BoxRec

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Sam Peter, Adilson Rodrigues, Gerry Cooney, John L Sullivan and your therapist aside, calling Foreman/Moorer a fix is a joke of the highest order. You certainly aren't game to debate that. You invent something new to avoid it with every post.

Ahem... Our exchange wasn't regarding Foreman-Moorer, but dealt with the general quality of Old George. If you reread the posts you might notice that.

Unfortunately, there is no way to establish whether a fight is actually fixed or not, unless there are admissions from involved parties, so a lengthy discourse these things is really quite a waste of energy.

My appologies, as I have obviously pushed a button that threw you off your game.

Saad...... You think that Tyson-Seldon is the only fixed fight in boxing history?

So, is someone really saying they believe the Foreman - Moorer fight was fixed?

Darling wrote:So, is someone really saying they believe the Foreman - Moorer fight was fixed?

Next, they'll be telling us they don't even know who Kid Azteca is, &...uh...wait...sh!t. Sorry, mate

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Darling wrote:So, is someone really saying they believe the Foreman - Moorer fight was fixed?

Next, they'll be telling us they don't even know who Kid Azteca is, &...uh...wait...sh!t. Sorry, mate

Irene, you foxy little minx, are you saying YOU thought Foreman - Moorer was fixed?

PS : No PMs thanks

Darling wrote:So, is someone really saying they believe the Foreman - Moorer fight was fixed?

John L did, but now that is a taboo topic. He is more interested in Sam Peter/Jeremy Williams at this point. Best not to even ask, he wont talk about his absurd post.

The Great John L wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Sam Peter, Adilson Rodrigues, Gerry Cooney, John L Sullivan and your therapist aside, calling Foreman/Moorer a fix is a joke of the highest order. You certainly aren't game to debate that. You invent something new to avoid it with every post.

Ahem... Our exchange wasn't regarding Foreman-Moorer, but dealt with the general quality of Old George. If you reread the posts you might notice that.

Unfortunately, there is no way to establish whether a fight is actually fixed or not, unless there are admissions from involved parties, so a lengthy discourse these things is really quite a waste of energy.

My appologies, as I have obviously pushed a button that threw you off your game.

LOL, you obviously are so up in arms you are lost as to what was being discussed. I'm not going to give you the play by play but rest assured you've never looked dumber on here.

No need to apologize, poor posting isn't a criminal offense. It's just sad to see you lose control of all ability to have a rational discussion. It's like talking to multiple personalities. But these random off topic rantings aren't your normal ammo, so I'll just assume you're having a bad day.

Darling wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Darling wrote:So, is someone really saying they believe the Foreman - Moorer fight was fixed?

Next, they'll be telling us they don't even know who Kid Azteca is, &...uh...wait...sh!t. Sorry, mate

Irene, you foxy little minx, are you saying YOU thought Foreman - Moorer was fixed?

PS : No PMs thanks

Certainly not --- I just don't think you're anywhere near as witty or bright as you seem to be under the impression you are

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Darling wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote: Next, they'll be telling us they don't even know who Kid Azteca is, &...uh...wait...sh!t. Sorry, mate

Irene, you foxy little minx, are you saying YOU thought Foreman - Moorer was fixed?

PS : No PMs thanks

Certainly not --- I just don't think you're anywhere near as witty or bright as you seem to be under the impression you are

Compared to your peurile self, even Buzz could be termed bright and witty

PS : No PMs thanks.

Who is sending you PM's, Collie? I don't believe you've received one from my good self in several months. Have you been shirking your meds again?

We both know what you get upto when you're, "not right," don't we, mate?

Darling wrote:[ Compared to your peurile self, even Buzz could be termed bright and witty

PS : No PMs thanks.

I am both bright and witty, as certified by the B&W federal certification board. I transcend your petty "consideration" on this subject and can offer bonafide credentials to those who feel they need proof. I also offer training in both disciplines for those wishing to hone their skills in these critical areas of expertise.

Darling, cut the libelous diatribe of reputation damaging mudslinging or you will answer to my impressive array of attorneys.

