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 03-03-2008, 11:55 AM   #16
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,738
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyJ74
I totally agree with you. For all of Foreman's jocular, nice guy persona, there seemed to be a definite unscrupulous and shady side to the guy. I mean, here's a guy who based his whole comeback on the premise that he needed money to finance his youth center. Foreman would tell anybody who would listen how important it was for him to be heavyweight champion again, and that being champion meant more than anything in the world to him. So, what does he do after winning the title? He engages in a little shady dealing with his promoter Bob Arum in order to get an unranked "club fighter" a top ten ranking so Foreman could be assured an easy title defense. And then what happens? The supposed tomato can in Axel Schultz turned out to be a better fighter than expected, and in the eyes of most sane observers - discounting the three blind mice judging the fight at ringside - did more than enough to take George's title. So, honorable, nice guy, Christian George refused to fight Schultz again and instead chose to do what all fighters do who value their titles above all else: he allowed himself to be stripped!

I mean, what an unscrupulous phoney! After losing his belt to Ali in '74, Foreman comes all the way back and climbs that mountain again, and he just gives it up like that. Unbelievable!

As for Crawford Grimsley, he was definitely a step below Lou Savarese in terms of ability. I believe Grimsley was a former kick boxer before turning to professional boxing. But right after his fight with Foreman is when he got starched by Jimmy Thunder!
Calling Foreman a fake is taking things a bit too far. He did a lot of good work for the church and for the youth in his community for the better part of 10 years before making his comeback. Did he get a bit greedy along the way of his success? Possibly. But for the most part, I think Foreman is a genuinely good human being who certainly has done more for the world that he lives in than many of his boxing peers. Furthermore, as for your comment about him " giving up like that", do you not appreciate what it took for a guy to return to boxing after 10 years off and winning a world title at age 45??? He could have retired right then and there without even fighting Schultz, Savarese, Grimsley or Briggs, and no one but no one would have held it against him. I know you probably would have liked to see him go on a mission challenging Bowe, Lewis, Holyfield and Tyson fighting each one 3 months apart from one another, but in the real world of boxing we rarely get to see sights that are so pleasing to the eye.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 03-03-2008, 12:16 PM   #17
Sonny's jab
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

You wont find many Texan Christian ministers who dont have an "unscrupulous and shady side" to them.

Business is business, and Foreman was a businessman as well as a fighter. Foreman's not the only guy taking advantage of rigged rankings and corrupt officiating. You cant really blame the fighters.

Anyway, Foreman had to start almost at the bottom when he launched his comeback, he CREATED a growing interest in his comeback by knocking guys out, travelling through the backwaters of America to do so. He didn't just turn up from 10 years out with promotional leverage, he had none at all, he started out as small print, and small purses, not headlines and big paydays.

I've read Foreman's book and he's quite honest about the types of opponents he wanted to fight, and the slightly cynical nature of "good matchmaking", a theme he sees in his first and second careers. And he believes all champions and their managers want to risk the title as little as possible for most reward, it's business. Of coursen 1995-97 was beyond the pale, but I forgive him, just ignore those last fights, they were meaningless.
 Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 12:26 PM   #18
AnthonyJ74
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,546
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. magoo
Calling Foreman a fake is taking things a bit too far. He did a lot of good work for the church and for the youth in his community for the better part of 10 years before making his comeback. Did he get a bit greedy along the way of his success? Possibly. But for the most part, I think Foreman is a genuinely good human being who certainly has done more for the world that he lives in than many of his boxing peers. Furthermore, as for your comment about him " giving up like that", do you not appreciate what it took for a guy to return to boxing after 10 years off and winning a world title at age 45??? He could have retired right then and there without even fighting Schultz, Savarese, Grimsley or Briggs, and no one but no one would have held it against him. I know you probably would have liked to see him go on a mission challenging Bowe, Lewis, Holyfield and Tyson fighting each one 3 months apart from one another, but in the real world of boxing we rarely get to see sights that are so pleasing to the eye.
Do you not understand that Foreman was basically "given" more than one title shot during his comeback? Yeah, I know it took a lot of work for Foreman to return to boxing after a ten year hiatus and work himself into shape. I don't discount that. But you have to admit that George's "cause" was helped immensely by the fact that his popularity opened doors that should have only been opened by fistic merit! No way around that!

