Is Joe Frazier really an ATG?

[LacedUp]

But all of those guys did so well!! Well, at least better than Frazier would have fared against Lennox.

Next

Wow,

You create a factual statement, which is then combated with factual evidence of the opposite - before creating a fictional statement

You're reaching cyclone./

[LacedUp]

Holyfield's opinion I respect very often because he has kept it real very often.

Foremen indeed was a hard puncher, I am not arguing that. "Hardest hitter" is romantic hogwash though.

Old man Foreman lacked the snap of his younger self, but that foreman was also much heftier (260lbs!) And STRENGTH trained through weights, pulling cars etc! Unlike younger Foreman who is NOT a big HW as we would describe them today!

Foreman was also an arm puncher and a push puncher as evidenced by film. His shots were strong at knocking fighters off balance, which is WHY he failed to canvas KO guys like Frazier, even after 6 KD's and many other fighters too!

He did not have the snap of Lewis or Bowe, despite being much heavier than them.

So what Evander describes is quite possibly true in a sense, just a different type of power.

But remember, Evander SURVIVED Foreman, he was knocked OUT by other fighters! The hardest shots scramble your brain so they are not felt, part of your bodies pain protective mechanism which is proven science (see fight science).

But the biggest problem I have with your post here is that you are willing to take someone elses WORD for something at all.

What you should be doing is investigating what is real from not real, regardless of what anybody says!

Essentially what you're saying is I should take your crappy agenda driven word over a guy who actually fought both guys.

That's rich.

[Elroy1]

Essentially what you're saying is I should take your crappy agenda driven word over a guy who actually fought both guys.

That's rich.

Are you a little bit slow mate? Maybe that's why you paraphrase me wrong in the dome all the time. because you are dyslexic or something!

I said you shouldn't listen to ANYBODY'S word for something, INCLUDING my own! You should investigate how true things are for yourself.

How in the middle of a fight can he accurately guage the power of several key punches that him him, do this for several fights, months or years apart and then later sit down and recall through the hazy recollection of times of concussion which shots were the hardest?

It simply doesn't make sense does it? I mean really?

Not to mention Holyfield was much stronger when he fought Lennox too than he was when he fought Foreman,

And not to mention he was knocked out other times but not by Foreman,

See, these irrefutable points often mount up don't they!

It's why we can say with some confidence, not that Evander is specifically wrong here, but that his word is colliding with facts.

Another angle, Foreman couldn't KO Briggs, but around the same time LEnnox did KO Briggs? And others.

But these fights and Holyfield's own experiences like with Bowe etc, mean less than a statement made by Holyfield regarding remote times during concussion about things he probably COULDN'T recall properly at all!

I have boxed a fair bit and I know it is difficult to tell one punch harder from another and I also know the hardest shots you DON'T feel because your temporarily scrambled.

Can you not see this?

[LacedUp]

Are you a little bit slow mate? Maybe that's why you paraphrase me wrong in the dome all the time. because you are dyslexic or something!

I said you shouldn't listen to ANYBODY'S word for something, INCLUDING my own! You should investigate how true things are for yourself.

How in the middle of a fight can he accurately guage the power of several key punches that him him, do this for several fights, months or years apart and then later sit down and recall through the hazy recollection of times of concussion which shots were the hardest?

It simply doesn't make sense does it? I mean really?

Not to mention Holyfield was much stronger when he fought Lennox too than he was when he fought Foreman,

And not to mention he was knocked out other times but not by Foreman,

See, these irrefutable points often mount up don't they!

It's why we can say with some confidence, not that Evander is specifically wrong here, but that his word is colliding with facts.

Another angle, Foreman couldn't KO Briggs, but around the same time LEnnox did KO Briggs? And others.

But these fights and Holyfield's own experiences like with Bowe etc, mean less than a statement made by Holyfield regarding remote times during concussion about things he probably COULDN'T recall properly at all!

I have boxed a fair bit and I know it is difficult to tell one punch harder from another and I also know the hardest shots you DON'T feel because your temporarily scrambled.

Can you not see this?

Mate, I really don't have the time to look through your long posts.

Next time, keep it short and simple. Otherwise, 'I'm not reading it.

[GoldenGloveLove]

Only obviously.

[Elroy1]

Mate, I really don't have the time to look through your long posts.

