Every fighter has an excuse when they lose. How is Janitor even remotely biased? Because he doesn't think Foreman beats every heavyweight in history?
Think you've got that wrong, a cautious Foreman was tagged and badly shook up by Lyle after trying to box sensibly. If he fought Lyle with the same mindset and intensity like he did against Frazier he gets Lyle out of there earlier. Foreman's speed is vastly underrated, go watch the Frazier fight again. I just can't see Louis with his plodding footwork escaping and surviving Foremans initial onslaught.
This is revisionist, dishonest bull**** of the worse kind. More reprehensible than that, it is outright deliberate lying to somehow support your unsupportable claim that Foreman was a natural 230 pounder. It is outright lying. Foreman's weights in ALL his fights. http://boxrec.com/boxer/90
this time is the last time i respond you,(even when nobody is talking with you,you are like a pin pom ball and the people ignore you)get mental help urgently and ignore me
Exactly, and that's Louis downfall here... He was always there to be hit and was about as slow as molasses in January with his movement. He's going to get tagged, and he will go down. Much less has dropped him.
If I don't agree with something you say, I will address it and rebut it. It's kinda how the forum works. It's like making a thread then expecting nobody to respond because you never talked to them. You're just angry because I backed you into a corner.
Both men were ATGs and I can see the logic in choosing either, I personally believe the Foreman of the Norton fight would have kayoed Joe. That being said, there is no reason for anyone to throw Max Baer into the mix. To compare the skilless Baer to Foreman is silly. Baer had not amateur background, George was an Olympic champion. Also, George would freeze up like Baer did. No one would have to drag him from the dressing room like his buddy Dempsey did. Also why do some of you think that Joe would fight this smart tactical fight and Foreman would fight a stupid one? Against a hitter like Louis, George would know what to do and how to do it. As for George's chin, I doubt very much, Louis or anyone for that matter could put more hurt on George than Lyle did. And George still got up to win. Could Louis hit that much hard than Ron did? He could hit faster and more pinpoint, but not sure if he hit harder at all. Big slow Buddy Baer knocks Louis out of the ring, the Foreman of the first Frazier fight, the Norton fight, or the Joe Roman fight does the same, plus 1000.
Foreman would be dangerous, especially early, but Louis was a far better boxer than George. People make a point of Louis's slow feet, but his footwork was better than Ron Lyle's and he managed to get in range to floor Foreman. I honestly think Louis weathers an early storm to break Foreman down anywhere between rounds 6 and 10.
Why this assumption that Louis needs to escape from Foreman? Louis was the most dangerous puncher in the divisions history, including Foreman. It wasnt generally a problem for him if somebody was willing to stand their ground.
That's just it though, it was a problem for him. He got dropped vastly more times than Foreman ever did. If you get dropped, regardless of whether you recover, it's a problem correct? I think you'd agree with that. Now, we can also agree Louis was dropped by much less than Foreman correct? So yes, I see it as a BIG problem Joe is there to be hit by Foreman. Also, the opposite is true for Foreman. He'd absolutely love it if somebody was there to be hit by him and decided to trade with him. He'd think Christmas came early. I like Joe and respect him immensely. Which is why I have him as the No. 2 most times on my HW ranking. That said, I think Foreman is just all wrong for him.