Which HWs past and present would have had a good chance of beating a 70s Foreman? - Page 9

Yaman

Quote:

Originally Posted by res

So the concept of fighters who were never the same after a major loss is unknown to you?

That concept is called 'excuses' for most cases. Blatant, pathetic excuses. I'm sorry but he's not getting a free pass from me.

Cardinal Buck

Quote:

Originally Posted by res

So the concept of fighters who were never the same after a major loss is unknown to you?

Ali had no trouble at all drilling Foreman with right hands pre-loss. It was embarrassing.

res

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardinal Buck

Ali had no trouble at all drilling Foreman with right hands pre-loss. It was embarrassing.

He had no problem doing it within the context of a rather desperate strategy.

res

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yaman

That concept is called 'excuses' for most cases. Blatant, pathetic excuses. .

I think it's called Psychology.

poet682006

Quote:

Originally Posted by res

He had no problem doing it within the context of the use of a rather desperate strategy.

Not to mention it's fvcking Ali for crying out loud. Who the hell else is as accurate as Ali with their right? Joe Louis and that's about it.

Poet

Yaman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardinal Buck

Ali had no trouble at all drilling Foreman with right hands pre-loss. It was embarrassing.

It wasn't the right hands or skill of Ali that did it, it was cuz Foreman wuz fighting stupid, he was being silly.
I can't resist

Capaedia

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yaman

That concept is called 'excuses' for most cases. Blatant, pathetic excuses. I'm sorry but he's not getting a free pass from me.

I guess Meldrick Taylor's loss to Chavez didn't affect him either.

You know man, it takes quite some nerve to just drop an argument to come back and mock it later without addressing it properly.

I guess Monte Cox is on Foreman's nuts too?

Yaman · 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capaedia

I guess Meldrick Taylor's loss to Chavez didn't affect him either.

You know man, it takes quite some nerve to just drop an argument to come back and mock it later without addressing it properly.

I guess Monte Cox is on Foreman's nuts too?

You again. I do not feel like making big posts trying to convince someone who has made up his mind already and is that biased. I actually don't think Foreman's first loss was irrelevant in terms of its effects, but to claim that it was the SOLE reason for his displays against Young & Lyle? That is absolutely laughable and screams bias. You seem to undermine ANY negative displays of 'prime Foreman' as it being something HE did wrong himself instead of crediting his opponent, or making excuses for his bad performances or losses. The whole goal is to make young George seem as invincible as possible.

And So was Foreman beaten to a pulp like Taylor now? What are you gonna mention next, Jess Willard was never the same again after the Dempsey fight just like George?