Leotis Martin's KO over Liston. How much does it make you question Liston's chin?

Nobody has said he's "shitfaced drunk " the only person that has addressed that is you - weird, given that there are so many points left unaddressed by you in this thread.

Right. But what do you make of George Foreman's claims that he would "drink until he wouldn't remember his own name, in the camp for this fight?

The only "proof" you have produced to support your position is that he looked "solid", "scored a knockdown" and was "in shape". But Rob Steen says he was not in shape at this point of his career, and Foreman said he was pissed often in camp.

You seem to be saying that because he looked okay, this proves he wasn't drinking in camp - but as i've pointed out to you, there are lots and lots of fighters who drink in camp and look solid, or okay, or whatever.

What is it exactly you are trying to say? How much can you ignore and continue to repeat yourself?

 

Personally, I don't think those distinctions really matter. Obviously the earlier in the camp he's "drinking until he can't remember his name", the better, but trying to draw a distinction between "being an alcoholic" and "drinking in camp" is desperate and embarrassing. The whole point of his being an alcoholic being relevant is that it would call for him to drink in camp.

The point is, if the statement is true (and there's really no reason to think it isn't, Steen, Tosches and Mee all vouch for it), that drinking would hurt Sonny's training. Almost inarguably.

Well, you are wrong. That's a really stupid thing to say and i've been leading you, as much as is possible, to that realisation. I won't hold your hand any more: no, you are wrong, and your insistance upon this has been embarrassing.

If Sonny was regularly boozing during training he would be getting beat up in sparring and the fight would have been called off. I never heard sparring partners saying they had to go easy on old Sonny because he was on the sauce, I only ever heard of what a legend he was. I know Foreman has also said complimentary things about Sonny in training too and this contradicts the drunken training claims. Tyson drank, smoked crack, did coke and drank alcohol whilst in training for Trevor Berbick. Sugar Ray Leonard and Ray Robinson partied in the training period of many of their fights. By their own testimony.

So did Tapia and Oscar. They ALL looked good on fight night. Less good than they would have looked if they hadn't been using drugs and drinking in the run up to the fight (training), sure, but they didn't look like drug-addicts or alcoholics. Charley Burley went drinking the night before he thrashed Archie Moore. What you are trying to claim - that Sonny COULD NOT have been drinking because of how he looked on the night of loss to Martin - is utter, utter drivel.

And I thank you, in keeping with your character, for not bothering to answer and instead just asking me another question.

I am trying to prove that you are wrong, that you are dishonest, that you can't be trusted in what you say when you are talking about Liston (or Marciano for that matter) and that as a poster you are defined by your bias: it is only possible for you to believe one thing, and that is the worst thing. No matter how much evidence, logic, or purpose is weighed against you you will still try to squirm your way to a negative conclusion when it comes to this fighter - no matter how bad you look doing it. So far, it's going swimmingly.

No, we both agree with him completely above. Here, Foreman doesn't indicate that Liston is drinking during camp, but nor does he say that the drinking stops. Foreman says that a) Liston drank himself blind during the training camp for Martin and b) that Foreman would drink for a month (!) between fights. Both the binge drinking, and drinking during the training camp would hurt him enormously.

I believe both statements. You have literally CHOSEN to believe the one that agrees with your position, whilst dismissing the other one for not better reason than it allows you to run down this fighter. It's ridiculous behaviour for an adult male.

You have mis-interpreted the statement, for your own ends. It does not say what you are trying to pretend it said.


The first Foreman statement states directly that Sonny drank in camp.

The second states that he would disappear for a month and go drinking, then come back to camp. It does not say whether he was drinking when he was in camp.

But binge drinking, for a month, between fights, would be incredibly bad for any boxer, especially an older one. Even if your dishonest interpretation is correct the point still stands. Liston was hurting himself with alcohol, even according to "evidence" that you produce.

 

big of you. It is interesting to me that in your efforts to paint Liston as in shape for Martin you have been relegated to conceding both that he was binge drinking between fights and was also ill for the fight. I take it you now feel differently?

You are now actively "painting" Liston as a binge drinker rather than someone who drank in the build up to fights. Alois Stevens, who knew Liston, Rob Steen, a biographer of Liston and George Foreman, a friend and campmate of Liston all claimed he drank during camps, but you seem to a) dismiss this and b) draw the distinction as relevant but base it upon almost nothing other than you preference.

AND that is what is dishonest. You yourself have admitted to preferring to believe one of two statements made by George Foreman based upon nothing more than your preference. You have two statements to hand - they don't even really contradict one another. You have no reason to believe one over the other apart from that one is more convenient for you to believe.

More, you would only ever publicly select that statement. You are incapable of taking a fifty-fifty choice in favour of a given fighter because of your stated ambition to undermine him. That is dishonest.

Yes, Foreman is saying what a good fighter Liston is. What's the relevance?

