boxing
Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-08-2009, 01:40 AM   #61
AnthonyJ74
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,579
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
I think Tyson gains more fighting Ruddock and then Foreman rather than fighting Ruddock twice. Ring Magazine ranked Ruddock #4 in 1990, while Foreman was #6. Fighting Ruddock once shouldn't been fine when having not been champion. Obviously the prison ordeal doesn't help - doesn't change the fact that Tyson probably wanted nothing to do with Foreman. Apparently, Don King proposed the fight but Tyson responded "What are you nuts. Why don't you fight him."

So, I do think a duck is harsh. But I do think Tyson intentionally avoided from. It's not like he was warranted in a fight, and it's not like fighting someone else on your way back up is any worse. Tyson was doing what he had to do to get a shot. While having the belt, Foreman wasn't deserving but I don't see Tyson giving him a shot in the future when he's becoming more deserving. Tyson fought Foreman would've been huge and big business even in the late 80's - in the early 90's it could have been big too. The thing is, I'm sure Foreman would much rather have fought Holyfield in 91 than Tyson in 91... so it just worked out that way.

A superfight almost went down in the mid-90's but it didn't pan out.
Ruddock was a legitimate top contender; Foreman was not. How the hell Foreman got his shot against HOlyfield is still beyond me. Foreman should have fought Ruddock, then the winner of that fight get a title shot. Foreman snuck in through the back door! Tyson fought Ruddock in an elimantor fight. Tyson would gain much more from a win over Ruddock than from a win over Foreman - who was still considered a joke by most. It wasn't until George took 12 rounds of punishment without going down or quitting against Holyfield that he was viewed as more legitimate. But still, he was more a novelty act than a true contender. I can't see how Tyson would be ridiculed for not fighting Foreman. Tyson fought the most dangerous guy around at the time (Ruddock) - and beat him handily twice!
AnthonyJ74 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 10-08-2009, 01:51 AM   #62
AnthonyJ74
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,579
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
It could have happened in the late 80's, but Foreman really didn't have a strong claim to earn that shot.

Tyson lost, and it still could've happened in the early 90's but that would be less likely to happen.

Foreman won the title and was talking a Tyson storm after the Moore and Schultz victories. Foreman still had the WBU after the Schultz stripping. Besides, Foreman may not have been stripped if a Tyson fight was proposed.

Tyson came back and signed a 5 fight deal. He wanted no Foreman, and lined up non-threats as his opposition.

You honestly think Tyson would make more against McNeely than Foreman?

The money was there, Tyson just didn't want Big George.
Foreman chose Schultz as the guy to defend his title against because Foreman wanted that big money fight against Tyson so bad. And Foreman couldn't even beat an unranked, moderately-skilled fighter with no power like Schultz. Foreman didn't want anything to stand in his way of a mega-fight with Tyson, but Schultz did stand in his way - and should have won that fight and the title!

And Foreman wanted Tyson to fight him immediately after Tyson was released from prison - no tune-up fights, just straight into a championship fight with George......

George was a con man! He was ALLLL about the money....
AnthonyJ74 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 03:21 AM   #63
Chris Warren
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 482
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Anthony did you read what i posted about Tyson being afraid of Foreman? Foreman wanted to fight Tyson before he want to jail and after he went to jail. Tyson declined. And as I said earlier who in the hell did Tyson beat to earn a shot at the title before he went to jail or after he got out of jail? Peter McNeely? Give me a break, stop trying to defend Mike Tyson.

You are going to critize Foreman for struggling against Schulz when he was 46 but apparently it is ok for Tyson to struggle against James Tillis when Tyson was in his prime. There is no fighter who ever lived who didnt look bad from time to time. Tyson look bad more often which is the reason he got knocked out 5 times.

Ruddock was never dangerous, He beat Michael Dokes and that was pretty much it for Rudduck. I guess that makes Rudduck this world class juggernaut right? He didnt seem to deadly when David Jaco a 3rd tier club fighter beat him. Fighting Tyson 2 times only proves how bad Tyson was and how Tyson would rather fight Ruddock a person he knew he could beat than fight Foreman for more money but get knocked out.

Anthony do you remember when Tyson paid Lewis 4 million dollars because he knew he couldnt beat him. Then fought Holyfield because he thought Holyfield was washed up which he was but Tyson still got knocked out. Tyson was always a coward. Tyson only fought people who had no business fighting him. You keep saying what did Tyson have to gain by fighting Foreman? What in the hell did he have to gain from fighting Holmes?

