Joe Joyce vs 70s George Foreman

Wow a 26 year old south paw Moorer was jabbing a 46 year old Foreman. You mean how Usyk out jabbed and bullied a 27 year old Joe Joyce? I guess you won't bring that up because it doesn't fit your narrative.

 

Um how is Joyce a monster? Wait because he beat shop worn Joseph Parker? Also you act like Joe Joyce has a great defense. Second Joe Joyce stronger than Foreman? That is why Joe Joyce was being pushed around the ring by 6'2 200 pound Usyk. Third Joe is taller than Foreman, he isn't more bulky. When Joe Joyce was 27-28 he weighed 220 pounds or less, he bulked up as he got older. If you want to use that logic Foreman was a 260 pound fighter because that is how much he weighed when he was 38 plus.

Joyce couldn't get Bryant Jennings a man he is taller and heavier than even though Luis Ortiz and Oscar Rivas did it but yeah Joyce is getting George Foreman one of the most durable heavyweights of all time out of there because you say so.

 

When did Joe Joyce prove did matter? When he was getting knocked out 3 times in the first round when he was a 27 year old amateur or when 200 pound Usyk bullied him around the ring? Gerry Cooney was 6'5 230, Jack O"Halloran was 6'6 240-250, Chuck Wepner was 6'5 225-230 and he destroyed them all. You know what else is funny? The best fighter Joyce beat wasn't 6'5. It was the 6'2/6'3 broken down Joseph Parker. So Foreman knocked out Ken Norton 6'3 220, Ron Lyle 6'3 220, Pierre Coezter 6'4 225, John Dino Denis 6'3 215-220, David Jaco 6'6 215-220, Should I go on?

I know what you will say but Joyce weighs more. Joyce weighs more because he choose to weigh more. Boxers up until maybe the early 2000's tried to be in the best shape they could be in. As I stated earlier you seen guys like Leroy Jones from the 70s who was 6'5 250 to 270 pounds but being fat didn't get him anyway. Guys like Lou Esa who sparred with Foreman was a legit 6'6 250 pounds and his bulk didn't get him any where. That is why Foreman choose to lose weight in his prime. He was 6'3 230 as a 19 year old and got down to 212 for one bout. Joe Joyce was 220 pounds as a 28 year old. You think Foreman back in the 70's couldn't just add weight? If he did any decent boxer would of picked him apart. Just like Usyk picked Joyce apart.

 

You want some more funny stuff? Here the compubox numbers from the 6'3 Joseph Parker vs Joyce bout. Joyce landed 308 punches but look at how low his percentage is. Even old Foreman was landing over 50 percent of his punches. While Joe Joyce is landing 36 percent of his punches against a faded Parker.

Also why do people keep saying Foreman has poor stamina? He got tired in 1 fight in his prime and that was against a Hall of Fame level fighter. Foreman went 10 with Gregoria Peralta twice. One time he won a decision and the other time he won by KO. Foreman didn't need to go the distance. He blasted everybody out quickly. Also do you honestly think Ali wouldn't box circles around Joyce? Usyk a lighter fighter was able to toy with Joyce.

 

You can't counter the truth. Just spin some old timey bull****.

 

Whilst it is clear that you are a bit dim (demonstrated over several years and countless posts), even you should know that your opinion is not "the truth". Thus, there is no "truth" coming from you to counter.

Parker's best win is probably a disputed decision over a then unranked Ruiz Jr, 6 years ago, since which he has been found wanting.

What else is there to say about him?

Very little.

 

What he did is still enough to be a better scalp than all but four of Foreman’s victims. Your silence on that truth and use of butthurt emojis speaks volumes.

 

So you are content to double-down on being stupid then. Well done.

 

What I thought. No names given.

 

Until this^ post, you hadn't asked me for names. But funnier still, is that it's clear to me you have no idea why I was laughing at your post, in my initial response.

Nor, it seems, can you even suggest the performance/s in which Parker had you convinced that he'd beat every opponent Foreman beat (save for Norton, Frazier, Lyle* [] and Moorer).

You've simply declared your opinions as facts and later described them as "the truth". That you can't understand why this is both amusing, while making you look ignorant, does not come as a surprise to me.

 

So emotional.

 

Are you? You might want to go and see someone about that.

 

The point is he looked awful up till the last round and Joyce has a far better chin than Moorer did.

 

From 1970-1999 if Joyce had been in his prime back then he would have won a title, certainly the WBO title if not a major title at that time, theere were plenty of weak title holders in the 90`s.

 

To which part of the post you've just replied to are you actually responding?

I do not mention Joyce's, but Parker's likely irrelevance in the 90s.

Nonetheless, perhaps Joyce should win a title (an actual title; not a plastic 'interim' trinket) in his own era, before people start speculating about which belt-holders he might have beaten in the past.