Briedis vs. 70s Foreman

You said "if he can take shots from Usyk and Jai, he can take Foreman's shots".

If you think Bredis is mobile enough to avoid most of Foreman’s punches and durable enough to survive those he ships, that's one thing.

What you actually posted, though, was that taking Foreman's shots are no more difficult than taking those of Uysk and Jai, albeit I understand why your inevitable response will attempt to argue that you meant something different to what you actually posted.

 

No, that’s not what I meant.

I wasn’t saying Foreman’s punches are literally equal to Usyk’s or Jai’s the point was about durability. If Briedis can take clean shots from those guys, it’s not crazy to think he can survive Foreman’s.

You’ve basically restated the real issue yourself: does Briedis’s movement and toughness keep him from getting stopped? That’s what matters here.

 

Again, you stated "if he can take shots from Usyk and Jai, he can take shots from Foreman". That isn't a cleverly selected quote from a wider post. It was your entire post. I would say the implication is clear, accept I would be wrong to do so, because you didn’t imply anything. You literally said that it is no more difficult to survive (take) Foreman’s shots than those of Usyk and Jai, which is obviously nonsense.

As you've realised it's nonsense, you're now claiming what you actually meant was that you believe a combination of Bredis's movement and durability would mean Foreman wouldn't stop him. If that is truly what you really meant, then my suggestion to you is that you post what you mean first time around.

 

He's running away from it because he got ridiculed and lost any semblance of credibility.

It's that simple. You know it, i know it, and he knows it. Heck, everyone knows it.

 

I do. Though I think your use of the word "semblance" is a gross exaggeration

 

Fair

 

A thing to add is that Briedis isn’t small at all as a heavyweight to that era, he’s around the same size as Norton, but he has a backfoot game and probably a better heavyweight chin as well (although we can’t know for certain as he didn’t campaign long enough at heavyweight).

I think he at least does a lot better than people believe.

 

You guys are doing the exact thing you always accuse me of reading way too literally into one line and ignoring the wider point.

When I said “if he can take Usyk and Jai’s shots, he can take Foreman’s,” that was obviously about durability, not me claiming all three punch the exact same. It’s shorthand.

I’ve already said the real point is that Briedis is durable, mobile, and hard to stop, so I don’t see Foreman just blowing him out as a given.

If you disagree with my take on the matchup, argue that. But this whole “you literally said it’s equally difficult” angle is just nitpicking instead of addressing the actual point.

 

There is no way to interpret - "if he can take Usyk and Jai's shots, he can take Foreman’s" - other than you are claiming that surving Foreman’s shots is no more difficult than those of Usyk and Jai.

 

You’re treating a bit of forum shorthand like it’s a formal logic statement. The point was about durability thresholds, not that Foreman hits exactly the same as Usyk or Jai. The real question is whether Foreman can consistently land and break Briedis down. If you think he does, argue that.

 

You're claiming that by:

"if he can take Usyk and Jai’s shots, he can take Foreman’s "

you actually meant:

"Bredis is mobile durable, and hard to stop, I don't see Foreman blowing him out".

Ok, I'll humour you - I reiterate my advice to post what you mean in future.

 

Sure, I’ll phrase it better next time.

The boxing point remains the same though.

 

Breidis has never been stopped, why are people so confident Foreman can knock him out when we don't know what it would take? Isn't his durability an open question?

 

We've seen him hurt before. Chuvalo probably had as good of a chin as Briedis and he still got stopped

 

How about Young?