-
The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
i think that its easy to forget (or maybe you just dont know) how inexperienced he was as a fighter and how quickly he rose the ranks despite his lack of experience. he started boxing at the age of 17. that is pretty old. he won the state golden gloves and national golden gloves title a year after he started boxing. that is very impressive. then less than 3 years after he started boxing, he won the olympics. that is a very impressive feat. he used his sheer athleticism and strength to win.
he then started fighting professionally at the age of 20 (remember that he only started boxing at age 17). then he got to 37-0 with 34 KO's by the age of 24 and 3 1/2 years of professional experience before facing frazier. frazier was a force to be reckoned with and was expected to destroy foreman. obviously foreman easily won the fight. imagine that though. after 3 1/2 years, most people are still very protected. and that is also understanding his short amateur career. most people who move fast in the professionals had an extended amateur career.
lets look at wlad right now. he fought a high ranking HW in chris byrd after 4 years (safe fight but high ranking) but had an amateur record of 134-6 compared to foremans 22-4. that is 114 less fights. what foreman did would have been equivalent to wlad facing lewis at that time instead of byrd which everybody would have thought that wlad was too green to win. i would agree with that (although i would agree that wlad would never beat lewis but thats beside the point).
anyways, i just wanted to write how fast foreman went to through the rankings. no wonder he was so out of control early in his career. he never got the chance to really slow down and work on basics. it was basically throw punches and knock people out. and since he was winning, he just kept doing it and didnt develop a lot of basic boxing skill until after his first retirement.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
i think that its easy to forget (or maybe you just dont know) how inexperienced he was as a fighter and how quickly he rose the ranks despite his lack of experience. he started boxing at the age of 17. that is pretty old. he won the state golden gloves and national golden gloves title a year after he started boxing. that is very impressive. then less than 3 years after he started boxing, he won the olympics. that is a very impressive feat. he used his sheer athleticism and strength to win.
he then started fighting professionally at the age of 20 (remember that he only started boxing at age 17). then he got to 37-0 with 34 KO's by the age of 24 and 3 1/2 years of professional experience before facing frazier. frazier was a force to be reckoned with and was expected to destroy foreman. obviously foreman easily won the fight. imagine that though. after 3 1/2 years, most people are still very protected. and that is also understanding his short amateur career. most people who move fast in the professionals had an extended amateur career.
lets look at wlad right now. he fought a high ranking HW in chris byrd after 4 years (safe fight but high ranking) but had an amateur record of 134-6 compared to foremans 22-4. that is 114 less fights. what foreman did would have been equivalent to wlad facing lewis at that time instead of byrd which everybody would have thought that wlad was too green to win. i would agree with that (although i would agree that wlad would never beat lewis but thats beside the point).
anyways, i just wanted to write how fast foreman went to through the rankings. no wonder he was so out of control early in his career. he never got the chance to really slow down and work on basics. it was basically throw punches and knock people out. and since he was winning, he just kept doing it and didnt develop a lot of basic boxing skill until after his first retirement.
Excellent post. Big G is my 2nd fave. Rocco you know is my fave and similarly he started fighting at age 23!!!!!!!
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
In 3.5 years Mike Tyson wiped out a division. He turned pro in March 85. Beat Berbick for the WBC in November 86! Then went on to unify and beat everyone else including Holmes and Spinks by June 88. Thats fast progression!
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
i think that its easy to forget (or maybe you just dont know) how inexperienced he was as a fighter and how quickly he rose the ranks despite his lack of experience. he started boxing at the age of 17. that is pretty old. he won the state golden gloves and national golden gloves title a year after he started boxing. that is very impressive. then less than 3 years after he started boxing, he won the olympics. that is a very impressive feat. he used his sheer athleticism and strength to win.
he then started fighting professionally at the age of 20 (remember that he only started boxing at age 17). then he got to 37-0 with 34 KO's by the age of 24 and 3 1/2 years of professional experience before facing frazier. frazier was a force to be reckoned with and was expected to destroy foreman. obviously foreman easily won the fight. imagine that though. after 3 1/2 years, most people are still very protected. and that is also understanding his short amateur career. most people who move fast in the professionals had an extended amateur career.
