Re: Main Reason there was no Ali-Foreman II?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimanuel Boogustus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I just watched Round 1 again and a lot of the damage in that fight took place there and then. Ali hit George several times with left/right combinations and his right hand leads had George confused. Nobody had done that to George before. George was puffy around the left eye by round 2, he look bewildered. Ali knew he had his man early on in the fight, it was only a matter of time. George only had one basic plan and that was to load up and swing from the bleechers, by round 8 Foreman's tank was empty.
George states he was psychologically damaged after the Ali fight, Ali was never the same either after the Thriller In Manilla. Perhaps it's best we didn't see them go at it again.
How would Holmes have handled a 30 year old more experienced big George in 1979?
Foreman was a beast, tamed by one of the greatest ring tacticians of all time.
Good question about George v Holmes that would be really interesting. I would go with Holmes.
That is my all time favorite fantasy match up. I go with Holmes too. Would of done his legacy the world of good.
I think Holmes beats all those guys from the 60's/ 70's.
Not Ali but may be Frazier, now that would be a classic Holmes v Frazier.
I think Frazier gives Holmes as much trouble as he gave ALI, Holmes probably would have outboxed big George. Holmes possessed one of the best jabs in boxing history, it would only be a matter of staying away from Foreman's big shots. (easier said than done) A 30 yr old experienced big George would have been a formidable foe, but Holmes by decision. Frazier would be a nightmare for Holmes, all those angles, all that movement and that left hook!
Holmes not only had the best jab ever of the heavyweight greats he also had an amazing chin and recovery powers. I think that would have helped him survive and beat Frazier. It would have been a a hell of a fight.
Re: Main Reason there was no Ali-Foreman II?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimanuel Boogustus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I just watched Round 1 again and a lot of the damage in that fight took place there and then. Ali hit George several times with left/right combinations and his right hand leads had George confused. Nobody had done that to George before. George was puffy around the left eye by round 2, he look bewildered. Ali knew he had his man early on in the fight, it was only a matter of time. George only had one basic plan and that was to load up and swing from the bleechers, by round 8 Foreman's tank was empty.
George states he was psychologically damaged after the Ali fight, Ali was never the same either after the Thriller In Manilla. Perhaps it's best we didn't see them go at it again.
How would Holmes have handled a 30 year old more experienced big George in 1979?
Foreman was a beast, tamed by one of the greatest ring tacticians of all time.
Good question about George v Holmes that would be really interesting. I would go with Holmes.
That is my all time favorite fantasy match up. I go with Holmes too. Would of done his legacy the world of good.
I think Holmes beats all those guys from the 60's/ 70's.
Not Ali but may be Frazier, now that would be a classic Holmes v Frazier.
I think Frazier gives Holmes as much trouble as he gave ALI, Holmes probably would have outboxed big George. Holmes possessed one of the best jabs in boxing history, it would only be a matter of staying away from Foreman's big shots. (easier said than done) A 30 yr old experienced big George would have been a formidable foe, but Holmes by decision. Frazier would be a nightmare for Holmes, all those angles, all that movement and that left hook!
Holmes not only had the best jab ever of the heavyweight greats he also had an amazing chin and recovery powers. I think that would have helped him survive and beat Frazier. It would have been a a hell of a fight.
Holmes was tough, i just watched the Shavers knockdown, now if big George hits him like that what happens? I miss the 70's and all the great Heavyweights that were around then. Holmes deserves more credit than he gets, he would have made Lewis look foolish.
Re: Main Reason there was no Ali-Foreman II?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimanuel Boogustus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I just watched Round 1 again and a lot of the damage in that fight took place there and then. Ali hit George several times with left/right combinations and his right hand leads had George confused. Nobody had done that to George before. George was puffy around the left eye by round 2, he look bewildered. Ali knew he had his man early on in the fight, it was only a matter of time. George only had one basic plan and that was to load up and swing from the bleechers, by round 8 Foreman's tank was empty.
George states he was psychologically damaged after the Ali fight, Ali was never the same either after the Thriller In Manilla. Perhaps it's best we didn't see them go at it again.
How would Holmes have handled a 30 year old more experienced big George in 1979?
Foreman was a beast, tamed by one of the greatest ring tacticians of all time.
Good question about George v Holmes that would be really interesting. I would go with Holmes.
