Fights that looked fixed to you

Lol. “People who know boxing.” Thats hipster speak “anyone who doesnt agree with me doesnt know boxing.” Thats where good arguments go to die.


Yeah it wasnt a huge surprise, except to the odds makers and the vast majority of the public and experts. It wasnt a shock at all if you “knew” what you were looking at... you sound like Frank Lotierzos deluded ass, a Foreman worshipping moron who thinks he has some secret arcane knowledge of boxing that gives a higher guru like understanding of a sport that entails two guys punching each other in the face. Good luck with that.

 

Except just about everyone agrees with me. On viewing the punch and the replay, even the most casual of fans would likely recognize the impact of the punch.The hipster here is you.

It was a surprise, an upset. But not huge in historical context.
The odds for Frazier-Foreman 1 were wider.

It's ironic you talk of secret arcane knowledge, and you're the guy who's in the distinct minority believing and virtually insisting the win over Moorer was a "dive". Good luck with that.

 

Unfortunately for your argument I wasnt the first one to bring up the subject in this thread. The people who know about the bribes Foreman was paying just to stay relevant wouldnt agree with you. Your opinion is based on hero worship not on facts. If that limp wristed slow motion punch had been thrown by anyone else youd be question its authenticity too. But peopke refuse to believe that Foreman was as human as the rest of us. Congrats, you bought into the narrative you were spoonfed in the 90s hook line and sinker. Its good to see Foremans hard earned bribes paid off for at least one suckers undying admiration. Let me guess, you also think the Young and Ali fights were flukes...

 

Paying bribes to get ranked isn't the same as getting fighters to dive. And lots of bribes around rankings were taking place.
Exactly how much do you think Moorer was paid to dive then ?? What exactly was Moorer's motivation ? Why not just beat Foreman and cash in against Lewis or Bowe or Tyson ?

No hero worship here. Just common sense. See, I don't buy into any "narrative" or "fairy tale". Foreman was a mediocre fighter in the 1990s and he got a completely undeserved title shot against a mediocre champion in Moorer and pulled out a win. That's it. There's no need to glorify it, nor to build some elaborate conspiracy theory to explain it. Your cloak-and-dagger tale is as fanciful as the one that has Foreman-Moorer as some sort of miracle. It wasn't.
I was actually more impressed by 1991 Foreman against Holyfield, to be honest.

The punch was legit. Nothing limp wristed about it. There's nothing suspicious looking about it. The punch went straight through the target, which was Moorer's chin. If some people can't see that, that's their problem.

Foreman was human, yes.
He didn't need to be super-human to KO Michael Moorer, who was a very mediocre champion. These things happen. Time to get over it.

 

If that fight was a fix, they did indeed hook me good!

 

Its fight fixing. There are no two ways around it. Your defense of such behavior is sickening. If you pay a bribe to get a ****ty opponent ranked so you can get an easy, winnable defense thats fight fixing. And thats besides the fact that Scholz kicked Foremans ass and still lost the decision. Dont sit here and tell me that if they were so scared of Foreman defending a live body that theyd pay $350,000 to get some bum ranked that they didnt stack the deck in his favor with judges when most everybody thought Foreman lost that fight despite getting the decision.

Who knows what they paid him. Im sure it was better than what he expected to get in losing the title to any number of better HWs on the horizon. Thats how sweetheart deals are done and we rarely ever know the details of them. Braddock got a percentage of Louis for a decade after that. For all you or I know Moorer got a percentage of Foreman's earnings afterwards. Going into the Foreman fight Moorer got the lions share of the purse (and whatever they paid him to lay down). It was by far the largest purse of his career and the only "name" fighter he could have gotten that kind of a deal against. Against any of the other elites, including Holyfield who he had beaten, he would have been the B-side fighter and wouldnt have been able to negotiate a better and likely would have lost. Bowe, Golota, Holyfield, Tyson, and Lewis would have all beaten him and would have all been able to demand the larger purse regardless of Moorers title. So short of fighting stiff after stiff for peanuts Moorer's options were limited. And frankly how much does a win over Foreman get him? Foreman hadnt fought in over a year, was ancient, coming off a loss, and had yet to beat a legitimate contender in recent memory. He was unranked by the WBA when the fight was signed and was being callled on to quit for his own safety. So yeah, the best outcome, the most storybook and lucrative outcome for boxing in that perceived mismatch is Foreman pulling off a huge upset. I know I know, youre really smart and it was no surprise to you but regardless the vast vast majority of people expected Foreman to lose that fight. It was a latter day Cinderella story and like the orginal boxing Cinderella story it was a little too good to be true.

I dont think its an elaborate conspiracy theory at all. I think given the fact that Foreman was bribing people to fix fights for him its perfectly in line with what he was doing. The KO looked suspicious and was conducted by a guy whose entire career at this point was smoke and mirrors. Thats enough for me to question it.

It was a slow motion arm punch lobbed like he was tossing a piece of paper into a trash can. If you cant see that its your problem. I hope if you ever get punched in the face its by a punch that looks like Foreman's KO of Moorer. Youll come out just fine.

Get over the fact that I think the fight was fixed. You seem awfully invested for someone who has no hero worship here...

 

Must have paid Moorer extra for those 36 stitches to sew up the inside of his mouth.

 

If a fighter stands still to eat a punch and find a soft spot to lay down its not out of the real of possibility that the punch he gets hit with is going to do some damage. You understand that concept right? Sorry to **** off all you Foreman fanboys. LOL.

 

You likened it to tossing a wadded up sheet of paper into a trash can.

36 stitches is not a paper cut.

Which is it? Lollipop punch or he allowed himself to be clobbered by a seriously damaging blow? Try to be consistent.

 

Owens va pintor was fixed...now quit fighting yall sound like females

 

You make some good points and I wouldn't dismiss the possibility but McCall to be frank was an absolute nutcase both outside the ring and in it, you never knew what was going on in his head.

 

I bumped my head on a cabinet once just getting a can of peaches. It required stitches but didnt knock me out. I knocked a kids teeth through his bottom lip once in grade school when I accidentally hit him in the mouth while pointing at something. Dont be ridiculous and pretend that a cut mouth just had to be caused by a dynamite punch. That arguments reeks of desperation, grabbing onto anything to show the fight just had to be on the level. Like I said, believe what you want but to me that fight was a joke just like the rest of Foreman's comeback.

 

You should be more careful. You’re very accident prone.

Give it up. You contradicted yourself and now you’re scrambling.

 

If you need to tell yourself that Im fine with it.