Why did the Judges rob George Foreman in his fight vs Briggs?

I love George but he was making a real pain in the ass out of himself. He was still the "linear" champ and fighting guy like Schultz and Grimley, sometimes winning controversially.

I think they just wanted to retire him for good.

Also, I know it is hard to believe now, but there was a HUGE hype around Briggs as the next big thing, coming from the same area as Tyson and Bowe.

 

I thought Foreman won, but narrowly. A different eye might genuinely have had Briggs winning.

 

same reason holyfield got robbed vs the giant. They wanted to force them to retire.

 

Quite a while ago to be fair. Guess I could rewatch

 

George smiled and wave his hand. It's a good thing, to only be robbed once in your career, when you are 48.

 

It's when the powers want their way and through force get you to leave the game. George wasn't the first n won't be the last if you see the judging these days theyre even more ruthless about it

 

If the powers that be were conspiring against foreman, then why did he get the close somewhat controversial decisions against scultz and savarese? I think he lost one or both of those fights.

Foreman was a boon to boxing and made the powers that be lots of money. I think it was just a bad decision.

That said, he was just letting belts go instead of fulfilling mandatories and his second career was very controlled in terms of who he fought and when. Like foreman was not fighting Lennox period. So I could see the sanctioning bodies being frustrated with him for holding the lineal title while not being beholden to the sanctioning bodies.

 

He lost the Schultz fight for sure imho.

 

Me too, seems like I had George winning by a couple of points and I recall being surprised when Briggs got the nod.

 

Foreman didn´t lose the Briggs fight, but he didn´t win the Schultz fight either, so what goes around comes around.