lets look at wlad right now. he fought a high ranking HW in chris byrd after 4 years (safe fight but high ranking) but had an amateur record of 134-6 compared to foremans 22-4. that is 114 less fights. what foreman did would have been equivalent to wlad facing lewis at that time instead of byrd which everybody would have thought that wlad was too green to win. i would agree with that (although i would agree that wlad would never beat lewis but thats beside the point).
anyways, i just wanted to write how fast foreman went to through the rankings. no wonder he was so out of control early in his career. he never got the chance to really slow down and work on basics. it was basically throw punches and knock people out. and since he was winning, he just kept doing it and didnt develop a lot of basic boxing skill until after his first retirement.
Solid post. What George did during his first career was impressive, without a doubt. One of the most menacing champions to ever set foot in the ring. He then had one of the greatest transformations ever and came back decades later to make history becoming the oldest ever to win the the lineal championship.
A quick question though: Do you think that could ever be accomplished at any other weight class? Someone with so little amateur background winning a lineal title and destroying an ATG in the process? I can see it in the cruiserweights and maybe light heavy, but not below. To me it illustrates how much tougher the competition is at the middle to lighter weights. Don't want to take anything away from George though...
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
What's more amazing is the fact that Foreman was an olympic gold medalist with a 22-4 amateur record. WTF
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
1968
George had to get through some pretty damn good American Amateurs to win a berth on
the 1968 United States Olympic Boxing Team.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mikeeod
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
i think that its easy to forget (or maybe you just dont know) how inexperienced he was as a fighter and how quickly he rose the ranks despite his lack of experience. he started boxing at the age of 17. that is pretty old. he won the state golden gloves and national golden gloves title a year after he started boxing. that is very impressive. then less than 3 years after he started boxing, he won the olympics. that is a very impressive feat. he used his sheer athleticism and strength to win.
he then started fighting professionally at the age of 20 (remember that he only started boxing at age 17). then he got to 37-0 with 34 KO's by the age of 24 and 3 1/2 years of professional experience beifore facing frazier. frazier was a force to be reckoned with and was expected to destroy foreman. obviously foreman easily won the fight. imagine that though. after 3 1/2 years, most people are still very protected. and that is also understanding his short amateur career. most people who move fast in the professionals had an extended amateur career.
lets look at wlad right now. he fought a high ranking HW in chris byrd after 4 years (safe fight but high ranking) but had an amateur record of 134-6 compared to foremans 22-4. that is 114 less fights. what foreman did would have been equivalent to wlad facing lewis at that time instead of byrd which everybody would have thought that wlad was too green to win. i would agree with that (although i would agree that wlad would never beat lewis but thats beside the point).
anyways, i just wanted to write how fast foreman went to through the rankings. no wonder he was so out of control early in his career. he never got the chance to really slow down and work on basics. it was basically throw punches and knock people out. and since he was winning, he just kept doing it and didnt develop a lot of basic boxing skill until after his first retirement.
Solid post. What George did during his first career was impressive, without a doubt. One of the most menacing champions to ever set foot in the ring. He then had one of the greatest transformations ever and came back decades later to make history becoming the oldest ever to win the the lineal championship.
A quick question though: Do you think that could ever be accomplished at any other weight class? Someone with so little amateur background winning a lineal title and destroying an ATG in the process? I can see it in the cruiserweights and maybe light heavy, but not below. To me it illustrates how much tougher the competition is at the middle to lighter weights. Don't want to take anything away from George though...
It's difficult to compare weight classes. The 70's had some solid fighters. He beat a few really good fighters and a few pretty good ones. I think the hard thing about smaller weight classes is the speed. He didn't have to worry about people boxing circles around him so you could say that it's easier as a HW to move up more quickly since its easier to rely on power.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
The Group of United States Amateurs that were competing against George.
