conney was more a 6'5 than 6'6 guy, but if you say that he was 6'7 weighing 224 pounds he was pure bone, even weaker than i expected, worse for...
johnson was a master but foreman will catch him i have no doubt about it and johnson never tested a similar impact to the george's blows
at 235 mercer was fat, frazier weighed 209 1/2 in his peak against bob foster and looked perfect. mercer was in perfect shape at 220 at 29 against...
the precise definition was a croquette of shi7 but it sounds too hard
another bunch of **** post from you, congratulations.. gerry conney was a skinny 224 pounder in 6'6 of height, and probably physically the weakest...
25 pounds of difference? joe frazier weighed a compact 206-209 pounds in 5'11 of height in his peak (ali,ellis,bob foster) and conney weighed...
foreman did not rate liston in his top.3 hardest punchers... don't invent things... his top 3 was cooney,lyle and cleveland williams
like facing gerry conney why? because the height? or his glass chin,lack of strength, or poor weight for his height?
he would be a cruiserweight, if you think that a guy who weighed 209 pounds in his peak would be a hw today... you are dreaming, he was not...
please... a proved all time great warrior vs a nobody with crappy chin and a left hook... frazier eats him alive
70s foreman tkos evander ( who was badly hurt by bert cooper and bowe) and he brutaly destroys morrison
are you serious? foreman had a much better chin than cooney and was much better overall than cooney ,he was proved against an undefeated joe...
boy.. actually there is no debate.. your opinion is a croquette of trash you are the guy who said that ruddock would ko michael moorer in a single...
i also can cut and manipulate a phrase
i like more toney stylistically and i think that the hw version of toney at 217 who fought evander beats any version of jones
