Foreman vs. Schulz - How did you score it?

You mean it isn't easy to score if you're desperately looking to find a Foreman victory. If you try to score the fight for the actual winner it's not that difficult to score.

 

:bbb

Schulz landed more no doubt about that ...but Foremans punches carried much more weight...

 

No, I scored objectively 115-113 for Foreman who won the fight basicllay with his heavy jab. Schultz certainly showed a good chin and some boxing ability in there.

 

:verysad Exactly Brian.I was the biggest Boxing fan out of us,and after that i had to listened to it be derided.How do i defend it though after that?Especialy to my mate who knew he had just been ripped off.
That was a microcosm of the picture picture of course because of it came under major attack across the board after that.

Anybody recall the odds for Schultz?

 

I recall having it 116 to 115 for Foreman........ Foreman just scraped by Schulz.... Foreman took Schulz lightly.... It almost cost Foreman the IBF title but, in the end, I gave Foreman the nod over 12 rds....

MR.BILLhat

 

That's fair..........:thumbsup

MR.BILL

 

I actually thought that George won by a thin margin.
I scored it 115-114 in favor of George foreman.

 

Nothing like bumping threads from 2 decades ago eh?

 

I saw the fight live. I cant remember how I scored it but Foreman did not win that fight. I mean he won on the score cards but Schultz got the better of George no matter how you might squint to did George the benefit of the doubt.

 

Alex Garcia? He wasnt a bad HW in the early 90s but Foreman wouldnt have needed to pay him to lose - GF woulda smashed Senor Garcia

 

Schulz clearly won.

I actually rate this as one of the worst robberies ever not because it was the widest of misjudgings (it wasn't), but because there were levels to it.

Foreman-Schulz was the Inception of robberies.

1) Schulz only gets the fight because Arum bribes the IBF $100,000 to get the fight approved. Arum admitted to this in court.

2) The cherry pick gone wrong completely flips the script, wins the fight, only to get screwed on the cards.

3) Upon the IBF demanding a rematch, Foreman vacates the title instead (maintaining his ill-maintained lineal status) to fight Crawford friggin' Grimsley.

Levels

 

Contrary to popular myth, in no way shape or form did Schulz deserve the win in this fight. I viewed a high quality tape of the entire fight on the slowest motion setting with the volume turned off. That way I didn't have to listen to commentators Gil Clancy and Jim Lampley rave in awe for all those shots by Schulz that did not find their target. For the record, I had Foreman clearly winning rounds 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, and 11. 115/113 just as two of the three judges scored it. Even Larry Merchant, who in the past had poked fun at George, especially in the Holyfield and Alex Stewart fights, the former of which he called a "massacre" by Holyfield and the latter a "one point" win for Stewart had George winning here. Just because Schulz, an unknown who was giving little to no chance of winning and exceeded expectations does not mean he deserved to win. All that grappling and grunting by Schulz in close does not make his offense more effective. Schulz spent much of the fight circling and back-peddling. He was largely ineffective having to throw from a distance so when he did manage to land his punches lacked effect as they barely made contact. Foreman landed the more authoritative punches with solid jabs and body shots and the occasional but very effective uppercut.

 

If you ever feel screwed over at work having to do an extra unpaid hour or something, just think of poor axel....rightfully 2 time world champ but never in the history books!

 

It's a myth so popular George himself bought it lol.

If only he'd known that in ultra slow mo, volume free, he'd won clearly, maybe he wouldn't have dropped his title to avoid the rematch