razor ruddock of 1990 vs george foreman of 1990 who wins and why??? - Page 3

Synthetic Decay · 01-23-2013, 06:00 PM

Old Foreman had a better chin than young Foreman, the extra weight also made him harder to move. His boxing iq and timing had improved as well, although he was slower.

Tyson probably passed 15 inch arms when he was 14 years old.

NoNeck · 01-23-2013, 06:23 PM

And yet, for his entire comeback, Foreman notched only one significant win and it was in a fight where he was miserably down on the cards and knocked out an undersized heavy with no chin.

Synthetic Decay · 01-23-2013, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoNeck

And yet, for his entire comeback, Foreman notched only one significant win and it was in a fight where he was miserably down on the cards and knocked out an undersized heavy with no chin.

Too slow on his feet. Anyone that stands in front of him is still going to have difficulty.

He did better against prime Holy than Tyson did against old Holy. Should have beat Briggs.

NoNeck · 01-23-2013, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synthetic Decay

Too slow on his feet. Anyone that stands in front of him is still going to have difficulty.

He did better against prime Holy than Tyson did against old Holy. Should have beat Briggs.

Ruddock isn't all that slow on his feet. Just watch the Bonecrusher fight. That guy would beat Foreman unless he stupidly gets knocked out, which I doubt considering Tommy "starched in 1 by Bentt" Morrison went the distance.

Synthetic Decay · 01-23-2013, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoNeck

Ruddock isn't all that slow on his feet. Just watch the Bonecrusher fight. That guy would beat Foreman unless he stupidly gets knocked out, which I doubt considering Tommy "starched in 1 by Bentt" Morrison went the distance.

I agree and think the same, Ruddock should win.

PowerPuncher · 01-23-2013, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synthetic Decay

Too slow on his feet. Anyone that stands in front of him is still going to have difficulty.

He did better against prime Holy than Tyson did against old Holy. Should have beat Briggs.

No he didn't and I don't see the 'anyone who stands in front of him has difficulties', he avoided or didn't face any punchers bar maybe Morrison who shut him out looking like Sugar Ray in doing so

Synthetic Decay · 01-23-2013, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerPuncher

No he didn't and I don't see the 'anyone who stands in front of him has difficulties', he avoided or didn't face any punchers bar maybe Morrison who shut him out looking like Sugar Ray in doing so

He backed Holy up most of the fight, where as Mike spent most of the fight getting pushed back and clinch fucked.

Cooney, Morrison, Briggs, Moorer could all punch.

Theron · 01-23-2013, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highguard

yes that was me,
i also said it has nothing to do with boxing

and if you ever went to a gym, you would know a grown man with 17inch arms
is nothing special and is actually kinda on the smallish side for a heavyweight

Oh i know when i go to my gym all the guys walking around have arms that look like this...

This is a boxing forum not a bodybuilding forum why do you care so much about arm size unless your one of those, ohh nah but arm size indicates punching power and skill...

NoNeck · 01-23-2013, 08:24 PM

^No one gives a fuck about Tyson's biceps.

PowerPuncher · 01-23-2013, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synthetic Decay

He backed Holy up most of the fight, where as Mike spent most of the fight getting pushed back and clinch fucked.

Cooney, Morrison, Briggs, Moorer could all punch.

Not for the first 5 rounds he didn't where Tyson was at least level with Holy and a bigger Holy at that

The most dangerous punchers of the era were Lennox, Bowe, Tyson, Rudduck. Cooney was shot, Briggs was average, Morrison was alright, Moorer had a decent dig for his size but he wasn't nearly as naturally big or have the fireworks of the other men

rusak · 01-23-2013, 08:45 PM

If Ruddock doesn't fight stupid, he should win, possibly by stoppage. Foreman avoided real competition for a reason. No hand speed, no foot speed, no head movement, low volume, Foreman is very beatable.

TBooze · 01-23-2013, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rusak

If Ruddock doesn't fight stupid, he should win, possibly by stoppage. Foreman avoided real competition for a reason. No hand speed, no foot speed, no head movement, low volume, Foreman is very beatable.

Yeah, unbeaten Moorer sucked...

If the money was right, Foreman was in the other corner. He avoided no decent pay day.

Synthetic Decay · 01-23-2013, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerPuncher

Not for the first 5 rounds he didn't where Tyson was at least level with Holy and a bigger Holy at that

The most dangerous punchers of the era were Lennox, Bowe, Tyson, Rudduck. Cooney was shot, Briggs was average, Morrison was alright, Moorer had a decent dig for his size but he wasn't nearly as naturally big or have the fireworks of the other men

Mike was getting manhandled right off of the bat. I don't think that the 7lb is the difference between handling Mike and getting pushed around by George.

So there were only 4 punchers in that era? What's funny is that it's not as if the guys you mentioned were having trilogy's against each other, i think that speaks for itself, you can't just click your fingers and make fights. Morrison and Briggs are well renowned punchers and although Gerry was well past it, his power was still there.

highguard · 01-23-2013, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerPuncher

No he didn't and I don't see the 'anyone who stands in front of him has difficulties', he avoided or didn't face any punchers bar maybe Morrison who shut him out looking like Sugar Ray in doing so

THANK YOU,

but many of these guys will tell you that these strong punchers would have not shot standing in front of foreman

this is why
he fought guys like qawi instead of them

and when i say them,
i mean ALL OF THEM

NoNeck · 01-23-2013, 11:38 PM

off topic...but McCall fought with a similar style to 90s Foreman, built a better resume during that period, and gets written off because he flipped out against Lewis.

01-23-2013, 06:00 PM	#31
Synthetic Decay Journeyman ESB Jr Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 293 vCash: 500	Re: razor ruddock of 1990 vs george foreman of 1990 who wins and why??? Old Foreman had a better chin than young Foreman, the extra weight also made him harder to move. His boxing iq and timing had improved as well, although he was slower. Tyson probably passed 15 inch arms when he was 14 years old.
Top

01-23-2013, 06:23 PM	#32
NoNeck Pugilist Specialist ESB Addict Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 1,557 vCash: 500	Re: razor ruddock of 1990 vs george foreman of 1990 who wins and why??? And yet, for his entire comeback, Foreman notched only one significant win and it was in a fight where he was miserably down on the cards and knocked out an undersized heavy with no chin.
Top

01-23-2013, 08:24 PM	#39
NoNeck Pugilist Specialist ESB Addict Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 1,557 vCash: 500	Re: razor ruddock of 1990 vs george foreman of 1990 who wins and why??? ^No one gives a fuck about Tyson's biceps.
Top

01-23-2013, 08:45 PM	#41
rusak Contender ESB Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 551 vCash: 500	Re: razor ruddock of 1990 vs george foreman of 1990 who wins and why??? If Ruddock doesn't fight stupid, he should win, possibly by stoppage. Foreman avoided real competition for a reason. No hand speed, no foot speed, no head movement, low volume, Foreman is very beatable.
Top

01-23-2013, 11:38 PM	#45
NoNeck Pugilist Specialist ESB Addict Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 1,557 vCash: 500	Re: razor ruddock of 1990 vs george foreman of 1990 who wins and why??? off topic...but McCall fought with a similar style to 90s Foreman, built a better resume during that period, and gets written off because he flipped out against Lewis.
Top