Best I've faced: George Chuvalo

As Cam Newton said (with apologies to Vince Lombardi)

"You show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser."

 

Well, Chuvalo showed me he was a bad loser and he was still a loser.

Its bull**** because Chuvalo always wants to put himself on the level of better fighters by lying and insinuating he was cheated, robbed, or that extentuating circumstances prevented his victory when in truth he has two good wins on his record, one against a LHW, and one that was a 1/100 fluke in a fight in which he lost every round and had his face rearranged like quasimodo. To not give those guys credit does him no service and makes him look like a deluded moron.

 

I knew klompton would be here making excuses for his boy Quarry's loss to Chuvalo. Every time.

 

All credit to Chuvalo for his toughness and all, but I do tire of his constant self-congratulatory thing. For a guy who lost every big fight he was ever in, he sure accomplished a lot. Just ask him.

 

I couldn't help but notice the omission of Oscar Bonavena's name from Chuvalo's list....not even a mention of the guy's name. After all, I believe that at least ONE of those two trips to the canvas in their 1966 10 rounder was a genuine kd,....that would be for honorable mention for "hardest puncher",...plus, Oscar seemed every bit as strong, if not stronger than George in that bout...at least vying with Foreman in that category.

 

Agree with this.

This "Best I've faced series" should be taken with a grain of salt since their best opponents almost always are someone they beat and not the ones they lost to. I think Foreman named Lyle as his best opponent ffs. At least Chuvalo doesn't lose his head like that.

Mainly, I think these are interesting because of the details the fighters give when they talk about the fights. About the characteristics of their opponents. That's where their first-hand experience and knowledge really shines.

 

TBH ,I think he has made valid points.

 

good insight from one who knows but gives himself too much credit

"I had him" is nonsense. it was one way traffic

 

Saw now you are putting down Chuvalo, I am sure you heard of McCarthyism, yours is Klumpism it sounds a lot like mcarthyism, until he was put in his place by another Senator. He was talking about Mccarty but I will just insert klump. klump "Have You No Sense of Decency" At long last, have you left no sense of decency?
"Little did I dream you could be so reckless and so cruel as to do an injury to decent fighters. If it were in my power to forgive you for your reckless cruelty, I would do so. I like to think I'm a gentle man, but your forgiveness will have to come from someone other than me.
A renowned historian such as yourself should have an unbiased interpretation of history and not inject your spiteful klumpism's into it. I have a cure for you go to your favorite drug store and get some 'Midol'. You've been down on Dempsey, Archer, Carter, now Chuvalo and God knows who else. Give it a rest. Chuvalo, fought whoever they put in front of him and always tried his best. You always come up with your klumpism's to "prove" your point to yourself. or to fit your agenda. Another klumpism used as fact, by klump, Tiger and Carter, referred to Archer as chicken excrement. Tiger was a gentleman, I knew him back then and I cant even imagine Tiger calling Archer chickenshyt. You act as it was a secret that Archer was a boxer who specialized in not getting hit and with a good jab. Both knew what they were facing it was no surprise. The only surprise is why you would say that even a know nothing must know, fighters then and now prepare to fight what is in front of them. Now it's starting to make sense your conspiracy theory of the archer mob, consisting of the entire Garden cartel and the NY boxing commission, zack Clayton especially, they conspired not only to fool the fighters who had handcuffs on and the stupid fans who paid for the distinct pleasure of being bored to death by Archer's stinking boring style, not only once but a number of times. But cos of Archer's whining they threw away the millions and the title and instead got Archer beat. Good job exposing the corruption between your ears.

 

Well said.

 

I think you are right. Like Lennox Lewis losing to "lucky" punches, for instance. Fighters have so much pride that they rarely admit their opponents were better; it's the warrior mindset.

 

Depends on your perspective. Yes he may have been a fringe fighter who lost to the likes of Ali, Foreman, Frazier and others in that league, but in terms of accomplishments he probably exceeded about 90%+ of the those who try to become professional boxers.

If I was deemed to be in the top 10% of my profession I'd be prouder than hell.

 

:scaredas:

 

damn rights...