And I know George has done a lot for the community and has donated a lot of time and money over the years. I never said he didn't. But that doesn't change the fact that George was a businessman at heart, and his comeback sure started to smell a little seedy and greedy a long the way. And as far as George "giving up the title"! What else do you call what he did? George lost to Tommy Morrison and was rewarded for his "effort" by being "given" a title shot against Moorer. He wins unexpectedly and then is given a bum to fight in his first defense. When that bum turned out to be tougher than expected, Foreman is ordered to fight his "hand picked" opponent again in a rematch. And Foreman refuses! Let's talk about honor here for a moment. George is allowed to fight an unranked bum - a bum that all of a sudden got ranked via a $250,000 bribe paid to Bob Lee - and then George gets busted up in the fight. George lost and Schultz deserved to win the title. You would think George would at the very least give the guy another shot.....George asked for Schultz the first time. And do you not think Schultz deserved to have his hand raised at the end of the fight? Tell me where Foreman's honor and integrity starts and stops.....The line seems a little murky to me....
AnthonyJ74 is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 12:26 PM   #19
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,738
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonny's jab
You wont find many Texan Christian ministers who dont have an "unscrupulous and shady side" to them.

Business is business, and Foreman was a businessman as well as a fighter. Foreman's not the only guy taking advantage of rigged rankings and corrupt officiating. You cant really blame the fighters.

Anyway, Foreman had to start almost at the bottom when he launched his comeback, he CREATED a growing interest in his comeback by knocking guys out, travelling through the backwaters of America to do so. He didn't just turn up from 10 years out with promotional leverage, he had none at all, he started out as small print, and small purses, not headlines and big paydays.

I've read Foreman's book and he's quite honest about the types of opponents he wanted to fight, and the slightly cynical nature of "good matchmaking", a theme he sees in his first and second careers. And he believes all champions and their managers want to risk the title as little as possible for most reward, it's business. Of coursen 1995-97 was beyond the pale, but I forgive him, just ignore those last fights, they were meaningless.
This is pretty much how I see it as well.

Like you said, he basically started his whole career all over again rather than riding off his legacy of the past to get a few quick fix paydays. Of course Holmes would later do the same thing, but only after seeing Foreman's example. I doubt he would have launched a comeback in the exact same fashion had George not paved the way.

people here act like George Foreman was some sort of half ass TV evangelist who scammed the public. His battles with Holyfield, Moorer and Stewart were genuine fights, as were all of his others. Additionally, folks frown about how he selected Axel Schultz, Lou Savarese and Crawford Grimsley as opponents. What they have already forgotten in such a short time, is that at age 45+ Foreman was not supposed to be holding a world title and fighting 20 something year odl men with undefeated records. He was supposed to in theory be retired. Who gives a shit if the guy didn't line up fights with the most deserving fighters at 46 years of age? The fact that he fought Grimsley, Savarese, and Briggs were bonus viewings of the great George in my opinion.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 12:36 PM   #20
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,738
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyJ74
Do you not understand that Foreman was basically "given" more than one title shot during his comeback? Yeah, I know it took a lot of work for Foreman to return to boxing after a ten year hiatus and work himself into shape. I don't discount that. But you have to admit that George's "cause" was helped immensely by the fact that his popularity opened doors that should have only been opened by fistic merit! No way around that!

And I know George has done a lot for the community and has donated a lot of time and money over the years. I never said he didn't. But that doesn't change the fact that George was a businessman at heart, and his comeback sure started to smell a little seedy and greedy a long the way. And as far as George "giving up the title"! What else do you call what he did? George lost to Tommy Morrison and was rewarded for his "effort" by being "given" a title shot against Moorer. He wins unexpectedly and then is given a bum to fight in his first defense. When that bum turned out to be tougher than expected, Foreman is ordered to fight his "hand picked" opponent again in a rematch. And Foreman refuses! Let's talk about honor here for a moment. George is allowed to fight an unranked bum - a bum that all of a sudden got ranked via a $250,000 bribe paid to Bob Lee - and then George gets busted up in the fight. George lost and Schultz deserved to win the title. You would think George would at the very least give the guy another shot.....George asked for Schultz the first time. And do you not think Schultz deserved to have his hand raised at the end of the fight? Tell me where Foreman's honor and integrity starts and stops.....The line seems a little murky to me....
I don't think that it was only Foreman calling all the shots in terms of who he was scheduled to fight and who he wasn't. As for Moorer giving him an unwarranted shot at his title, that had just as much to do with Moorer's greed as it did anything else. Michael probably saw big $$ signs by signing to fight Foreman, and figured that it'd be an easy win. Hindsite tells us that it wasn't the case.

I find it unfortunate that people seem to overshadow the giant magnitude of Foreman's regaining the title with the fact that he fought a few underqualified fighters afterwards. It takes his accomplishment out of context and causes certain people to focus on the less important.

If this is of any consolation, I don't think you have to worry, because we'll probably never see another George Foreman again in our lifetime.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 12:36 PM   #21
AnthonyJ74
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,546
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. magoo
This is pretty much how I see it as well.

