In hind sight, How should Frazier have fought Foreman?

The description of the 4th round does not say Frazier won the round thats the point,and you are smart enough to know it, so you are being disingenuous.
I found a counter article that gave Foreman every round and it was a ringside report.I thought I had posted it I'll try to find it again
Watch the fight , then tell me Frazier won 2 rounds.


The point of an AP report is that it is not a first hand report but a wire service one.Again you know that, so stop with the BS . An example of inaccurate AP statements can be viewed in any of Jennette's posts about his idol.

Bottom line.

"He also said that Lott told King that Cus sat alongside Tyson saying, "It's suicide against Foreman if you're short and fight a swarming attacking style like Marciano or Frazier," never figuring that Foreman could be a possible Tyson opponent down the road. He said that Cus said the only fighters who had a chance against Foreman were, tall rangy fighters who could fight him from a distance while moving away from him, and no way any swarmer could beat Foreman by going to him. "


http://home.comcast.net/~heavyweights/ForemanvsFrazier2.htm

 

No, it doesn't literally say the words "Frazier won the round" You are the one, being disingenuous. It just describes Frazier out boxing Foreman and doing exactly the same things that we said he did that made us feel he took the round.


Last time I watched it, I gave Frazier 1, 2, and 4. 1 is disputable, I know, but hard to give Foreman the round for getting clowned even if Frazier is fighting defensively.

Fraizer/Foreman II was shown on closed circuit television live, we have footage of it. Terrible

This content is protected

.


WTF? Ringside my ass, this is a modern fan who doesn't appear to be a reporter or writer of any kind, watching the fight, and giving his take. Get out of here. Stuff like this should have clued you in. :nut

This content is protected

 

My last post included a report that didn't give Frazier a round.
If Frazier had finished the 5th without being stopped no doubt you would have awarded that to him as well!. This is just silly barefaced bias.

 

What report? That link to some unnamed guy watching the fight in retrospect, you tried to pass as a live ringside report despite referencing things that would happen 5 years in the future. I don't care what he thinks about the fight.

I provided an actual article from the time that shares me and the other poster's observation. Not to source as an authority or indisputable truth but at least to show there is a genuine report that saw the same things we did.

 

Upon rewatch, Cosell certainly says "Frazier's best round of the fight! Frazier's best round thus far!"

But what does this mean? He had no problem calling Round 3, "Another one for Foreman." But he does not call Round 4 a Foreman round, instead he keeps it calling Frazier's best round multiple times.

Watching the fight, I have no clue how anyone could score this for Foreman unless your just a fan of missed jabs and walking into clean punches.

The big right hand at the start hits Frazier on the shoulder in the slow motion replay and knocks him off balance but Frazier comes back with a clean left hook. Foreman appears to feel it, and gets knocked back.

Frazier lands at least two more clean left hooks and gets in a triple jab directly to Foreman's eye and face which likely causes the swelling. Foreman doesn't land anything of note in the round, Frazier slips or blocks just about everything he throws. Frazier even closes the round strong with a loud thudding clean left hook counter that Foreman certainly feels.

This round shows what type of success Frazier could have against Foreman by applying educated pressure with constant movement. Frazier does totally exhaust himself with this round, at 224 and post-Manilia he just doesn't have the stamina to fight like this anymore for a full fight.

Of the four completed rounds, I think 3 is a clear Foreman and 4 is a clear Frazier. 1 and 2 are debatable.

 

Look the bottom line is Cosell at no time said,[ as you did,]

" I think Fraizer won that round". Your quote, your spelling


I'm not suggesting you lied, I'm saying you were wrong and it would be refreshing to hear you say so!


This is also what you wrote and it's ludicrous


"I had Frazier winning rounds 1,2, and 4. 3 was close but Foreman edged it".



Sorry if you really believe Frazier won 3 rounds out of the completed 4 you are watching the fight with the eyes of a Frazier Fan Boy and I'm no Foreman booster.

Find any reputable sports writer who states Frazier was in front at the time of the stoppage,if you can't, perhaps it' s time for you to examine how you read a fight?

 

No matter what the disagreement, the term "fanboy" is annoying. I've seen it used quite a bit on the internet for a long time and always thought it another annoying fad like "google it" or "It is what it is" or "old school". It's off the subject, but I thought I would bring it up.