* Forest Ward ~ {1967 National AAU and 1967 Pan Am Games Champion}
* Chuck Haynes
* Jimmy Lee Clark
* Clay Hodges ~ {1966 and 1967 National Golden Gloves Champion}
* Frank Bellony
* Jeff Merritt
* Albert Milne
* Frank Steele
* Bunky Akins
* Frank Schram
* Mike Boswell
* Terry Daniels
* Curtis Whitehead
* Sylvester Dulaire
* Bill Henry
* Fred Grogan
* Thomas Gamble
* Henry Crump
* Formus White
* Ken Norton
* James Howard ~ {1966 National AAU Champion}
* Albert Wilson ~ {1968 National Golden Gloves Champion}
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
In 3.5 years Mike Tyson wiped out a division. He turned pro in March 85. Beat Berbick for the WBC in November 86! Then went on to unify and beat everyone else including Holmes and Spinks by June 88. Thats fast progression!
Another impressive fact is how many prime, HOF fighters Mike beat. The weight class was STACKED. Look at the names on his resume: Berbick, Tubbs, Page, Bruno, Marvis Frazier, Tucker and Tyrell Biggs. Talk about a murderers row!!!
Sorry Ross, I couldn't resist. The post is talking about GEORGE FOREMAN's accomplishments, which have absolutely nothing to do with Mike. It's funny that u r so desperate for concurrence on ur admiration for Mike that u constantly have to try and tout his accomplishments. Try to stay on message or at least tie ur post to the original discussion.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
I did not know that about young George and his lack of boxing experience, it certainly resulted in his first loss to Ali. I think the older George Foreman has said that he would have paced himself and not exposed his naivety against Ali had he had the experience he gained in his second comeback.
I also think it is a fair point from @milkeeod that the quality of skill if better in the lower weights.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mikeeod
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
In 3.5 years Mike Tyson wiped out a division. He turned pro in March 85. Beat Berbick for the WBC in November 86! Then went on to unify and beat everyone else including Holmes and Spinks by June 88. Thats fast progression!
Another impressive fact is how many prime, HOF fighters Mike beat. The weight class was STACKED. Look at the names on his resume: Berbick, Tubbs, Page, Bruno, Marvis Frazier, Tucker and Tyrell Biggs. Talk about a murderers row!!!
Sorry Ross, I couldn't resist. The post is talking about GEORGE FOREMAN's accomplishments, which have absolutely nothing to do with Mike. It's funny that u r so desperate for concurrence on ur admiration for Mike that u constantly have to try and tout his accomplishments. Try to stay on message or at least tie ur post to the original discussion.
Im pointing out that George isn't the only fighter to have a rapid career rise. He only made two defences of the title as well.
Boxing's quickest World Champions | Boxing News
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
i think that its easy to forget (or maybe you just dont know) how inexperienced he was as a fighter and how quickly he rose the ranks despite his lack of experience. he started boxing at the age of 17. that is pretty old. he won the state golden gloves and national golden gloves title a year after he started boxing. that is very impressive. then less than 3 years after he started boxing, he won the olympics. that is a very impressive feat. he used his sheer athleticism and strength to win.
he then started fighting professionally at the age of 20 (remember that he only started boxing at age 17). then he got to 37-0 with 34 KO's by the age of 24 and 3 1/2 years of professional experience before facing frazier. frazier was a force to be reckoned with and was expected to destroy foreman. obviously foreman easily won the fight. imagine that though. after 3 1/2 years, most people are still very protected. and that is also understanding his short amateur career. most people who move fast in the professionals had an extended amateur career.
lets look at wlad right now. he fought a high ranking HW in chris byrd after 4 years (safe fight but high ranking) but had an amateur record of 134-6 compared to foremans 22-4. that is 114 less fights. what foreman did would have been equivalent to wlad facing lewis at that time instead of byrd which everybody would have thought that wlad was too green to win. i would agree with that (although i would agree that wlad would never beat lewis but thats beside the point).
anyways, i just wanted to write how fast foreman went to through the rankings. no wonder he was so out of control early in his career. he never got the chance to really slow down and work on basics. it was basically throw punches and knock people out. and since he was winning, he just kept doing it and didnt develop a lot of basic boxing skill until after his first retirement.
I have to say that this is up there with my favorite threads on this forum.
Excellent work my friend.
I wasn't aware of how fast he rose through the ranks, so the educational value to me here is pretty high.
