George Foreman vs. Ray Mercer in 1995

:good

 

-That was my point.

-This just reads as a random Tyson diss that has nothing to do with my comment. Two completely different types of fights and fighters, even a different Holyfield.

 

I made an observation that basically addressed all the comments about Holyfield "rocking" Foreman. You responded assuming that it was meant only for you. I tried to elaborate. Now you accuse me of random dissing. Let's just drop it.....

 

I still don't see how you really addressed my comment at all.

It was certainly a random attempt at a diss on Tyson, especially the last bit. I'm not sure how else to read into that.

 

Willy Lump Lump: go ahead and use google on yee world wide web.

Hey, I'm a fan of your boy Foreman...I just think he gets beaten by Mercer, who at this stage (1995) was better than Schultz.

 

If that's what you insist it was, then have it your way. :good

 

You obviously don't read posts..

 

Ha! Whatever you say...

 

If you want to take Foreman lasting 12 and Tyson getting stopped on his feet in the 11th as a moral victory, go ahead. Evander beat the crap out of both of them. The major difference is Foreman fought a far more conservative fight and protected himself better with his cross armed defense while Tyson stayed aggressive and got caught square on the chin lunging inside late in the fight. Flies to Bee Stings, it is not.

 

We're never going to agree on this topic no matter what points either of us put forth.

But from my perspective and mine alone, a 42 year old man who's career was divided by 10 years of inactivity, and going 12 rounds against a 28 years old ATG in the peak of his prime without going down, as opposed to a 30 year old man given even ods against a much OLDER and deteriorated version of that same great and getting hammered pillar to post enroute to a stoppage = flys to bee stings comparison.. Sorry for the run on sentence....

 

Well, I was talking Holyfield and Foreman, and you dragged Tyson back into this.

It has everything to do with Old Foreman fighting a conservative, risk free style that proteced his chin and stamina. He took lots of face damage, but rarely got hit on the button reaching out or stepping into something big he didn't see coming. He would go into a shell, plant his heavy legs, and use those big arms to guard his chin, while picking his shots carefully as his man came to him. With his short stature and reach, Tyson could never fight that way.

 

Oh I know how this all started now.... Go back to page six and read Anthony's response which was to ME and then read the comments that followed, which you eventually latched onto... EDIT: It actually began on page five, but I responded to him on page six. bare with me on this Mongoose, we'll get to the bottom of this!!!!!!

 

Holyfield hurt Foreman badly with a well-placed right cross at the end of the 9th round. Foreman was seriously hurt; he pitched forward, sunk towards the ropes, and Holyfield pounced on him with a volley of punches. If that round had been 15 or 20 second longer..........!

Foreman was seriously wobbled at the end of the 3rd round as well.

 

well if alex stewart butchered foremans face in 92.....you could imagine what ray mercers ramrod jab woulda done to foremans face circa 1995.......perhaps in 91 foreamn woulda beaten a very green mercer ...but not a 45 yr old foreman

 

And still a 48 year old foreman was good enough to whoop two undefeated lions , savarese and briggs two years later.....come on now..