Prime Sonny Liston vs 90 Foreman

Williams had a glass chin and couldn't take what Liston dished out. Kind of how Liston wouldn't be able to take what Foreman would clobber him with.

Fixed it.

Well, Frazier is the toughest fighter Foreman ever saw, unless, he's talking about Ron Lyle ... unless he's talking about Cooney that is I guess that maybe Liston might also make the list of 107 toughest fighters Foreman ever saw.

 

He sparred Liston which is physical evidence that supports his opinion on Liston. The same cannot be said for his opinion on Fury

 

No, we just know that he SAYS he sparred with Liston. There's no physical evidence. None. Not a single one. We haven't seen the footage of their spars, we don't know how they went down, we only have Foreman's words to go by. It's no more valid than his words about Fury, both claims made by Foreman with 0 supporting proof. You are just biased as always. Either accept all this words or ignore all of them, don't pick when to do which when it suits you.

 

https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https://external-preview.redd.it/0Omrrh0HkOCnfUzlCj9g8L3kNCb2n1rVZb8s1ll_3HQ.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=fd10dba3148a2052c22791f59099d2252eeb2463

False equivalence. Fury and Foreman never got in the ring. It's a question of detailing his real experience vs Liston vs an opinion on Tyson Fury. What reason is there to lie about Liston giving him problems ? Why wouldn't he say that he handled Liston ? Keep grasping

 

As I pointed out, Foreman was a green fighter when (if) he sparred Liston.

 

We know they got in the ring, we don't know how the sessions went down or if Foreman's words are true. There is 0 evidence for that. Him saying Liston gave him issues is no different than him saying he wouldn't land on Fury, both are statements with 0 proof that completely rely on Foreman's own experiences as a fighter. You don't know if its true or not and there's no way to prove any of it, so either reject everything he says or accept everything he says. Stop being a hypocrite.

 

The fact that Foreman wouldn't be able to land a punch on Tyson Fury makes me wonder about the strength of his era

 

It's a false equivalence

Foreman didn't experience fighting Fury. We know for a fact he experienced fighting Liston, he detailed the sparring session and no bystanders said anything different. That's the physcial proof which supprts his opinion unless you can tell me a good reason why he would lie about such an event. The burden of proof is on you to suggest his description of sparring Liston is irrelevant and every other opinon is in the same frame as this one, since we know he's been both right and wrong on things before. This isn't black and white, so stop grasping at straws

 

But he still landed leather on Liston, is bigger and hits way harder than that "180 pounder" so why didn't he KO Liston if your example is relevant to his chin ?

None of those are describing technical attributes or how they did against Foreman in their fight.

 

So here's Markus saying that Foreman has no idea what he is talking about despite boxing being GF's profession for his entire life.

A green Foreman. Other guys seem amazing when they know what they are doing and you don't.

 

Did he fight Fury ? Yes or no.

Liston was old btw. He might have been retired

 

I guess Liston got lucky. Still doesn't change the fact that a 180lb fighter cracked Liston's chin, that Liston got stopped by light-hitting Ali and got flattened by no-name brand Leotis Martin. Call me crazy but I think Foreman hits harder than any of those, and indeed, harder than Cleveland Williams as well.

What those refer to is Foreman's way of bigging up his opponents and other boxers.

It is known.

It is a thing.

I like Foreman for it, it makes a refreshing difference from guys that denigrate their opponents.

But Foreman is the definition of an unreliable narrator.

 

Doesn't matter. That is his educated opinion on the matter.

Meanwhile in real life he would have beaten Liston down, and then called him the toughest guy he ever fought.

 

What are you even talking about, what bystanders? We wouldn't even know the existence of these sparrings if not for Foreman. No one else talked about it. There's no footage of it. 0. None. This literally did not happen when you exclude Foreman's words on the topic, there's no other indication of it much less any kind of proof.

YOU brought up this sparring argument first to prove Liston's power. Its your job to make it a legitimate claim. If Foreman's words are enough for you then Foreman's words are also enough for me on him vs Fury. That simple. You have no way of knowing which of Foreman's words are correct or not, so you either accept it all or ignore it all. You can't just decide to listen to him when he talks up your favorite fighters then ignore him when he says something you disagree with. His knowledge doesn't disappear when you disagree with him, either take it into consideration or ignore it all together.

 

He explained to the interviewer how Liston fought him and we know they sparred. He's talking about an experience in his past, not a opinion on someone he's never fought. So it's a false equivalence. Give me a good reason why he would lie about how the sparring went, otherwise I will take his word for it, because not every opinion is the same, and you're goofy for suggesting such