Tyson knew Holmes couldnt beat him so took a easy fight. Tyson's whole career was a joke. He was lucky he didnt have to fight people like Ali, Frazier, Lyle ect ect ect like Foreman did. Tyson fought nobodies but still got credit for it. Every single person Tyson fought got built up to make it seem like he fought somebody. Foreman fought basically the same 3rd tier fighters like Jaco that Tyson fought. When Foreman fought them they were bad fighters. When Tyson fought them they were better than a prime Ali.

I will agree with you though, Foreman was a con man. But which is worse being a con man or a coward who beat on women and ****s and goes to jail and have big prison guys make you drop the soap and have their way with you? Infact Tyson probably just dropped the soap without being forced. He was that kind of a coward.
Chris Warren is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 11:37 PM   #64
PetethePrince
Slick & Redheaded
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,395
vCash: 1200
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyJ74 View Post
Ruddock was a legitimate top contender; Foreman was not.
Ring Magazine ranked Foreman #10 in 1990 and #6 in 1991. Ruddock was #4 in 91 and Tyson fought him twice (While not beating the champion). There goes your Foreman wasn't a top contender theory.

Quote:
How the hell Foreman got his shot against HOlyfield is still beyond me.
Above

Quote:
Foreman should have fought Ruddock, then the winner of that fight get a title shot.
And Tyson shouldn't have fought Ruddock twice.

Quote:
Foreman snuck in through the back door!
Like the way I did with your sister?

Quote:
Tyson fought Ruddock in an elimantor fight. Tyson would gain much more from a win over Ruddock than from a win over Foreman - who was still considered a joke by most. It wasn't until George took 12 rounds of punishment without going down or quitting against Holyfield that he was viewed as more legitimate. But still, he was more a novelty act than a true contender. I can't see how Tyson would be ridiculed for not fighting Foreman. Tyson fought the most dangerous guy around at the time (Ruddock) - and beat him handily twice!
Tyson had many chances to fight him. There could have been a huge super fight in the mid 90's. Didn't happen, though. Tyson either doesn't like money, or thought it was far too risky in comparison to the reward. I'll go with the latter.
PetethePrince is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 11:39 PM   #65
PetethePrince
Slick & Redheaded
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,395
vCash: 1200
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyJ74 View Post
Foreman chose Schultz as the guy to defend his title against because Foreman wanted that big money fight against Tyson so bad. And Foreman couldn't even beat an unranked, moderately-skilled fighter with no power like Schultz. Foreman didn't want anything to stand in his way of a mega-fight with Tyson, but Schultz did stand in his way - and should have won that fight and the title!

And Foreman wanted Tyson to fight him immediately after Tyson was released from prison - no tune-up fights, just straight into a championship fight with George......

George was a con man! He was ALLLL about the money....
PetethePrince is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2009, 01:34 AM   #66
AnthonyJ74
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,579
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Ring Magazine ranked Foreman #10 in 1990 and #6 in 1991. Ruddock was #4 in 91 and Tyson fought him twice (While not beating the champion). There goes your Foreman wasn't a top contender theory.



Above



And Tyson shouldn't have fought Ruddock twice.



Like the way I did with your sister?



Tyson had many chances to fight him. There could have been a huge super fight in the mid 90's. Didn't happen, though. Tyson either doesn't like money, or thought it was far too risky in comparison to the reward. I'll go with the latter.
Childish moron!

Anyways, Foreman was not a legitimate contender. I don't care what the Ring magazine had him rated. He was rated that high due to his popularity and the fact that he fought so often. Tyson was afraid of Foreman but he fought Ruddock?? Yeah, that makes sense. Ruddock hit harder than Foreman, was faster, and could throw combinations. Foreman, slow as molasses, was really a threat! Get over it.

Foreman calling out Tyson was moronic prior to 1990-1991. From '87-89, Foreman had fought a bunch of stiffs, tomato cans, and no-hopers. He iced Gerry ****ey in 1990, and all of a sudden people were saying what a threat Foreman was and how devastating he was. Even though ****ey had been inactive, through drug rehab, and hadn't won a meaningful fight in many years.......Foreman chose ****ey for a reason.

