Foreman & Hopkins in their 40s- whose run was more impressive?

[Mr140]

George Foreman because he took so much time off and came back ans mange to win the belt. Losing to Morrison who was scared to death of fighting him close but was a pretty good fighter at the time so not that bad for him. Holyfeild is a top ten atg heavyweight in prime so no big deal he lost to him either really either because he was a great and younger. Lhw division is pretty weak right now and Foreman kinda was competing in a division which is the best the heavy's had really seen in his 40's and after taking like over ten years off that takes some balls to do and being hw champ to says your the best.

[Max Power]

It's fair to say Foremans run was awesome as well but I didn't see him beat any top tier boxers of the 90's and didn't see him fight the good+big men like Riddick or Lennox or Tyson.

[mikeeod]

Master u r correct. Not even disputable. Moorer had a china chin, Axel Schulz, Alex Stewart and Tommy Mortison were club fighters at best. Briggs is a joke. Evander was good but George lost clearly in that one. Cooney was a dinosaur, and Bert Cooper was too small and high on drugs.

Compare that to Pascal, Cloud, Beibut, Pavilik, Joe C, Tarver, Dawson n soon Stevenson. How many P4P ranked (at the time of the fight) is in that list? Multiple, n I forgot to mention Winky on that list as well. Really, Hop was already old at 36 when he destroyed Tito, but I wanted to limit it to guys he fought while over 40.

The one guy Georfe fought who was ranked p4p at the time they fought was Evander n he lost that one. George is an ATG heavyweight n a great man, but not anywhere near Hop in terms of accomplishment. Hop is a master at his craft. Too bad boxing fans today don't know enough about the sport to appreciate it.