You chose to believe the less damning statement.

Why? Really, why? Tell me why.

 

But i've ALREADY explained to you why this line of thinking is utterly, utterly ******ed. Mike Tyson, Sugar Ray Leonard, Oscar De La Hoya, the list of fighters who abused substances in training camp and looked good in the fight, looked BETTER in a fight than Liston did is long.

Listen to me carefully, and really try to understand: trying to understand the level of substance abuse a fighter engaged in in training camp by judging his performance is F*CKING stupid. It's really one of the dumbest things you've ever done.

Even if a guy turns in a 9/10 performance, how do you know he wouldn't have turned in a 10 if he didn't abuse alcohol? What do we give Liston out of ten? A seven? So he turned in a seven and you consider that that rules out alcohol abuse during camp, all together. It's absolutely ridiculous.

Yes, but your determination to put Liston in with Sullivan and the guys who drank between fights but didn't drink during training (is that even what Sullivan did??), as we have seen, is based on the worst kind of nonsense.

Shite, and this has been pointed out to you several times now in several different posts. Lots of guys abused substances and "looked good" whilst using that substance in camp. It makes no difference for the argument's sake whether or not he was addicted.

Thank you, doctor. For someone who previously defined a functioning alcoholic as someone who stops drinking for protracted periods, your coming on in leaps and bounds.

The thing about this is - you're not this stupid. You just pretend to believe things to help fuel your bias. It's bizarre. Not all alcoholics drink themselves to death. Yes, an alcoholic who doesn't die from alcoholism can absolutely be compared to someone who does, in everything but the fact that they died

And you clearly don't understand that distinction, or are pretending not to understand it.

 

There is a distinction between a binge drinker and a person who drinks every day, but that is not and has never been the issue, although that hasn't stopped you whittering on about it almost endlessly.

The question is, was Liston drinking or not in camp for Martin? There is not strong evidence either way, but what evidence exists points to a fighter who was indeed drinking during training and probably had been as far back as Patterson II.

wtf are you talking about? Jesus Christ, you don't even know what an alcoholic is. An alcoholic doesn't necessarily drink every day, at all, "a civilian alcoholic" (wtf) wouldn't. Your desperation to have me say "no, he's not an alcoholic because he doesn't drink every day" is doubly pathetic because by no standard is an alcoholic expected to drink every day. He might, he might not. A drinking day would be as bad as a hangover day would be as bad as a withdrawl day, depending. I'm surprised all your "personal experience" hasn't tipped you to that. Suffice to say that it's pretty clear you have very little/none at all.

No, you idiot, I am not saying "the odd champ took a night off to go drinking during camp and that made him an alcoholic?" Ffs.

I, very clearly, am talking about fighters who were addicted to drugs and or alcohol and turned in excellent performances. Mike Tyson, who was, by his own admission, using drugs but especially alcohol in the build up to fights. I am talking about Sugar Ray Leonard who drank and used cocaine, in his run up to fights. I'm talking about Pernell Whitaker who smoked ****ing crack during training for his fights. I'm talking about Shannon Taylor being addicted to ****ing heroin. I'm talking about Sonny Liston, who a camp-mate said "drank till he didn't know his name" in the build-up to Sonny Moore II and and Leotis Martin specifically.

You see, your claim that Liston couldn't possibly have turned in such a performance as he did against Martin if he was using alcohol is really, really stupid. You've assured me a couple of times that you're not a troll, that you wouldn't possibly troll, but the level of stupidity you're displaying here is astonishing if that's what it is.

This is proven bull****. In a wider sense, Liston didn't even abuse himself that brutally compared to guys like Tyson and Whitaker, based upon the evidence we have.

Your obsession with defining alcoholism (Which you have repeatedly demonstrated you don't understand) is bizarre, but it's also of absolutely no matter. The only question is if he was abusing alcohol in camp, and as i've said, he probably was. Who cares if he was an alcoholic? But as you're insisting upon lying about it, I will corret you.

You are either trolling, stupid, or talking about something you know nothing about with authority (Which is stupid). This:

"Drink problem yes. Alcoholic no. That's my opinion of active sportsmen who claim alcoholism."

This is proven nonsense. James Hunt went on what is described as "a two week round the hour cocaine and booze binge" before a race in 1971. He was ****ing and smoking drugs minutes before the race began. He won.

NBA boss Ron Artest was a stone cold alcoholic who couldn't even get through a game without a drink. He abused brandy at half-time in the dressing room. He was even an alcoholic by your standards in that he claimed to "drink every day." It was brawling under the influence rather than "poor balance" or whateverthe**** you said would be revealed by alcoholism, that exposed him.

George Best abused alcohol brutally, and by the end he was going directly from the pub and back again for Hibs games.


This bizarre idea you have that it would be "obvious" if professional sportsmen generally and boxers specifically were abusing drugs and alcohol is ridiculous.