almost the same! Yet WLad is cited as a giant because he is tall, and Tua has been cited as a small guy because he is short.

But imagine Wlad was as tall as he was, but was as thick as Tua is pound for pound! Wlad would be a monster. Thick as a brick house! It would not help his agility, but I think he would be able to take a better punch (ofcourse he would be taking more shots like that )

BoxBuzz wrote:Hey if your rating a guy who can beat another guy lower on your list of all time greats then that is a Syntax Error. But it's ok they make erasers and you rewrite the list.

I rate Louis higher because of his longevity etc, but if you bring the fact that Foreman is much heavier & stronger, then it makes it interesting if you were to pit them against each other.

Definitely have to say Joe Louis.

Whenver Joe Louis slipped a punch he was right there in position to throw one back and against George Foreman, Joe Louis would be slipping his punches all day, and countering with short crisp haymakers.

The only chance George would have would be to put him down and keep him down, Louis had a tendecy to get kind of lazy in fights and keep his hands low which caused him to get bombed, which George was very capable of doing. Say George catches him, if Louis get's back up I believe that he'll finish George off but if he's down than he's just down.

6 Pack wrote:

Tantum wrote:Wlad Klitschko isn't built like a truck?

I am not gonna get into it again, but look at VItaly, never off his feet.

BUt in reality, neither Klitschko is super thick, just super tall. A lot of these guys shorter are actually the same weight.

Height is not size.

Tua and Wlad weigh almost the same! Yet WLad is cited as a giant because he is tall, and Tua has been cited as a small guy because he is short.

But imagine Wlad was as tall as he was, but was as thick as Tua is pound for pound! Wlad would be a monster. Thick as a brick house! It would not help his agility, but I think he would be able to take a better punch (ofcourse he would be taking more shots like that )

6pack, Tua at 245 is an absolute PIG. A disgrace to HW boxing. If you think that extra flab and girth enables him to take a punch better you are sadly mistaken.

I would go with Foreman here as he would be all wrong for Louis.

I actually think Louis would do better than Foreman against other top 10 heavies but would come unstuck against Foreman.

I think Louis is the right kind of fighter to dissect Foreman, and relatively early. Louis by KO within 5.

King Carlos wrote:I think Louis is the right kind of fighter to dissect Foreman, and relatively early. Louis by KO within 5.

yeah, as long as he can stay at around mid-range, and the ref doesn't let Foreman push him right out of range....

Oh, dear. Here we go again.

Frazier couldnt beat Foreman with a hangun. Let it go...