That is my all time favorite fantasy match up. I go with Holmes too. Would of done his legacy the world of good.
I think Holmes beats all those guys from the 60's/ 70's.
Not Ali but may be Frazier, now that would be a classic Holmes v Frazier.
I think Frazier gives Holmes as much trouble as he gave ALI, Holmes probably would have outboxed big George. Holmes possessed one of the best jabs in boxing history, it would only be a matter of staying away from Foreman's big shots. (easier said than done) A 30 yr old experienced big George would have been a formidable foe, but Holmes by decision. Frazier would be a nightmare for Holmes, all those angles, all that movement and that left hook!
Holmes not only had the best jab ever of the heavyweight greats he also had an amazing chin and recovery powers. I think that would have helped him survive and beat Frazier. It would have been a a hell of a fight.
Holmes was tough, i just watched the Shavers knockdown, now if big George hits him like that what happens? I miss the 70's and all the great Heavyweights that were around then. Holmes deserves more credit than he gets, he would have made Lewis look foolish.
Lets not get out of control here...Lennox Lewis holds his own and beats most of the past pound for pound best heavyweights....He is #4 of all time % at least....Lennox could beat any top HW on his best nights......He was tall used his height and range had a massive right hand and one punch stopping power when he needed to...He was a great finisher....To say Holmes makes him look foolish is just crazy talk
Re: Main Reason there was no Ali-Foreman II?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimanuel Boogustus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I just watched Round 1 again and a lot of the damage in that fight took place there and then. Ali hit George several times with left/right combinations and his right hand leads had George confused. Nobody had done that to George before. George was puffy around the left eye by round 2, he look bewildered. Ali knew he had his man early on in the fight, it was only a matter of time. George only had one basic plan and that was to load up and swing from the bleechers, by round 8 Foreman's tank was empty.
George states he was psychologically damaged after the Ali fight, Ali was never the same either after the Thriller In Manilla. Perhaps it's best we didn't see them go at it again.
How would Holmes have handled a 30 year old more experienced big George in 1979?
Foreman was a beast, tamed by one of the greatest ring tacticians of all time.
Good question about George v Holmes that would be really interesting. I would go with Holmes.
That is my all time favorite fantasy match up. I go with Holmes too. Would of done his legacy the world of good.
I think Holmes beats all those guys from the 60's/ 70's.
Not Ali but may be Frazier, now that would be a classic Holmes v Frazier.
I think Frazier gives Holmes as much trouble as he gave ALI, Holmes probably would have outboxed big George. Holmes possessed one of the best jabs in boxing history, it would only be a matter of staying away from Foreman's big shots. (easier said than done) A 30 yr old experienced big George would have been a formidable foe, but Holmes by decision. Frazier would be a nightmare for Holmes, all those angles, all that movement and that left hook!
Holmes not only had the best jab ever of the heavyweight greats he also had an amazing chin and recovery powers. I think that would have helped him survive and beat Frazier. It would have been a a hell of a fight.
Holmes was tough, i just watched the Shavers knockdown, now if big George hits him like that what happens? I miss the 70's and all the great Heavyweights that were around then. Holmes deserves more credit than he gets, he would have made Lewis look foolish.
Lets not get out of control here...Lennox Lewis holds his own and beats most of the past pound for pound best heavyweights....
He is #4 of all time % at least....Lennox could beat any top HW on his best nights......He was tall used his height and range had a massive right hand and one punch stopping power when he needed to...He was a great finisher....To say Holmes makes him look foolish is just crazy talk
Yes, let's not get out of control here.
Re: Main Reason there was no Ali-Foreman II?
let's face it larry holmes' greatness comes mainly from his ability to take punsihment and still come back. foreman's greatness wasnt really that----except for in the lyle war---. larry holmes had trouble with EVERYBODY but still won. thats what i'm talking about. everybody gave him plenty of frightening moments, none of his fights except maybe leon spinks and marvis frazier were really big blowouts. HE HAD TO EARN EVERY WIN. it wasnt easy for larry but he did it. thats a big part of his greatness. lewis woulda gave him just as much trouble as cooney or weaver or shavers or witherspoon or anybody else. if larry was in his 1979 prime he would beat lewis. but if larry was in the mid-80s, i think lewis wins.