 

I tried to pass nothing, I told you I would try and find the report I thought I had posted but have so far been unable to do so .You don't care about the fight period, all you care about is an agenda boosting Frazier, suggesting he was winning the fight by 3 rds to 1! an opinion that no one else agrees with. Once again your dislike of me distorts your judgement to absurd lengths.

 

Yes it is, and so is someone earnestly stating that Frazier had won 3 of the completed 4 rounds of that fight.
Another thing that is annoying is that when film evidence patently contradicts someone's statement and they refuse to admit it and instead try to wriggle out of it ,never once saying," yeah I was wrong there,my mistake".
That's inclined to **** me off a trifle.:good

 

Yes, you corrected me on Cosel's actual quote and I just addressed this and confirmed that you were right. How did you miss that?

I think it's ludicrous to award Foreman a round he got took to school in.

You can't find one that gives Foreman every round either. I produced an article that describes two rounds in Frazier's favor. Two rounds I feel Frazier won. That's good enough for me.

 

What are you talking about?

Your claim that Foreman was tagging Frazier over 25 times in the 4th when footage clearly shows Frazier slipping everything and clearly outlanding Foreman in the round.

There's even a slow motion shot of the BIG RIGHT hand you claim won Foreman the round, clearly hitting Frazier in the shoulder and knocking him off balance. And slow motion footage of Frazier nailing Foreman with a huge left in retort.

 

Your acting like a big baby.

You claim that I'm being dishonest and can't possibly give Frazier those rounds. Bull****. I've broke down Round 4 in particular, and explained my reasoning, I have an article that made the same observations.

Maybe you can explain why you feel so differently? What on earth compels you to give Foreman this round he was clearly outclassed in. I don't care if Foreman knocked Joe out and **** on him in the next round or the previous fight or would always knock Joe out, we are addressing this one round in isolation. Explain within the confines of this round, why Foreman deserves it and why I'm so wrong its insane?

 

Round 1: Frazier misses a left hook at the start. Foreman is throwing lots of jabs, uppercuts, and trying to measure with hooks but is missing just about everything as Frazier is bobbing and weaving and smiling at him. With 20 seconds left, Fraizer connects with a solid right hand. Cosell mistakenly calls it a good left hand. Foreman lands a good left hook as the clock winds down. Even round really, I lean towards Frazier because his defense and clowning was making George look foolish but I could see a case for Foreman winning because he was so busy.

Round 2: Lots of feinting, Foreman missing a lot of jabs but finally touches Frazier with somea nd backs him into the ropes but Frazier answers with a solid left hook. Cosell "FRAZIER WITH A GOOD ANSWERING LEFT HOOK!" Foreman connects a few times with punches to the arms with Frazier on the ropes, but he is still slipping and making him miss most of his punches. Frazier hits another big left hook counter that Cosell goes crazy over. Frazier knocks back Foreman's head at 1:10 with a jab/hook. Foreman hits a stiff jab but misses the uppercut. Foreman blocks a big left, and hits some short body punches but Frazier knocks him back with another jab/hook at :37 seconds. Another flush one lands at :24. And another:05. Foreman misses lots of jabs/uppercuts, some hit Joe's arms. Slow motion replay highlights Frazier's left hook. Cosell says "its' a Fight! Much better round for Frazier! but says never the less the unofficial scoring around me has it 2-0 Foreman" whatever that means to you. I disagree 2 being a Foreman round, he was aggressive and busy, but got tagged too much and missed too much. Joe landed the biggest and cleanest punches of the round.

 

The round you say Foreman, "got took to school in ,"the ringside press gave as even, and Cosell comments on it.
I posted a report that gave Foreman every round .
You gave Frazier three rounds, that is not reality.
Be happy in your own universe.:good

 

You never posted any such report.

I accept you can't defend your own stance or argue mine. Cosell saying "at ringside the feeling is the round was even" is hardly the final say on the matter or what you are trying to portray it as "ringside press gave it even."

Cosell calls a few things wrong anyway and is being really melodramatic. I would like to see the actual press scoring, and even than, I would disagree if everyone scored it even.

I challenge anyone to argue this as a Foreman round or even.