Next time, keep it short and simple. Otherwise, 'I'm not reading it.

Compressed version?

You should not take any ones word INCLUDING mine.

And there is tangible evidence that collides with Evander's word.

And Evander's word can't be trusted on this issue as the fights were seperated by a lot of time, he was concussed and you don't feel the hardest shots etc.

[billeau2]

Compressed version?

You should not take any ones word INCLUDING mine.

And there is tangible evidence that collides with Evander's word.

And Evander's word can't be trusted on this issue as the fights were seperated by a lot of time, he was concussed and you don't feel the hardest shots etc.

Good to see the idiot has found a place accomidating for his screed. BTW calling Humean an American was priceless.... But you wouldn't know who David Hume was now would you? You are in fact, ironically enough, quite like the idiots Hume sought to expose in his life as the Muhammed Ali of the epistemological set:

You make blanket statements about defense, punching power, and even size without providing any basis in reality for these statements. You act as though your statements are facts ready and observable when NOTHING is farther from the truth. I will grant you that an older Foreman is a different animal....an inferior one by any measure of common sense YET this fat old man was able to be a factor as a modern heavyweight, go figure! And the Sam Peter you seem to think of as a big beefy improved model for the Frazier's back then? was handled once and had to fight the best fight of his career to avoid a fat small middle weight who was "old school" you know who that was dunce? But let me guess.... James Toney was also an epiteme of modernity yes? And Jones as well?

Heres another stat for you that really happened unlike your poor prognostocating ******y! Bob Foster, a fearless ATG who some consider the best light heavy bar none....could do little against Ali or as a heavyweight. But let me guess neanderthals in Foster's time had not learned the mechanics of punching that the Ross Purity's, Sam Peters, klitschkos most of whom would tire wayyyy before a fifteen round fight....had learned as modern humans.

And trainers who still use Louis as a guidepost for perfect punching technique are deluded as well, they should use a guy like Vlad or his brother who virtually never throw combos, cannot fight inside....BUt hey!! its the modern way!!! people have evolved to a point where if they threw punches they would get hit and this seeming lack of punching is alas....GREAT DEFENSE!!!!!

You sir would be humerous if it was not for the fact that critical thinking skills have left the building and left us.....YOU.

[Elroy1]

Good to see the idiot has found a place accomidating for his screed. BTW calling Humean an American was priceless.... But you wouldn't know who David Hume was now would you? You are in fact, ironically enough, quite like the idiots Hume sought to expose in his life as the Muhammed Ali of the epistemological set:

You make blanket statements about defense, punching power, and even size without providing any basis in reality for these statements. You act as though your statements are facts ready and observable when NOTHING is farther from the truth. I will grant you that an older Foreman is a different animal....an inferior one by any measure of common sense YET this fat old man was able to be a factor as a modern heavyweight, go figure! And the Sam Peter you seem to think of as a big beefy improved model for the Frazier's back then? was handled once and had to fight the best fight of his career to avoid a fat small middle weight who was "old school" you know who that was dunce? But let me guess.... James Toney was also an epiteme of modernity yes? And Jones as well?

Heres another stat for you that really happened unlike your poor prognostocating ******y! Bob Foster, a fearless ATG who some consider the best light heavy bar none....could do little against Ali or as a heavyweight. But let me guess neanderthals in Foster's time had not learned the mechanics of punching that the Ross Purity's, Sam Peters, klitschkos most of whom would tire wayyyy before a fifteen round fight....had learned as modern humans.

And trainers who still use Louis as a guidepost for perfect punching technique are deluded as well, they should use a guy like Vlad or his brother who virtually never throw combos, cannot fight inside....BUt hey!! its the modern way!!! people have evolved to a point where if they threw punches they would get hit and this seeming lack of punching is alas....GREAT DEFENSE!!!!!

You sir would be humerous if it was not for the fact that critical thinking skills have left the building and left us.....YOU.

I'm done with you.

You have nothing to offer at all of any relevance.

I remember your last post, basically you rely totally on the opinion of past authority figures in the sport which made claims themselves not based on any evidence.

In round 1 for instance you can see the sort of stuff I am talking about in Liston Ali 1 when we were talking about him, arm stretched out, marching forward, not even a punch. I could give you a clip and time for any individual thing you point out to me but you would always have an excuse or fall back on "but he said so!"