Big George is one fighter I obviously know a lot about professionally, but I haven't studied him the way I studied Ali, Fraizer, Holmes, Shavers, Moore or any other fighters from back then.
Excellent. +1
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mikeeod
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
In 3.5 years Mike Tyson wiped out a division. He turned pro in March 85. Beat Berbick for the WBC in November 86! Then went on to unify and beat everyone else including Holmes and Spinks by June 88. Thats fast progression!
Another impressive fact is how many prime, HOF fighters Mike beat. The weight class was STACKED. Look at the names on his resume: Berbick, Tubbs, Page, Bruno, Marvis Frazier, Tucker and Tyrell Biggs. Talk about a murderers row!!!
Sorry Ross, I couldn't resist. The post is talking about GEORGE FOREMAN's accomplishments, which have absolutely nothing to do with Mike. It's funny that u r so desperate for concurrence on ur admiration for Mike that u constantly have to try and tout his accomplishments. Try to stay on message or at least tie ur post to the original discussion.
Im pointing out that George isn't the only fighter to have a rapid career rise. He only made two defences of the title as well.
Boxing's quickest World Champions | Boxing News
Tyson had an EXTENSIVE amateur career and didn't make the Olympic team. George, as was pointed out, started late and went on to, in a ridiculously short amount of time, win Olympic Gold and the heavyweight championship, beating an ATG in the process. It would be equally pointless for me to day that Evander Holyfield won a cruiser weight title in 15 fights, unified and cleaned out cruiser, and went on to beat....
It doesn't belong in this thread. Evander had an extensive amateur career and was an Olympic bronze medalist. What George did is unheard of, coming from the streets and with little time to learn his trade, win the most prestigious championship in the world (not a title, but the one and only championship at that weight at that time). Just tell the OP good job.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mikeeod
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
In 3.5 years Mike Tyson wiped out a division. He turned pro in March 85. Beat Berbick for the WBC in November 86! Then went on to unify and beat everyone else including Holmes and Spinks by June 88. Thats fast progression!
Another impressive fact is how many prime, HOF fighters Mike beat. The weight class was STACKED. Look at the names on his resume: Berbick, Tubbs, Page, Bruno, Marvis Frazier, Tucker and Tyrell Biggs. Talk about a murderers row!!!
Sorry Ross, I couldn't resist. The post is talking about GEORGE FOREMAN's accomplishments, which have absolutely nothing to do with Mike. It's funny that u r so desperate for concurrence on ur admiration for Mike that u constantly have to try and tout his accomplishments. Try to stay on message or at least tie ur post to the original discussion.
Im pointing out that George isn't the only fighter to have a rapid career rise. He only made two defences of the title as well.
Boxing's quickest World Champions | Boxing News
Hahaha. I missed the silly comment at the end, about Foreman only defending twice. Yeah, what kind of bum loses to Ali?!? Much more impressive to get outboxed and knocked out by James Douglas. What did Ali ever do that was so great?!?
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
A remarkable fighter.
He only had 'one' bad fight in his 1st Career, and no controversial wins.
How many boxers can say that.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bill Paxtom
A remarkable fighter.
He only had 'one' bad fight in his 1st Career, and no controversial wins.
How many boxers can say that.
It's just a shame that it took over a decade to get his head back into boxing after that loss. If he could have matured more quickly, I have no doubt that he would have had many more years of success during the 70's and 80's.
Although he did have the Jimmy young fight which was bad but I will give him the excuse that he did suffer from heat exhaustion in that fight and almost died so it's understandable. Kind of like I give Robinson a pass on losing to Joey maxim.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mikeeod
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mikeeod
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
In 3.5 years Mike Tyson wiped out a division. He turned pro in March 85. Beat Berbick for the WBC in November 86! Then went on to unify and beat everyone else including Holmes and Spinks by June 88. Thats fast progression!
Another impressive fact is how many prime, HOF fighters Mike beat. The weight class was STACKED. Look at the names on his resume: Berbick, Tubbs, Page, Bruno, Marvis Frazier, Tucker and Tyrell Biggs. Talk about a murderers row!!!