Then he blows away Adilson Rodgriguez, another joke, and then he gets a title shot. At what point did Foreman morph from being a total joke to a legitimate, dangerous foe for Tyson? Where? When? How?
AnthonyJ74 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2009, 01:44 AM   #67
AnthonyJ74
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,579
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris ****** View Post
Anthony did you read what i posted about Tyson being afraid of Foreman? Foreman wanted to fight Tyson before he want to jail and after he went to jail. Tyson declined. And as I said earlier who in the hell did Tyson beat to earn a shot at the title before he went to jail or after he got out of jail? Peter McNeely? Give me a break, stop trying to defend Mike Tyson.

You are going to critize Foreman for struggling against Schulz when he was 46 but apparently it is ok for Tyson to struggle against James Tillis when Tyson was in his prime. There is no fighter who ever lived who didnt look bad from time to time. Tyson look bad more often which is the reason he got knocked out 5 times.

Ruddock was never dangerous, He beat Michael Dokes and that was pretty much it for Rudduck. I guess that makes Rudduck this world class juggernaut right? He didnt seem to deadly when David Jaco a 3rd tier club fighter beat him. Fighting Tyson 2 times only proves how bad Tyson was and how Tyson would rather fight Ruddock a person he knew he could beat than fight Foreman for more money but get knocked out.

Anthony do you remember when Tyson paid Lewis 4 million dollars because he knew he couldnt beat him. Then fought Holyfield because he thought Holyfield was washed up which he was but Tyson still got knocked out. Tyson was always a coward. Tyson only fought people who had no business fighting him. You keep saying what did Tyson have to gain by fighting Foreman? What in the hell did he have to gain from fighting Holmes?

Tyson knew Holmes couldnt beat him so took a easy fight. Tyson's whole career was a joke. He was lucky he didnt have to fight people like Ali, Frazier, Lyle ect ect ect like Foreman did. Tyson fought nobodies but still got credit for it. Every single person Tyson fought got built up to make it seem like he fought somebody. Foreman fought basically the same 3rd tier fighters like Jaco that Tyson fought. When Foreman fought them they were bad fighters. When Tyson fought them they were better than a prime Ali.

I will agree with you though, Foreman was a con man. But which is worse being a con man or a coward who beat on women and ****s and goes to jail and have big prison guys make you drop the soap and have their way with you? Infact Tyson probably just dropped the soap without being forced. He was that kind of a coward.
Damn , you are all over the place! I need a shotgun blast to post a rebuttal to all of your assertions......

Tyson being afraid of Foreman because of what some boxing people (trainers, managers) suppossedly heard Tyson say doesn't prove anything. Stories in boxing are a dime a dozen.

Ruddock was dangerous. His punching power, speed, and overall strength made him a threat.

Yes, Tyson avoided Lewis like the plague. Tyson chose Holyfield instead of Lewis because he thought Holyfield would be a much easier fight. Yes, yes, yes.......But what does that have to do with Tyson and Foreman? What is the connection there?

Old Holmes and Foreman and Tyson? Again, what connection is there? Holmes at least had been champion as late as 1985 and had performed very well in losing (controversially) to Spinks in April 1986. Tyson fought Holmes in January of 1988, less than two years since Holmes had basically been at or near the top of the division.....Foreman was totally different. Foreman since starting his comeback had not been anywhere near the elite level of the heavyweight division since 1977....In January of 1988, Foreman was fighting club fighters. The guys Tyson was fighting during the late 1980's were light years ahead of Foreman in ability and accomplishment..........If you don't grasp that fact - sorry!
AnthonyJ74 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2009, 03:15 AM   #68
PetethePrince
Slick & Redheaded
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,395
vCash: 1200
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyJ74 View Post
Childish moron!

Anyways, Foreman was not a legitimate contender. I don't care what the Ring magazine had him rated. He was rated that high due to his popularity and the fact that he fought so often. Tyson was afraid of Foreman but he fought Ruddock?? Yeah, that makes sense. Ruddock hit harder than Foreman, was faster, and could throw combinations. Foreman, slow as molasses, was really a threat! Get over it.
That's the end of the discussion. Which all began of a complete misconstruction, as if I implied Tyson should or needed to call Foreman out. As if that was even being argued, and as if Tyson needed Foreman. It's clear, he didn't want to. Big bucks would've been made, and Foreman could've had a chance. He gave Tyson tons of chances and Tyson wanted zero part. Bottom line.