Gentlemen Gentleman, I did not mean to create such discourse.

TGJL....I would have to say there is at least much anecdotal info that would lead most to agree that GF could punch even after his return. When he got older I'm thinking folks had an easier time getting out of his way, so that may account for some of what your preaching. And yep the tomato can run probably produced more in the way of "skill reaquisition" than any bragging rights on power.

But to attempt to sell wholesale the idea that Foreman had lost his "pop" is at the very least controversial, and deserving of your best in terms of articulating the concept.

Holyfield said no one had hit him harder.....(even after Bowe knocked him down and out.) And Holyfield might not be a bad source from which to build a counter argument to this. You can pretty much see the bit of mangling (in real time) that GF was able to muster on Moorer's puss. So when he was able to land square, he obviously had some steam.

Briggs had some positive comments on his power as well as I recall.

However to support your side, I do think there were some he tangled with who felt they didn't feel that sort of power. But that feedback certainly could have been self serving and may not be all that reliable.

But in many of those fights you can see him sort of manhandle his opposition even if he wasn't landing on prime "KO" related real estate. In fact often you can see him sort of "scoot" people around with his punches in ways you don't see all that often. In his prime he could "Scoot a Moose".

I'm thinking I'm just the sort of personality that if I would have happened to have been a tomato can who survived a fight with him, I just might be inclined to tell anyone who would listen...that "I wasn't all that impressed". So maybe there are a few out there with precisely that story to tell. However I'm not sure just how credible a witness they may make.

lol.

BoxBuzz wrote:

Darling wrote:[ Compared to your peurile self, even Buzz could be termed bright and witty

PS : No PMs thanks.

I am both bright and witty, as certified by the B&W federal certification board. I transcend your petty "consideration" on this subject and can offer bonafide credentials to those who feel they need proof. I also offer training in both disciplines for those wishing to hone their skills in these critical areas of expertise.

Darling, cut the libelous diatribe of reputation damaging mudslinging or you will answer to my impressive array of attorneys.

Why can't we all......just get along?

:(

yancey...that would be too simple.

yancey wrote:Why can't we all......just get along?

Who's not getting along?

BoxBuzz wrote:yancey...that would be too simple.

I blame you, Buzz.

Getting that clown in to ban granberry was a low act.

Darling wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:yancey...that would be too simple.

I blame you, Buzz.

Getting that clown in to ban granberry was a low act.

It's quite a feat on your part to have six different personalities on the board, with not a-one of them ostensibly responsible for any of the resulting conflict. Well done, chappie.

Personally, my favourite is the fella whose vocabulary extends only as far as, " "

keithmoonhangover wrote:

Ezzard wrote:On second viewing it was closer than it first seemed but I turned to my friends and said exactly the same thing.

The draw made so much sense. They could both remain world champions and both keep earning the big money.

Wasn`t it more to do with a certain promoter not having rights over one of the fighters if the fight was a draw?

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Darling wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:yancey...that would be too simple.

I blame you, Buzz.

Getting that clown in to ban granberry was a low act.

It's quite a feat on your part to have six different personalities on the board, with not a-one of them ostensibly responsible for any of the resulting conflict. Well done, chappie.

Personally, my favourite is the fella whose vocabulary extends only as far as, " "

6 different personalities? I've always been the same towards you, Irene. Total dislike for your blowhard wannabe tough guy act.

Got a real job yet, Irene, or are you still standing outside The Pink Oboe in Oxford Street with the other "bouncers" looking like a chump?

Darling wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Darling wrote: I blame you, Buzz.

Getting that clown in to ban granberry was a low act.

It's quite a feat on your part to have six different personalities on the board, with not a-one of them ostensibly responsible for any of the resulting conflict. Well done, chappie.

Personally, my favourite is the fella whose vocabulary extends only as far as, " "

6 different personalities? I've always been the same towards you, Irene. Total dislike for your blowhard wannabe tough guy act.

Got a real job yet, Irene, or are you still standing outside The Pink Oboe in Oxford Street with the other "bouncers" looking like a chump?