Sorry Ross, I couldn't resist. The post is talking about GEORGE FOREMAN's accomplishments, which have absolutely nothing to do with Mike. It's funny that u r so desperate for concurrence on ur admiration for Mike that u constantly have to try and tout his accomplishments. Try to stay on message or at least tie ur post to the original discussion.
Im pointing out that George isn't the only fighter to have a rapid career rise. He only made two defences of the title as well.
Boxing's quickest World Champions | Boxing News
Hahaha. I missed the silly comment at the end, about Foreman only defending twice. Yeah, what kind of bum loses to Ali?!? Much more impressive to get outboxed and knocked out by James Douglas. What did Ali ever do that was so great?!?
Dont forget 213lb Jimmy Young;)
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
I think Hw is hardest division to stay on top of reason being is the lower weights have maybe bit more skill and speed but at hw a gatekeeper has the power to put a legend to bed. To me if you are heavyweight champ your best there is because no one can beat you fuck pound for pound.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
The fact is Wlad would have knocked out young George Foreman.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
NO WAY!!! wtf--- George Foreman would eat Wlad for breakfast lıke a chıcken leg!
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
The fact is Wlad would have knocked out young George Foreman.
wlad had more skill but in no way does he beat a young foreman. foreman had a solid chin and hit like a monster. you can bet his trainer would tell him to just walk forward and throw as many punches as he could. i dont see wlad lasting more than 2 rounds. terrible style match up.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
The fact is Wlad would have knocked out young George Foreman.
wlad had more skill but in no way does he beat a young foreman. foreman had a solid chin and hit like a monster. you can bet his trainer would tell him to just walk forward and throw as many punches as he could. i dont see wlad lasting more than 2 rounds. terrible style match up.
Not really but whatever
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
The fact is Wlad would have knocked out young George Foreman.
wlad had more skill but in no way does he beat a young foreman. foreman had a solid chin and hit like a monster. you can bet his trainer would tell him to just walk forward and throw as many punches as he could. i dont see wlad lasting more than 2 rounds. terrible style match up.
I agree with you on George being a bad style match up for Wlad. George always had a GREAT CHIN and would close the gap. Where smaller guys allow Wlad to hold and lean on them, I see George being strong enough to manhandle him, push him off and land the one-two. I don't see Wlad taking George's punch very well at all either. There is always the chance that it goes like the first Sam Peter fight did for Wlad, but I think George was a much better fighter and would likely stop him.
I think Lennox and young George would have been a great fight. Lennox was a little sturdier than Wlad, but he also would have been put to sleep if caught with a good shot from Foreman. I favor Lennox in that fight by decision after some shaky moments, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if George caught him and stopped him.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mikeeod
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
The fact is Wlad would have knocked out young George Foreman.
wlad had more skill but in no way does he beat a young foreman. foreman had a solid chin and hit like a monster. you can bet his trainer would tell him to just walk forward and throw as many punches as he could. i dont see wlad lasting more than 2 rounds. terrible style match up.
I agree with you on George being a bad style match up for Wlad. George always had a GREAT CHIN and would close the gap. Where smaller guys allow Wlad to hold and lean on them, I see George being strong enough to manhandle him, push him off and land the one-two. I don't see Wlad taking George's punch very well at all either. There is always the chance that it goes like the first Sam Peter fight did for Wlad, but I think George was a much better fighter and would likely stop him.
I think Lennox and young George would have been a great fight. Lennox was a little sturdier than Wlad, but he also would have been put to sleep if caught with a good shot from Foreman. I favor Lennox in that fight by decision after some shaky moments, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if George caught him and stopped him.
Prime Lennox should be too wise to get bombed out by Foreman.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
At the 1968 Olympic Games {October 1968} ~ Mexico City, Mexico
Finals
USSR Heavyweight ~ Ionas Chepulis
Howard Cosell lead us to believe that Ionas Chepulis was some kind of incredible and unbeatable Amateur Heavyweight.
He built the Russian into some sort of 'unstoppable tank'. He actually called him a 'Soviet Tank'. One that 'Mortar Shells'
bounce off of.
