what do you guys think on who won? i've seen it, it looks close but i'm a briggs nuthugger so i'm takin briggs, i thought he seemed to hurt the giant more even though george had him backpedaling i don't think foreman got much accomplished in doing so, on dkp's website in briggs bio it states shannon landed 50 more power punches, i don't know how the scoring works but is that enough to outpoint steady jabbing from both fighters?
briggs won 3 rounds, Foreman 9. The fight's terrible result led to an investigation by the NJ Division of gaming Enforcement. It was one of the worst, and most obviously corrupt robberies I've seen.
I do think it's sad how Briggs's efforts in this fight have been totally downplayed and forgotten about...he was able to go the 12 despite some nasty shots from Foreman, threw just as many punches as George, and actually out-landed him firmly on power punches (it was George's jab that was the main difference), and seemed to genuinely hurt George with some of his shots. Despite all that, I couldn't give Briggs the fight at all. Foreman was accurate, controlled the ring better, and his jab was commanding. I thought it was 8-4 Foreman.
Yeah, I thought George won. George looked pretty damn good in that fight. He moved well, punched well, and he had a lot of stamina. He looked a heck of a lot better than he did against Alex Stewart. The only time I thought that Briggs hurt George was with a huge body shot towards the last 1/3 of the fight. But George seemed to control most of the fight! Not a bad way to look for a 48 year old fighter.
Exactly. Easily one of the worst decisions of the 90s, and among the worst that I can remember in my 30 years of following the sport. The boxing establishment wanted Big George to retire. I'm still kinda disappointed the planned Foreman-Holmes match never came off.
George outlanded Briggs in total punches. He won at least 8 rounds, maybe 9. He backed up Shannon the whole fight. He completely intimidated Shannon and broke his will. He had Shannon hurt on a few occasions as well. Foreman was robbed, and I hate using that expression. So often, someone will ***** about "robberies" that could have gone either way. In this case, though, the decision was clear-cut. Robbery was right.
briggs was suppose to be the future in the division at the time not a near 50 yearold george foreman but i think foreman did beat briggs by a point or 2
There was a thread recently about how alot of times people get emotional and jump the gun to cry foul and claim robbery over close debatable contests. This is a pretty good example of a No-Ifs-Ands-Or-Buts robbery. Not a close contest IMO. George won.
It was one of Briggs' best performances, no doubt - and even so he lost a very clear one-sided contest to an old Foreman, showing the wide disparity in quality between the two and serving as a pretty good indicator of Briggs' worth: in his prime, not half the fighter a weathered ATG was in his twilight.