As for Ruddock, he was completely open and didn't set up things with the jab and got way too into his explosive punch. In the end he had zero chance with Tyson with this transformation. Foreman was far more dangerous for obvious stylistic reasons. Arguing otherwise as if the other end is opposite is just dogmatic. And arguing as if the fight wouldn't have been huge is even stupider.
PetethePrince is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2009, 03:21 AM   #69
Chris Warren
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 482
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Man PeteThePrince is cool. I should hook my mom up with you. She needs a nice man in her life.
Chris Warren is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2009, 09:56 AM   #70
lefthook31
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in a boxing gym near you
Posts: 10,432
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

I have read a lot of speculating articles about this proposed fight that could have come off in 1990. Regardless of what was said, and even regardless of what Tyson might have felt, (possibly the thought of losing to a 41 year old was too much), Foreman never had a significant win over a fighter of the caliber of Tyson or even close. Any resemblance of speed gave big George fits. He was outboxed by Morrison and outfought by Shultz. He couldnt knock out Lou Savarese or Crawford Grimsley, two of the slowest heavyweights ever. His one shot knockout of Moorer came after a 10 round beating and against a guy with a very bad chin and really the shot was right on the button.
Any way you ****yze this fight its hard to believe that George would have come out victorious, but if in fact Tyson was scared of Foreman that would have certainly gave George a big mental advantage and that would have been a huge factor given Tyson's fragile psyche.
lefthook31 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2009, 02:00 PM   #71
AnthonyJ74
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,579
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
That's the end of the discussion. Which all began of a complete misconstruction, as if I implied Tyson should or needed to call Foreman out. As if that was even being argued, and as if Tyson needed Foreman. It's clear, he didn't want to. Big bucks would've been made, and Foreman could've had a chance. He gave Tyson tons of chances and Tyson wanted zero part. Bottom line.

As for Ruddock, he was completely open and didn't set up things with the jab and got way too into his explosive punch. In the end he had zero chance with Tyson with this transformation. Foreman was far more dangerous for obvious stylistic reasons. Arguing otherwise as if the other end is opposite is just dogmatic. And arguing as if the fight wouldn't have been huge is even stupider.
I agree a Foreman/Tyson fight would have been huge. Foreman's popularity was such that people would have tuned in to watch the fight in droves......However, that has no bearing on Foreman's chances against Tyson or on whether or not Tyson was afraid of Foreman. Tyson didn't need Foreman; Foreman needed Tyson. Foreman, prior to his fight with Holyfield, was still chasing that big money fight. He knew he'd get a big paycheck by fighting Tyson. But Tyson was on the comeback trail to get his title back. Why would Tyson fight Foreman? Foreman was not the champ? Foreman was not even a real contender. Tyson, the number 1 contender, fought Ruddock, the number two contender. That fight was big. Rarely do you have the two top contenders square off to fight each other to determine a rightful title challenger. Big props to Tyson and Ruddock for doing that. Foreman, meanwhile, was protecting his unbeaten comeback record by fighting guys like Mike Jameson, Terry Anderson, and a washed up, fragile, inactive Gerry ****ey.........Tyson would have gained nothing by fighting Foreman except a big paycheck. But Tyson was chasing the title. Regaining the championship was more important to Tyson than fighting George Foreman for big bucks.....I don't see what the issue is.....
AnthonyJ74 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2009, 03:29 PM   #72
lefthook89
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,743
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris ****** View Post
Dave Jr you might be afraid of a rapist who beats on women but I am not. I am 6'2 230. No man scares me, you might fear midgets like Tyson with a lisp but I dont. I would spit in his face and once he realized I wasnt afraid of him he would lay down like does when ever any other person stood up to him.
im sure you could, your also an olympic level weight lifter with a lamborghini gullardo with five or six brazilian women clinging to your nuts. see how easy it is to say things behind your computer screen? i think foreman could beat any version of tyson and this is coming from a fan of tyson! but dude be realistic, if you ever spat on tyson, he may realize you aren't afraid of him. but you would realize that you had made the dumbest mistake in your life after waking up from a 2 month coma and not able to eat solid foods. i know you hate tyson, but that doesn't mean you have to be a dumbass in the process.
lefthook89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2009, 03:32 PM   #73
IntentionalButt
Nash Equilibrium Debunker
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 128,802
vCash: 46300
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris ****** View Post
Of course all sane people would pick Foreman, Hell Tyson would pick Foreman. But I want to see all of the Mike Tyson fanboys come and say the Douglas who beat Tyson that night would of beat anybody. Or that Buster Dougals hits harder than Ali. Of course Ali knocked out Foreman, Bonavena, Lyle, Wepner, Liston, ect ect ect and the only person Douglas knocked out was Tyson.