Howard Cosell >
"Ionas Chepulis could be ranked in the Top 15 of the Professional Ranks right now. He's had over 200-Bouts, and won
185 of them. He's as strong as Joe Frazier, and he looks bigger as well. He's real strong and clubs you with heavy
arms, and wears you down."
Truth,
Ionas {Age; 29 years, 2 months} was a good-and-strong Russian Heavyweight, but Ionas was far from the best that Country
had to offer.
Yes, Ionas was experienced, as he had been boxing for 10-Years. But all his bouts had been in Russia, and the 1968 Olympic Games
would be his '1st' International Tournament.
Ionas, at 6' 1" and 203 lbs. was solid, and he did have an impressive record of 185-22 {87 KO's} when he entered the Olympic Games.
But, He was 'never' a USSR National Champion. His performances at the Soviet Championships >
* 1965 National Championships > 'Silver Medalist'
* 1966 National Championships > 'Bronze Medalist'
* 1968 National Championships > 'Silver Medalist'
Ionas had lost in the Soviet Championship Finals only 3-Months earlier {July 1968} when he was soundly beaten by Alexander Vasyushkin.
Ionas who was Lithuanian, did win that National Championship 4-Times {1963, 1964, 1966 and 1967}. He also won the 1962 Baltic Championships.
Ionas did have a great start at the 1968 Olympic Games, when he won all bouts by stoppage.
Preliminary .........* TKO 3 ~ Billy Wells {Great Britain}
Quarter-Finals .... * KO 3 ~ Bernd Anders {East Germany}
Semi-Finals ........ * TKO 2 ~ Joaquin Rocha {Mexico}
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mikeeod
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
The fact is Wlad would have knocked out young George Foreman.
wlad had more skill but in no way does he beat a young foreman. foreman had a solid chin and hit like a monster. you can bet his trainer would tell him to just walk forward and throw as many punches as he could. i dont see wlad lasting more than 2 rounds. terrible style match up.
I agree with you on George being a bad style match up for Wlad. George always had a GREAT CHIN and would close the gap. Where smaller guys allow Wlad to hold and lean on them, I see George being strong enough to manhandle him, push him off and land the one-two. I don't see Wlad taking George's punch very well at all either. There is always the chance that it goes like the first Sam Peter fight did for Wlad, but I think George was a much better fighter and would likely stop him.
I think Lennox and young George would have been a great fight. Lennox was a little sturdier than Wlad, but he also would have been put to sleep if caught with a good shot from Foreman. I favor Lennox in that fight by decision after some shaky moments, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if George caught him and stopped him.
The Sam Peter fight is a good comparison. Wlad fought a strong guy who lacked skill and got dropped multiple times. The difference is that foreman is a top 10 HW of all time while people was fortunate to ever be in the top 10 HW's of his horrible era. Wlad wouldn't know what to do when foreman just pushed him when wlad would try to clinch.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mikeeod
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
The fact is Wlad would have knocked out young George Foreman.
wlad had more skill but in no way does he beat a young foreman. foreman had a solid chin and hit like a monster. you can bet his trainer would tell him to just walk forward and throw as many punches as he could. i dont see wlad lasting more than 2 rounds. terrible style match up.
I agree with you on George being a bad style match up for Wlad. George always had a GREAT CHIN and would close the gap. Where smaller guys allow Wlad to hold and lean on them, I see George being strong enough to manhandle him, push him off and land the one-two. I don't see Wlad taking George's punch very well at all either. There is always the chance that it goes like the first Sam Peter fight did for Wlad, but I think George was a much better fighter and would likely stop him.
I think Lennox and young George would have been a great fight. Lennox was a little sturdier than Wlad, but he also would have been put to sleep if caught with a good shot from Foreman. I favor Lennox in that fight by decision after some shaky moments, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if George caught him and stopped him.
Prime Lennox should be too wise to get bombed out by Foreman.
