Bob Foster Vs Roy Jones at LHW..Will Foster just expose RJJ and destroy?

Foster was 36 years old, at the same age Jones lost 3 consecutive fights to Tarver by ko,Johnson by ko and another loss to Tarver by dec. You're quite desperate about this aren't you?

 

I suppose you need to follow up my discussion with jowcol, whom the reply was directed to.

 

I just thought it was worth a mention that some thought Foster should have lost the Ahumada fight, so a claim that Foster never ever lost at lhw is kinda weak. But I think you again didn't follow the discussion that the statement you replying to was a part of.

 

I watched his bout with Aumada live. It was a disputed decision no doubt but you can't go back and alter the decision of the judges. Foster was past prime and retired right after that bout. It would be difficult for me to envision another lt heavy beating Foster in his prime aside from Moore or perhaps Loughran.

 

He didn't retire right after that bout. He was going to fight #1 contender (Conteh), but three months later changed his mind. Jones was also past his prime for Tarver and Johnson, does that stop people using those bouts against Jones' reputation? Why can't the same be applied to Foster?

 

No your post implied Foster was the recipient of a hometown decision.

I followed the discussion on both issues, as usual you are getting sarky when someone disagrees with you.And if you don't want others commenting on your responses , send them via private posts, not on public ones.

If you want to traduce Foster you should have mentioned Mauro Mina.

 

But it was you who brought the issue up was it not?
You who mentioned a past prime 36 years old Foster getting a draw with Ahumada who put Conteh through hell 4 months later. Others are merely responding and following the direction you have lead them to.

 

Difference is RJJ was brutally koed by these two while Foster had a draw with Aumada. Huge difference. No lt heavy ever came close to stopping Foster prior to his retirement after the Aumada bout

 

Me? It was the reporters and spectators, many of whom thought it was a hometown decision (both judges and the referee were from Albuquerque). Even local newspaper (Albuquerque Journal) was split the same way as the judges, one reporter had it for Ahumada, another had Foster winning by a point I think, and the third reporter had it a draw 145-145. Had it been held in another town it is likely that the official scores would be in favor of Ahumada.

 

Difference is Jones was a natural super middleweight, who began his professional career at 154 lbs, whereas Foster was a big light heavyweight his whole career. By that logic, Foster was in Jones' place whenever he ventured into heavyweights, and he was stopped a lot of times there even when in his prime.

 

I saw the fight live and the bouts decision was certainly disputed. However the official decision stands.

 

I said there should be a note to a claim that Foster was never beaten at lhw. I didn't lead anybody anywhere. Had Foster decided to go on with his career, instead of retiring, he would have an official loss as well, from #1 ranked Conteh.

 

Then again, that's fighting pedigreed up and coming youth. Giving up a ton in the age and reflexes department.

The Jones losses were to contemporaries and hardly spring chickens. No age advantage and there was hardly any physical mileage deterioration on Jones, as compared to foster.

 

The one thing to remember about the Foster Aumada bout was it was not universally called a bad decision. AP scored the bout 145-144 for Foster. So it was a close bout no doubt and with close bouts there will be those that score it for the loser.