George Foreman (1991) -vs- David Tua (1998)…

You’re being pedantic. I was obviously alluding to lateral movement being necessary, rather than being a 250 pound mummy.

 

And you're ducking the question for the 3rd time!

Lateral movement is not "necessary" to beat Tua. Ike stood right in front of him.

 

And the idea of a geriatric Foreman being comfortable doing what Ike did is peak delusion.

 

Doing what Ike did? Standing in front of a short stubby armed opponent throwing power punches all night? That was right up Foreman's alley.

 

I assure you I could care less about you or plucking your post. You're simply a Foreman romantic and I'm here for the facts. As a last word freak I expect you to keep babbling but you're simply wrong. Again.

 

Briggs.

 

I disagree. Foreman lost the fight and Briggs landed more power punches by a large margin. Briggs was also totally winded due to asthma.

 

You wouldn't know facts if they bit you on the fanny.

Refer back to what i told you months ago. Life's too short to waste time on rumpers.

 

You honestly think Briggs won that fight? Do you remember how close you had it scored?

Asked respectfully.

I had Foreman winning by four points. In fact, I only know you and a couple of others whom DIDN'T think Foreman won that fight. Briggs seemed bothered by the broken nose early, and never really seemed to get off. Foreman jabbed him silly.

As for Tua, I think Foreman would lose a moderately close decision.

 

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/foreman-briggs-the-robbery-that-wasnt.663374/

 

JT, you're not aging gracefully and have become a true lower tier bore. I'm done with you.

 

No come-forward fighter in history is beating Foreman.

 

Foreman won it so decisively, even noneck had to give him a draw.

 

The irony.