Re: Main Reason there was no Ali-Foreman II?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimanuel Boogustus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I just watched Round 1 again and a lot of the damage in that fight took place there and then. Ali hit George several times with left/right combinations and his right hand leads had George confused. Nobody had done that to George before. George was puffy around the left eye by round 2, he look bewildered. Ali knew he had his man early on in the fight, it was only a matter of time. George only had one basic plan and that was to load up and swing from the bleechers, by round 8 Foreman's tank was empty.
George states he was psychologically damaged after the Ali fight, Ali was never the same either after the Thriller In Manilla. Perhaps it's best we didn't see them go at it again.
How would Holmes have handled a 30 year old more experienced big George in 1979?
Foreman was a beast, tamed by one of the greatest ring tacticians of all time.
Good question about George v Holmes that would be really interesting. I would go with Holmes.
That is my all time favorite fantasy match up. I go with Holmes too. Would of done his legacy the world of good.
I think Holmes beats all those guys from the 60's/ 70's.
Not Ali but may be Frazier, now that would be a classic Holmes v Frazier.
I think Frazier gives Holmes as much trouble as he gave ALI, Holmes probably would have outboxed big George. Holmes possessed one of the best jabs in boxing history, it would only be a matter of staying away from Foreman's big shots. (easier said than done) A 30 yr old experienced big George would have been a formidable foe, but Holmes by decision. Frazier would be a nightmare for Holmes, all those angles, all that movement and that left hook!
Holmes not only had the best jab ever of the heavyweight greats he also had an amazing chin and recovery powers. I think that would have helped him survive and beat Frazier. It would have been a a hell of a fight.
Holmes was tough, i just watched the Shavers knockdown, now if big George hits him like that what happens? I miss the 70's and all the great Heavyweights that were around then. Holmes deserves more credit than he gets, he would have made Lewis look foolish.
Lets not get out of control here...Lennox Lewis holds his own and beats most of the past pound for pound best heavyweights....
He is #4 of all time % at least....Lennox could beat any top HW on his best nights......He was tall used his height and range had a massive right hand and one punch stopping power when he needed to...He was a great finisher....To say Holmes makes him look foolish is just crazy talk
Yes, let's not get out of control here.
Who at their peak in HW history would walk over Lewis at is peak?....Please don't tell me you are one ofg those who think he had a glass chin? One so fragile Mercer, Briggs, Tua could not dent....He had one of the best right hands and one of the best jabs plus one shot KO power he has amazing finishing ability plus he could box masterfully....
Patterson?...Sparked by Ingmar....Liston? The bully who folded under pressure...Marciano...The man had a handful of top names on his resume and half the hand was older then dirst when he beat them....Dempsey?....He was a CW in modern times....Frazier? Joes biggest asset was his work rate he crumbled at Foremans power and no reason to think he would fare better after a big LL right...Ali, Louis and Johnson are the only ones I can reasonably say would beat him 8 out of 10 times....
Re: Main Reason there was no Ali-Foreman II?
Now that you mention it, Frazier would spark Lewis, Foreman in 73 would do it too, Holmes by UD, the Tyson of 87/88 by KO, Ali by easy decision, Louis by KO...If Rahman could KO Lewis so would Sonny Liston. I'm not saying Lewis had a glass chin, he just got hit a helluva lot and that would mean trouble with a lot of the fighters i mentioned. I reckon Ken Norton gives him trouble, so would Lyle and Shavers. It is impossible to judge how he would fare against Johnson or Dempsey. I didn't even think he won the second Holyfield fight!
Lewis was a good average HW IMO.
Re: Main Reason there was no Ali-Foreman II?
Alot of oldtimer would have beaten Lewis and i am going to say easily. In the fight with Tua you can see why. The big shots comed from Tua. Lewis didn't land a single clean power shot. All his punches comed from up there with no power on them and in the best case on the top of Tuas head. Lets take Marciano for example.
He is shorter. This means even fewer power shots will reach him. Second the stamina! Tua don't have it. He is unnecessery big! Third Marciano has punching power in both hands! Forth he is much more educated and i think that he woudn't go so lame inside and let Lewis tie him! This was the bigest problem from Tua. Every time he stayed outside and let Lewis commit on going away from the ropes Tua landed some insane shots!
I think that being bigger than necessery doesn't make you better fighter! Knowledge is something different!
