How good was Foreman`s performance v Cooney?

If someone of your capabilities is telling me i know nothing then lets just say i feel very very very good about myself

I wouldn't expect you to understand much of my post to be perfectly honest even as simple as i made it.

 

This is exactly how I’d expect you to respond lol.

 

In a way, I agree. If you fought Ali, your status as a fighter gets automatically elevated. Doubly so if you happened to beat him. It's the Ali Effect.
The era was great because you had Ali, Frazier, Norton and Foreman all fighting each other and creating history. I love the era, but it gets blown out of proportion for me.
There was a massive drop-off in competitiveness, once you take those guys out of the equation. The 80's and 90's had a deeper talent pool.
So if anyone wants to challenge the established narrative, go ahead. I'm all ears.
It beats reading the same old story year after year.

 

Amazing. Been on the forum 5 minutes and not only do you know everything about boxing but you can read minds as well

You've been clamoring for days for someone to refute you and when it happens you've got nothing.

Luv it.

 

Being on this forum has nothing to do with knowing boxing, you refute little (if at all ) repeating the same fan boy narrative over and over again, go back through my posts read what I say and move on I’ve answered most of your questions already lol you don’t need me to explain myself if you’re not gonna change your mind.

Does it annoy you I have a different opinion to you? That I “Disregard” fighters by stating facts?

 

Ali was great, Norton was not, Joe had a very shallow resume outside one win (Something we critique Bowe for a lot) and I just think Foreman was a byproduct of very good managing I mean look how Jimmy Young performed against all of them (excluding Joe obviously) either he was great or they simply were not as good as we thought, there’s nothing wrong with that it is how it is.

Ali was overweight yes and far from his best days I excuse him, but did you see the Norton and Foreman fights?

 

I have no worries with different perspectives but they have to have a solid base and be reasonably unbiased.

Your facts are often not "facts" at all, well Mendoza facts maybe. Dismissing Frazier as a small come forward fighter who made his name off Ali is anything but a fact. He cleaned house in Ali's absence and was kicking butt from 67-73.

Labeling Lyle as nothing but a "crude slugger" is also understating him. I've already done Norton.

Gazelle straightened you out on a lot of stuff but it fell on deaf ears. This is why i didn't want to address you originally and here you are trying to throw that back.

It's blatantly obvious that you just want to take down the era and are viewing it as negatively as possible. As i said that's easy with just about any era.

 

It's a topic that deserves it's own thread really. It's been done before, years ago. Something about the '70's and the cycle of overratedness.'
It was a good era, no denying it. I do feel that it's been romantized too much though.
Anyway, for me a topic for another time...

 

The 80s weren’t close talent wise...imo. Although I agree 70s gets way blown out of proportion. Although having men like Foreman and Holmes compete in the 90s is a staple to the era they fought in.

 

Just putting words in my mouth and assuming sh1t as always lol.

 

Well it's all back there in previous pages but I've wasted way too much time already which i actually knew and said from the start. That's very definitely on me.

Adios.

 

Cute

 

List is void because a guy with three successful title defenses, one against a cruiserweight and one by robbery, is in the top 5.

 

No one, except perhaps Sonny Liston, would have done it anyway.