You make too many idiotic statements to address at once, but I'll point out just one.

I am talking about real HW boxing, and you mention Bob Foster. An opponent who didn't achieve anything against any real HW boxer of any substantial skill. Incredible!

Actually I'll go a couple more?

WHO uses Louis as a bench mark today for modern HW's to aspire to? I mean really? Nobody who display's any evidence to back it up I can tell you that! And I don't care if someone like Roach SAYS so, I would ask him HOW so? You see the difference.

And then you mention Foreman, yes he was old and fat, he was in his 40's, that's getting on for a HW even in modern times but fortunately things aare not so clear cut here for George.

I think young Geroge would have been better suited for SOME opponents and definitely young Geroge is better suited for some opponents.

George's early career was fought against a much smaller and poorer quality of opposition. And it was young Geroge who gassed against Muhammad and lost to featherfist Young.

Old George had a BETTER career than young George, mounting fights against Holyfield, Morrison, Briggs and beating Moorer etc.

But you would attribute this to Young+Ali being better than these guys since they struggled with the old version.

How can it be?

Because this is a case where old George was...

- Better skilled, he only learned how to box properly in his 2nd career!
- Far heavier and stronger, with better punch resistance and crude power.
- Vastly more experienced!

And these qualities^ are sometimes more important that youth and athleticism! And sometimes not. Against the vast majority of opponents, I'd say they are in Geroge's case!

But you go on with your nutbaggery, if you would like me to debunk anything with examples or stats individually, feel free to ask!

Critical thinking and reflective analysis is my JOB.

[LacedUp]

I'm done with you.

You have nothing to offer at all of any relevance.

I remember your last post, basically you rely totally on the opinion of past authority figures in the sport which made claims themselves not based on any evidence.

In round 1 for instance you can see the sort of stuff I am talking about in Liston Ali 1 when we were talking about him, arm stretched out, marching forward, not even a punch. I could give you a clip and time for any individual thing you point out to me but you would always have an excuse or fall back on "but he said so!"

You make too many idiotic statements to address at once, but I'll point out just one.

I am talking about real HW boxing, and you mention Bob Foster. An opponent who didn't achieve anything against any real HW boxer of any substantial skill. Incredible!

Actually I'll go a couple more?

WHO uses Louis as a bench mark today for modern HW's to aspire to? I mean really? Nobody who display's any evidence to back it up I can tell you that! And I don't care if someone like Roach SAYS so, I would ask him HOW so? You see the difference.

And then you mention Foreman, yes he was old and fat, he was in his 40's, that's getting on for a HW even in modern times but fortunately things aare not so clear cut here for George.

I think young Geroge would have been better suited for SOME opponents and definitely young Geroge is better suited for some opponents.

George's early career was fought against a much smaller and poorer quality of opposition. And it was young Geroge who gassed against Muhammad and lost to featherfist Young.

Old George had a BETTER career than Young, mounting fights against Holyfield, Morrison, Briggs and beating Moorer etc.

But you would attribute this to Young+Ali being better than these guys since they struggled with the old version.

How can it be?

Because this is a case where old George was...

- Better skilled, he only learned how to box properly in his 2nd career!
- Far heavier and stronger, with better punch resistance and crude power.
- Vastly more experienced!

And these qualities^ are sometimes more important that youth and athleticism! And sometimes not. Against the vast majority of opponents, I'd say they are in Geroge's case!

But you go on with your nutbaggery, if you would like me to debunk anything with examples or stats individually, feel free to ask!

"I'm done with you"

........... Then follows with 20+ meaningless paragraphs

[////]

Wow,

You create a factual statement, which is then combated with factual evidence of the opposite - before creating a fictional statement

You're reaching cyclone./

I'm gonna have to block you bud. I don't mind hearing your boxing opinions but this constantly accusing me of being various people day after day is creepy.

We are just people with a common interest in a sport and I don't need a little chihuahua man nipping at my heels in every thread, telling me what I "secretly think" because he thinks I'm someone else.

I guess I will never get to hear your explanation of why Wlad's small opponents doing so poorly somehow means Frazier would beat Lennox, or whatever you were trying to say there (?). It seems like you just bring up Wlad for no apparent reason in every thread.

Bye weirdo.