Could Foremans career be replicated by anyone

[Boilermaker]

I am looking for some help from Mr 10 out of 10 on this one.

I would like to know what fighters (if any) could step into George Foremans career and achieve a career record as good as Foreman. I am not sure anyone could, but what does this board think. Could Ali, Louis, Jeffries, Johnson - anyone? who would you give the best chance.

[Ezzard]

Do you mean beat Frazier twice, Norton once, lose to Ali, stay on his feet against Holyfield and KO Moorer?

[Boilermaker]

Do you mean beat Frazier twice, Norton once, lose to Ali, stay on his feet against Holyfield and KO Moorer?

Not just beat Frazier and norton, but completely outclass them.

Also against Ali, it is a stoppage loss, but when people rightly give ali credit for the win, it is often forgotten that as good as the win was, it was not an easy dominant win. Ali (arguably the greatest ever in his best performance) was forced to improvise with a rope a dope technique to cause the upset and generally pull every trick in the book and produce his very best (despite still being out on his feet). All this by a guy who fought probably his worst possible fight ever. To start with, i dont think many could have pushed ali so hard and come so close to beating him on that night (though obviously a few probably could or would have).

and the holyfield moorer fights you talk of do need to follow a 10 year (not a 3 year) retirement.

But i suppose you have summarised in quite a few words, the main fights. So, yes, who do you think would repeat the performances?

[The End]

You know... I can't think of anyone who could do that. The closest I could come was Lennox Lewis being a big man with a punch who fought well when he was older. Then I tried to imagine Lewis in his early 20's (the high top fade one) dominating Frazier. Though I do think he could cause Ali some trouble with his size and caution.

[MEISINGER]

though i find his accomplishments unreal
mainly the comeback after 10 years

i still have him at number 6 on my all tiime heavyweight list

his career would be next to impossible to duplicate
he bacame a much wiser man in his comeback or as i call it his second career
without this wisdom he would of never regained the title
his wisdom out matched his skills

[Ezzard]

Do you mean beat Frazier twice, Norton once, lose to Ali, stay on his feet against Holyfield and KO Moorer?

Not just beat Frazier and norton, but completely outclass them.

Also against Ali, it is a stoppage loss, but when people rightly give ali credit for the win, it is often forgotten that as good as the win was, it was not an easy dominant win. Ali (arguably the greatest ever in his best performance) was forced to improvise with a rope a dope technique to cause the upset and generally pull every trick in the book and produce his very best (despite still being out on his feet). All this by a guy who fought probably his worst possible fight ever. To start with, i dont think many could have pushed ali so hard and come so close to beating him on that night (though obviously a few probably could or would have).

and the holyfield moorer fights you talk of do need to follow a 10 year (not a 3 year) retirement.

But i suppose you have summarised in quite a few words, the main fights. So, yes, who do you think would repeat the performances?

Just don't see it that way. Ali dominated him pretty much every round. Foreman was squashed that night.

[BoxBuzz]

I think he benefited from an "old school" mentality when he came back. He took a lot of risk fighting bums that had he lost to any of them,would have prematurely ended his return hopes. And at the same time that was the exact strategy that helped him rehone his skills. And with a bit of luck, he did walk on water for a time.

Nobody without a lady luck escort,nay a lady luck entourage, ever repeats that performance.

He came back to be champion, not just to make some money.

[dr_devious]

If Sonny Liston came along a generation later he could have been the Foreman of the 70s, beating Frazier and Norton and getting outboxed by Ali. He would never have had George's longevity with the second career though

[Boilermaker]

Do you mean beat Frazier twice, Norton once, lose to Ali, stay on his feet against Holyfield and KO Moorer?

Not just beat Frazier and norton, but completely outclass them.

Also against Ali, it is a stoppage loss, but when people rightly give ali credit for the win, it is often forgotten that as good as the win was, it was not an easy dominant win. Ali (arguably the greatest ever in his best performance) was forced to improvise with a rope a dope technique to cause the upset and generally pull every trick in the book and produce his very best (despite still being out on his feet). All this by a guy who fought probably his worst possible fight ever. To start with, i dont think many could have pushed ali so hard and come so close to beating him on that night (though obviously a few probably could or would have).

and the holyfield moorer fights you talk of do need to follow a 10 year (not a 3 year) retirement.

But i suppose you have summarised in quite a few words, the main fights. So, yes, who do you think would repeat the performances?

Just don't see it that way. Ali dominated him pretty much every round. Foreman was squashed that night.

But Ali, admitted that he was as good as out on his feet at times, didnt he. If ali didnt have that astonishing chin/recovery ability, he loses the fight. That means Foreman was close to winning.

Either way, even if you consider this fight an easy loss, the question still is applicable.

