Unjustified criticism of Fighters.

I can never understand this. It bugs me.
There was never a good time to face Duran in the rematch, because a year later he'd still be stuffing his face, and two years later there'd be another excuse.
Duran had enough time to prepare.

 

Yeah, it's hard to find a better example of a fighter either bring ignored or unjustly criticized because he's not liked.
He was an amazing talent.

 

Floyd could have beaten Mosley at LW, Tszyu at 140, Margarito at 147 and Pac in 2009 and he still wouldn't get any credit from a sizable portion of people on here. There'd always be an excuse or a loophole to discredit his wins :

Mosley - Weight drained, never beat anyone of note at LW anyway
Tszyu - Old, poor level of opposition, lost to Vince Phillips
Margarito - Slow and with a bunch of losses on his record to relative unknowns
Pacquio - Started his career at flyweight, got lucky decisions against Marquez and had already lost to Morales who were both naturally smaller than Floyd

 

Ike ahead of Morrison? Morrison won a WBO belt and beat Tillis, Thomas, Williams, Hipp, Ruddock, and Foreman.

Literally all Ike did was beat Tua in a razor close fight that could have gotten either way (mind you Tua never became a champion but was a resepectable top contender) and stopping a blown up light heavyweight feather fisted Chris Byrd. You are likely bigging up Ike based on his potential and not what he did in the ring. 2 good wins and no belt does not compare to 6 good wins and a belt, not in any universe.

Amateur accomplishments mean nothing in the context of the 90's professional decade. Ruddock beat Lewis in the amateurs and then got clobbered in 2 rounds when they fought as pros.

Maskaev had 6 wins and this "big win" you keep bringing up over was Alexander Miroshnichenko, correct? That guy mostly fight in Europe beating Euro level guys, many of whom had losing records. It looks good on paper to beat a guy like that with no pro experience, but that same Alexander would retire immediately afterwards. He was not ranked, nor did he have any belts. In reality it's not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things. No matter how you slice it McCall beating Maskaev isn't any better than Shavers beating a green Jimmy Young for example. It's great that Young and Maskaev would go on to do big things but beating them when they were green isn't a huge deal.

You have Olympic levels of mental gymnastics.

 

In some alternate universe Floyd did all these things and more and people will say he has no good wins on his resume.

 

You just pulled those Morrison resume “boosters” out of a trash bag.

He wasn’t on the level of Ike, Tua, or Byrd.

 

This is ridiculous. You can obviously have a list where you're unsure of the rankings because it's close.

 

Not if you want to push a specific agenda that involves glorifying Old George Foreman and Tommy Morrison and minimizing a knockout win over an undefeated, belt holding Lennox Lewis.

 

Which belts did Ike win? Which champions did he beat aside from Byrd? The answer to both those questions is none. Byrd wasn't even champ when Ike beat him.

Tua never became champ in the 90's. His best wins were Moorer and Ruiz. Moorer was old as hell and they fought in 2002 so that doesn't even count.

Byrd wasn't that relevant in the 90's. His best wins were in the 2000's.

You are shifting the goal posts and grasping at straws.

 

Im not being ridiculous. I know you can be unsure of the exact rankings. In my own list in this very thread I said I wasn't sure whose #1 of the 90's between Lewis and Holyfield.

NoNeck did not say he wasn't sure. He said:

He said flat out Foreman does not "deserve" to be in the top 5 of the 90's. Which suggests HE thinks whoever is at the #5 spot clearly has the better overall record than Foreman. And if that's his opinion that's fine. But when I asked him about it and asked if he thinks McCall or Moorer were clearly head and shoulders above Foreman he started back peddling as saying "dOnT pUt WoRdS iN mY mOuTh". I'm simply asking him to be consistent.

 

Foreman must have ****ed this guy's wife or something for all the hate he has for him.

 

Either that or he lost a bet on the Moorer fight.

If you'll notice I wasn't the one who derailed this thread. I just posted my opinion, a very short post that was less than a paragraph and he immediately zeroed in on it to have another long draw out Foreman thread.

This happens quite often.

 

Yeah I was just about to say that

Yeah he has a very worrying hatred for Foreman, and frequently brings up Foreman in threads that have absolutely NOTHING to do with him as he did yesterday in a Bobick-Stewart thread.

Reminds me of Chok and Williams to a lesser extent.

It's honestly sad.

 

George Foreman had poor stamina has to be the most idiotic criticism I heard about a boxer. Foreman got tired in 1 fight in his prime after throwing tons of punches and having Ali pull down on his neck. Now every time you hear somebody mention Foreman they mention either Ali beating him or how he had poor stamina. The second one would also beat about Foreman. How George had slow hand speed. Which again is dead wrong. Foreman didn't try to throw little pity pat punches like Muhammad Ali. He tried to throw power punches that knocked you out. That is why Ali got hit way more than Foreman did his fights against the same opponents lasted way longer. Would you want to go 12-15 rounds with a opponent and get hit over and over again or would you rather fight that same opponent and knock them out in 2 to 3 rounds while not being hit?

 

Duran said it was stomach cramps because of the chicken soup.