I can definitely see Lewis winning but his main problem was that he seemed to get intimidated pretty easily. He also had a few really bad fights. Lewis on a good day would beat foreman, but in general it would be a toss up because you aren't sure which Lewis is showing up.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
I do not think Lennox got intimidated by anyone. He beat fearsome punchers like Razor, Golota, Grant, Mercer, Tua and was never intimidated by them. You could criticse Lennox for taking people for granted but even he would never do that against Foreman.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Lewıs always moved fast agaınst the bıg bombers---he wasted no tıme agaınst Grant, Golota, Morrıson, Brıggs. all bıg punchers. But ıf he treıd that wıth George ıt would have backfıred. YOu dont punch wıth a puncher, and though LOennox was ındeed a bıg puncher, I gıve George the sıgnıfıcant nod about beıng the BETTER of the 2 punchers. Foreman-Lewıs would not have gone 4 rounds. George Foreman KO 3 or KO 4. Baddest-ass puncher I ever seen and he ALWAYS got the job done. Except ın the Congo---but the ropes was loose ;)
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
I was always a Foreman fan, but.... you gotta be realistic. As was very accurately stated in the opening post, George lacked some basics. It's not like he needed them against most of the opposition he faced back in the day. Norton went in looking like he was already defeated. Frazier was a little sparkplug of a heavyweight, and tried those leaping left hooks with George, leaving himself wide open for George's bombs. Ron Lyle was a fellow puncher just trading bombs with George until one of them would fall down.
Lennox was a big guy himself and huge puncher, but with better boxing skills. It's not inconceivable that Big George would've lost to Lewis. Wlad is another matter. Wlad's mental makeup is to make the fight as ugly as possible if he feels his chin is in danger. It's hard to tell what would've happened. It's not as if one punch from Wlad would've taken George out. While the opposite (George landing) would've been lights out for Wlad.
-
Re: The incredible thing that we don't talk about when it comes to George Foreman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mikeeod
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
i think that its easy to forget (or maybe you just dont know) how inexperienced he was as a fighter and how quickly he rose the ranks despite his lack of experience. he started boxing at the age of 17. that is pretty old. he won the state golden gloves and national golden gloves title a year after he started boxing. that is very impressive. then less than 3 years after he started boxing, he won the olympics. that is a very impressive feat. he used his sheer athleticism and strength to win.
he then started fighting professionally at the age of 20 (remember that he only started boxing at age 17). then he got to 37-0 with 34 KO's by the age of 24 and 3 1/2 years of professional experience before facing frazier. frazier was a force to be reckoned with and was expected to destroy foreman. obviously foreman easily won the fight. imagine that though. after 3 1/2 years, most people are still very protected. and that is also understanding his short amateur career. most people who move fast in the professionals had an extended amateur career.
lets look at wlad right now. he fought a high ranking HW in chris byrd after 4 years (safe fight but high ranking) but had an amateur record of 134-6 compared to foremans 22-4. that is 114 less fights. what foreman did would have been equivalent to wlad facing lewis at that time instead of byrd which everybody would have thought that wlad was too green to win. i would agree with that (although i would agree that wlad would never beat lewis but thats beside the point).
anyways, i just wanted to write how fast foreman went to through the rankings. no wonder he was so out of control early in his career. he never got the chance to really slow down and work on basics. it was basically throw punches and knock people out. and since he was winning, he just kept doing it and didnt develop a lot of basic boxing skill until after his first retirement.
Solid post. What George did during his first career was impressive, without a doubt. One of the most menacing champions to ever set foot in the ring. He then had one of the greatest transformations ever and came back decades later to make history becoming the oldest ever to win the the lineal championship.
A quick question though: Do you think that could ever be accomplished at any other weight class? Someone with so little amateur background winning a lineal title and destroying an ATG in the process? I can see it in the cruiserweights and maybe light heavy, but not below. To me it illustrates how much tougher the competition is at the middle to lighter weights. Don't want to take anything away from George though...
It's not so much that the competition is weaker, weight classes essentially cap the level of strength and power a boxer can possibly possess in a division, it's going to be rare that a guy shows up with only a small amount of ring experience and craft, but is able to blitz a division by being phenomenally stronger enough to nullify their lack of skills and experience against the opposition at lighter weights because the difference in physicality will always be capped by the weight limit, no such cap exists for a heavyweight so relatively green fighters whom possess freakish physical attributes are more likely to come around.
