The Louis that fought Rocky was not shot.

Ok I wrote fought when I meant BEAT. I have edited the post. An obvious mistake and I apologise to anyone responding to me in the hope that I think facing somebody you lose to counts for something.

 

Yes apart from Moorer. The guy he landed a title shot with after losing his last fight..

 

moorer was a capable contender at heavyweight who ended up champion probably only because of a funny turn Holyfield had in the ring the night moorer fought for the title. When Holyfield rematched Moorer it was a total mismatch. Moorer was no harder to beat than Cesar Brion. No disgrace really because Brion held his own with top fighters in his day.

nobody regarded George as the best in the world. No matter how amazed they were that he beat Moorer. George himself never believed he was the best in the world which is why he threw the belts away and did his own thing. They wanted him to rematch Schulz and he just split the belts up and fought guys your sister could beat. Crawford Grimsby.. a guy lasting one round with jimmy thunder who george could not dent in 12 rounds.

 

You can try and put any spin on it you like but you are just looking like someone desperate to disparage.

I just told you minutes ago that Ring magazine rated him number 1. I cannot make it any more simple.

1. George Foreman
2. Oliver McCall
3. Riddick Bowe
4. Michael Moorer
5. Lennox Lewis
6. Herbie Hide
7. Larry Holmes
8. Henry Akinwande
9. Jorge Luis Gonzalez
10. Lionel Butler

 

Of course he was rated number one AFTER he beat Moorer. They Had to rate Moorer number one when he beat Evander. I never said he wasn’t.

If Moorer had of defended against almost anybody from the actual top ten rather than dig up Foreman who had lost his last fight (and some thought had retired) then the guy he met would be number one too because I cannot see Moorer beating Lewis or Bowe or McCall or hide or Akinwande. Even Old Larry and Lionel Butler would be in with a serious chance.

I often wonder what would happen if George got Mcall and Larry got Moorer.

The thing was Foreman was such a novelty he was getting 5million dollars to fight anybody at all. so everybody wanted to fight him. George had the advantage that he was possibly the only non champion who could pick who he wanted to fight.

 

I mean, he looked great considering he was 147 years old when they fought.

 

You said nobody regarded him best in the world. You were wrong!!!

 

I agree with the OP.

A lesser Louis is still an excellent boxer, stfu and obverse the physics. Knock it off with yer bull**** that doesn't even attempt to explain causality and try to learn some basic high school level ****.

I know...say popular **** to me like I ain't hoid it and it addresses what went on in the ring. But Louis were old doe does not detract from his punch structure does it? But Louis were slowed doe doesn't detract from his timing does it? Since when was Louis a fast fighter any ****in' way?

I'd accept Joe Louis being a bad win if there was anyone talking about Louis boxing poorly but they don't. They talk about **** like who he whooped, how old he was, and what changes he made as he aged like that's an explanation for how to knock a man out. No need to worry about Mike Tyson right? Anyone one of us can whoop his ass, he's what 50? I got twenty years on the *****....Oh that **** doesn't jive huh? but when it's two pro boxers it does? Suck a dick, like **** it does.

 

Ring Magazine never thought old boy George was best in the world. They just had to acknowledge he was rated tops because he had the linear title.

He had the title but it bore no reflection of who was the best in the world. In that respect it was Just like when Savold was champ. Albeit Savold did not have the linear version.

Old George being top of the list without being the actual best in the world was not unusual. I imagine that was the case when Braddock was champ. Or when Leon Spinks was champ. I remember Michael Spinks being rated as the “champion” during the time Tyson had all the belts. There’s possibly hundreds of examples of the guy rated tops absolutely not being regarded as the best in the world.

George being the best example.

 

That's a lie, too.

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine's_Annual_Ratings:_1991
http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine's_Annual_Ratings:_1992
http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine's_Annual_Ratings:_1994

 

Joe Louis was never regarded as the best in the world during his comeback.

Foreman came back and regained the world heavyweight title. Joe Louis lost a title shot via one-sided decision and got knocked out by a rising contender. And now you're saying the best guy Joe beat in his comeback was Cesar Brion (Christ)

Fact is, you referred to George Foreman's comeback as a circus and said he never fought or beat anyone rated during his comeback. Those were all lies. George's comeback was more successful than Joe Louis' comeback.

George Foreman's comeback was one of the most successful in the entire history of the sport. He became the world champion again 20 years after first becoming champ.

That would be like Joe Louis regaining the title in 1957 via KO from Floyd Patterson.

Wouldn't that have been a big deal? Or would you just badger everyone saying "Well people really didn't consider "Old Joe" the best. They just rated him on top because he beat Floyd."

You're so lost that it's embarrassing.

 

This is exactly what im talking about. Everyone knows foreman was robbed against briggs and choklab says "officially, he lost. Look at the record". But then he claims foreman was given a "gift" against stewart, schulz, etc even tho "officially" he won, on record.

If that isnt an obvious agenda, idk what is.

And if youre wondering why i didny continue the other thread chok "choke artist"l ab. Its because u had the audacity to call Max Baer of all people a "scientific" fighter to suit your agenda. This isnt even funny anymore, u seriously have a problem.

 

the briggs fight- when the bell rang, briggs walked back to his corner, head and shoulders slumped. sat on his stool, head in his hands. he KNEW he had lost. even the ref was holding george's hand, ready to raise it. when the announcement came every one was shocked, most of all, BRIGGS! there is a photo out there that has briggs holding the belt, in the ring, with his name ALREADY on it. do they have two belts ready? (serious question) or is there an engraver ring side? so unless george won by knock out, briggs was supposed to have won, no matter what.

 

A prime Louis probably busts Rocky up big time, This old Joe wasn't totally shot but he didn't have it anymore that's certain

 

The governer and even the senator of the goddamn state investigated the fight. Foreman landed way more punches and was in control from start to finish. Anyone claiming briggs won fair and square is either an idiot or biased.

In choklab's case, its both!