Like you said, he basically started his whole career all over again rather than riding off his legacy of the past to get a few quick fix paydays. Of course Holmes would later do the same thing, but only after seeing Foreman's example. I doubt he would have launched a comeback in the exact same fashion had George not paved the way.

people here act like George Foreman was some sort of half ass TV evangelist who scammed the public. His battles with Holyfield, Moorer and Stewart were genuine fights, as were all of his others. Additionally, folks frown about how he selected Axel Schultz, Lou Savarese and Crawford Grimsley as opponents. What they have already forgotten in such a short time, is that at age 45+ Foreman was not supposed to be holding a world title and fighting 20 something year odl men with undefeated records. He was supposed to in theory be retired. Who gives a shit if the guy didn't line up fights with the most deserving fighters at 46 years of age? The fact that he fought Grimsley, Savarese, and Briggs were bonus viewings of the great George in my opinion.
But boxing doesn't handicap for age. If a guy wins the heavyweight title, it's his obligation to be champion and defend the title. The rules don't change just because the guy wearing the belt is 45! If George didn't want to be champion, he should have just retired right after knocking Moorer out. It wasn't fair to the other legitimate fighters out there that the title was being placed on ice because George wanted to fight Tyson in a mega-million dollar fight. Larry Merchant summed George up quite nicely after the fight with Schultz when he said something to the effect that "George wants to be champion but he's not up to being champion"!

I could care less about his fights with Briggs, Savarese or Grimsley. George wasn't champion then, so those fights don't mean a thing. He could have fought Pee-Wee Herman if he liked. But when George had the belt, he disgraced the belt and he disgraced the sport by his shameful actions. That's all! I'm sure George is a great guy, but his actions during his championship reign speak loud and clear.
AnthonyJ74 is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 12:38 PM   #22
AnthonyJ74
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,546
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. magoo
I don't think that it was only Foreman calling all the shots in terms of who he was scheduled to fight and who he wasn't. As for Moorer giving him an unwarranted shot at his title, that had just as much to do with Moorer's greed as it did anything else. Michael probably saw big $$ signs by signing to fight Foreman, and figured that it'd be an easy win. Hindsite tells us that it wasn't the case.

I find it unfortunate that people seem to overshadow the giant magnitude of Foreman's regaining the title with the fact that he fought a few underqualified fighters afterwards. It takes his accomplishment out of context and causes certain people to focus on the less important.

If this is of any consolation, I don't think you have to worry, because we'll probably never see another George Foreman again in our lifetime.
I'm only grilling Foreman for his championship reign; the fights against Savarese, Briggs, and Grimsley were fought when George didn't have the title.
AnthonyJ74 is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 02:42 PM   #23
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,738
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyJ74
I'm only grilling Foreman for his championship reign; the fights against Savarese, Briggs, and Grimsley were fought when George didn't have the title.
I suppose you're right.

It would have done the boxing world a better justice if George had just retired after beating Michael Moorer.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 02:53 PM   #24
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 22,251
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisPontius
Grimsley wasn't challenging Foreman, George was paying $250.000 to the sanctioning body to be allowed to fight a relative nobody for whatever title he still had left. Foreman pretty much disgraced the title. As for Crawford going 12, outside of Moorer, who didn't? Comebacking Foreman was hardly the puncher he used to be. Nearly every good fighter went the distance with him. Even the glass chinned Morrison.
I,d agree Foreman was not the monster he had been, but Gerry Cooney thought he hit hard!
mcvey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 03:07 PM   #25
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,738
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Foreman's win over Lou Savarese is underrated in my opinion. Savarese was a 6'5" 230 LB guy who was a 36-0 professional. He was coming off of a knockout win over Buster Mathis Jr. and holding the USBA title. If you ask me, there were worse guys he could have fought at 47 years old, or whatever he was at the time.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 03:22 PM   #26
Russell
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,532
vCash: 118
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Savarese is a bit underrated in general.

Have to figure he was one of the 90's juicers as well. His latter day case of gyno kind of proves that in my eyes.
Russell is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 06:12 PM   #27
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,738
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russell
Savarese is a bit underrated in general.

Have to figure he was one of the 90's juicers as well. His latter day case of gyno kind of proves that in my eyes.
Hindsite tells us that he wasn't a particularly great fighter, as shown in some of the performances following the Foreman fight. At the time however, he was a big heavyweight undbeaten in 36 fights and holding a minor belt. I can think of lineal champions who have given title shots to worse fighters, and Foreman at 47, wasn't even the actual champ at the time.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 06:27 PM   #28
Russell
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,532
vCash: 118
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Yeah, he wasn't amazing...

He was better than some of the people Foreman gets faulted for fighting early on, like Mike Jameson, who used to be Tyson's human punching bag in sparring.
Russell is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 09:23 PM   #29
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,738
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Foreman versus Crawford Grimsley

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russell
Yeah, he wasn't amazing...

He was better than some of the people Foreman gets faulted for fighting early on, like Mike Jameson, who used to be Tyson's human punching bag in sparring.
I'd say he was also as good or better than a lot of the fighters that Larry Holmes and Joe Louis gave title shots to. I don't think that a 36-0 guy would quite make any bum of the month clubs.
mr. magoo 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 01:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013