Re: Main Reason there was no Ali-Foreman II?
Quote:
Marciano...The man had a handful of top names on his resume and half the hand was older then dirst when he beat them
Ok now youre gonna get me talkin'...:) Marciano was 1 of those guys who was blessed and I dont care when he woulda fought, what time period or how old walcott or moore or charles were, Marciano would persevere. He came along to show that to us. There are some people in history like this, though its rare. Power is the last thing lost, right? 1st round Walcott pounds Marciano like a fucking rag doll, jolting shots that make you wither. Fresh 1st round champion Jersey Joe, not even close to breaking a sweat or fatiguing, full force shots, head and body. Rocky took it in stride. as with the next 12 rounds.
OH AND HERE'S ANOTHER ONE: EZZARD CHARLES WAS 32 years YOUNG when he fought Rocky, and had won 48 of his last 53 fights including against Joey Maxim THRICE, Bob Satterfield, Billy Gilliam, Jimmy Bivins THRICE, Rex Layne, Tommy Harrison, Jersey Joe Walcott, Joe Louis, Archie Moore, etc. He had only been knocked out ONCE in his career before fighting Marciano.
So these guys couldnt beat a slow, bald, 2 left feet, uncoordinated shoemaker?
Re: Main Reason there was no Ali-Foreman II?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
brocktonblockbust
Quote:
Marciano...The man had a handful of top names on his resume and half the hand was older then dirst when he beat them
Ok now youre gonna get me talkin'...:) Marciano was 1 of those guys who was blessed and I dont care when he woulda fought, what time period or how old walcott or moore or charles were, Marciano would persevere. He came along to show that to us. There are some people in history like this, though its rare. Power is the last thing lost, right? 1st round Walcott pounds Marciano like a fucking rag doll, jolting shots that make you wither. Fresh 1st round champion Jersey Joe, not even close to breaking a sweat or fatiguing, full force shots, head and body. Rocky took it in stride. as with the next 12 rounds.
OH AND HERE'S ANOTHER ONE: EZZARD CHARLES WAS 32 years YOUNG when he fought Rocky, and had won 48 of his last 53 fights including against Joey Maxim THRICE, Bob Satterfield, Billy Gilliam, Jimmy Bivins THRICE, Rex Layne, Tommy Harrison, Jersey Joe Walcott, Joe Louis, Archie Moore, etc. He had only been knocked out ONCE in his career before fighting Marciano.
So these guys couldnt beat a slow, bald, 2 left feet, uncoordinated shoemaker?
Can't said it better!
Re: Main Reason there was no Ali-Foreman II?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Now that you mention it, Frazier would spark Lewis, Foreman in 73 would do it too, Holmes by UD, the Tyson of 87/88 by KO, Ali by easy decision, Louis by KO...If Rahman could KO Lewis so would Sonny Liston. I'm not saying Lewis had a glass chin, he just got hit a helluva lot and that would mean trouble with a lot of the fighters i mentioned. I reckon Ken Norton gives him trouble, so would Lyle and Shavers. It is impossible to judge how he would fare against Johnson or Dempsey. I didn't even think he won the second Holyfield fight!
Lewis was a good average HW IMO.
Did not even win the second Holyfield fight?????....I just have to remove myself from this debate because it is just senseless now....Everyone is enititled to their opinions...LL is a top 5 hw of all time no denying it
Re: Main Reason there was no Ali-Foreman II?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Now that you mention it, Frazier would spark Lewis, Foreman in 73 would do it too, Holmes by UD, the Tyson of 87/88 by KO, Ali by easy decision, Louis by KO...If Rahman could KO Lewis so would Sonny Liston. I'm not saying Lewis had a glass chin, he just got hit a helluva lot and that would mean trouble with a lot of the fighters i mentioned. I reckon Ken Norton gives him trouble, so would Lyle and Shavers. It is impossible to judge how he would fare against Johnson or Dempsey. I didn't even think he won the second Holyfield fight!
Lewis was a good average HW IMO.
Did not even win the second Holyfield fight?????....I just have to remove myself from this debate because it is just senseless now....Everyone is enititled to their opinions...LL is a top 5 hw of all time no
denying it
I'm in denial! I wasn't the only one who thought Holyfield won the second fight, Lewis was sluggish that night.