I don't think one necessarily needs to be a Tyson fanboy to subscribe to the notion that Tokyo Douglas is a head to head nightmare. I think the fanboys are the ones who suggest that Tyson himself would beat Tokyo Douglas had he been motivated/prepared/zen/whatever.

That said, I think turn-of-the-decade Mike definitely loses to even this 'green" version of Big George.
IntentionalButt is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2009, 05:40 PM   #74
PetethePrince
Slick & Redheaded
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,395
vCash: 1200
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyJ74 View Post
He knew he'd get a big paycheck by fighting Tyson. But Tyson was on the comeback trail to get his title back. Why would Tyson fight Foreman? Foreman was not the champ? Foreman was not even a real contender. Tyson, the number 1 contender, fought Ruddock, the number two contender. That fight was big. Rarely do you have the two top contenders square off to fight each other to determine a rightful title challenger. Big props to Tyson and Ruddock for doing that. Foreman, meanwhile, was protecting his unbeaten comeback record by fighting guys like Mike Jameson, Terry Anderson, and a washed up, fragile, inactive Gerry ****ey.........Tyson would have gained nothing by fighting Foreman except a big paycheck. But Tyson was chasing the title. Regaining the championship was more important to Tyson than fighting George Foreman for big bucks.....I don't see what the issue is.....
There were 3 periods in time that the fight could've went down.

When Tyson was champ

When Tyson wasn't champ - pre prison

Post-prison When Foreman had a belt/strap.

You could make a case for each time. It's not like Foreman was very viable for the first two options. I can see how losing to a 40+ year old would be of large concern/embarrassment. But money moved Tyson. If you know Tyson, you know this. Tyson's desire and care for boxing post-prison is hard to decipher. He said he yearned the belt, he also said he wanted to prove he was the best. The opposition he went after doesn't convey that. He also said he was sick of boxing and didn't care anymore. The man was confused, but one thing seemed clear and that he didn't want Foreman. For whatever reason, even when Foreman had a belt/strap and even when there could have been loads of money to make. Why wouldn't Tyson be interesting in making tons of money in a superfight against an aging fighter? Fear? Concern? I guess taking McNeely, Bruno, and Seldon were far better choices? For the public interest? For money? Absolutely not. Foreman's viability is always there with the interest and the unknown, particular because of the stylistic matchup.

Even if Foreman wanted a big paycheck, does that matter? Tyson choose against it. That says something, at least, no? Foreman wanted Tyson. Tyson wasn't interested for obvious reasons.
PetethePrince is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2009, 07:58 PM   #75
AnthonyJ74
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,579
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The George Foreman who lost to Ali vs the Mike Tyson who lost to Buster Dougals

Quote:
Originally Posted by lefthook89 View Post
im sure you could, your also an olympic level weight lifter with a lamborghini gullardo with five or six brazilian women clinging to your nuts. see how easy it is to say things behind your computer screen? i think foreman could beat any version of tyson and this is coming from a fan of tyson! but dude be realistic, if you ever spat on tyson, he may realize you aren't afraid of him. but you would realize that you had made the dumbest mistake in your life after waking up from a 2 month coma and not able to eat solid foods. i know you hate tyson, but that doesn't mean you have to be a dumbass in the process.
Hahaha......man, that guy sounds a little in love with his so-called toughness....Being 6'2" 230 pounds automatically makes a guy tough and fearless? How? When did that happen? So, how exactly does that work? Do you become tough when you hit the 6 foot mark, and then for every inch after that your toughness increases by 10 percent? Or is it the 200 pound mark that must be achieved?

What a moron! If Vitali Klitschko were coming at this imbecile with malice and a desire to inflict physical harm, I'm sure he wouldn't be afraid...He fears no man! Not one! hahaha......This guy probably spends his free time flexing in front of the mirror, downing protein shakes, bragging about his bench press, and perfecting a tough guy swagger!
AnthonyJ74 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump






All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2015