[Boilermaker]

If Sonny Liston came along a generation later he could have been the Foreman of the 70s, beating Frazier and Norton and getting outboxed by Ali. He would never have had George's longevity with the second career though

Sonny is actually quite an interesting call. Maybe the best hope. He would have wrecked most of Georges 70s opposition, though I really do think that Frazier/Liston is a pick em fight, who knows sonny might just have done a Foreman. You wouldnt think hed beat Ali, based on his fights with him. But the Ali George fought was not as great as the one Liston fought. The comeback is another interesting one. Liston had that similar comeback that ended in his KO, but he was resiliant to come back from losses and maybe even fight when outgunned. Difficult to see him lasting the distance with Holyfield, but i would give him an outside chance of beating Moorer and the others Foreman beat, although the 10 year layoff made Foreman a lot further gone than Liston was in his second career.

[Boilermaker]

I think he benefited from an "old school" mentality when he came back. He took a lot of risk fighting bums that had he lost to any of them,would have prematurely ended his return hopes. And at the same time that was the exact strategy that helped him rehone his skills. And with a bit of luck, he did walk on water for a time.

Nobody without a lady luck escort,nay a lady luck entourage, ever repeats that performance.

He came back to be champion, not just to make some money.

Buzz, you did actually hit on another interesting point.

When fighters win the lineal title they invariably have that desire and will to win. Dempsey, Johnson, Corbett,Liston, Braddock etc. It nearly always propels them to a carreer best performance which is rarely duplicated or surpassed. Sometimes it lasts for quite a while, but once the easy living sets in that desire never returns. Not for Dempsey, Tyson, Johnson, Braddock, even Louis. Marciano nearly tried but knew it wouldnt come back. Is foreman also the only fighter ever to recreate that desire (at least for the Moorer fight). I know a lot of people talk about maturing and such forth, but in his comeback his punches really had lost so much speed he was a shell of himself. Yet he still found the desire to produce that one more special performance. I dont think that many others have had a second career peak, despite trying.

[Ezzard]

Just my observation but Ali never staggered, sagged or wobbled. Foreman barely landed a clean blow. I don’t think Ali was out on his feet at any point. But yes, still applicable…

Okay…to beat Frazier and Norton you need to be a fast starter and a KO artist.

Then a defeat to Ali, well anyone could lose to Ali.

Then a win against Lyle, however sloppy…

Then after a long layoff go the distance with Holyfield. (rules Mike Tyson out)

Then after many, many years a KO of a below average champion. Still a great feat due to Foreman’s age.


Joe Louis could have done it. Because he was so great.
Dempsey too could have done it. He carried his punch into his later years. And started off quick enough to have a seriously good chance of getting Norton and Frazier out of there early.
Jersey Joe Walcott was almost 40 when he KO’d Charles with one shot. Really deserved a win against Joe Louis. And was close to beating Marciano in their first fight.
I guess Lennox has a chance too.

[The Great John L]

In addition to destroying Frazier and Norton, he also beat Lyle in a life and death struggle and stopped a still capable Chuvalo. However, he was also very protected leading up to the Frazier fight, especially after barely getting the nod against Peralta in their first fight. And let's not forget that in addition to getting stopped by Ali he was also schooled and dropped by Young.

And exactly what risks did he take in his second career that earned him a title shot? It was risky figthing a string of bums and a few past it names? Wouldn't it have been riskier to actually fight some of the guys from that era that many on here seems to enjoy making fun of? There is a reason why Old George never fought Tucker, Spoon, Tubbs, etc. Because he would have gotten beaten.

In an alternate universe where Ali had won the FOTC, it's possible that George would have been nothing more than a Mac Foster type footnote. He may have just faded away after getting beaten by Ali, possibly then losing to a Quarry or Bugner while trying to earn another title shot.

Louis, Liston, Jeffries and possibly Lewis would have probably also walked right through Frazier and Norton. The difference is that most of them also would have had a chance of beating the Zaire Ali and Jimmy Young. It's hard to say about the come from behind KO of Moorer in a second career because none of them, with the possible exception of Liston, would have quit after losing a fight to Young.

[Ambling Alp II]

I think replicate Foreman's career is a tricky question. If someone else lost once to someone Foreman beat he probably would not have gone on to to fight the fighter's that Foreman did.
But anyway, there have been some interesting comments.
Ezz made some interesting observations, but he made one that I could not disagree with more. That Foreman barely landed a clean punch against Foreman. Huh? He nailed him with several haymakers in that fight. Alsmot everyone else would have been knocked out if they got hit with those.

Louis,Liston, Jeffries, and maybe Lewis would have walked through Frazier and Norton? Well maybe. However, Louis, Liston,Jeffries, and Lewis all had multiple fights against lesser opponents where they either lost or struggled. None ever walked through anyone as good as Frazier.

A prime Foreman probably would have walked through Schmeling,Godoy,Marty Marshall,Machen,Fitzsimmons,Sharkey,Rahman, Mercer etc.

Sure on a good night, they are capable. However they probably would not. I think Frazier would have at least a 50-50 chance vs Liston,Jeffries, and Lewis, and would be a live underdog vs Louis. I don't think it's a given that they would have walked through Norton either.

I do think Foreman deserves some credit for the Lyle fight. He take a chance a gainst a good opponent after coming off a layoff. He almost lost, but he showed a lot heart and pulled off the win.

The Young fight has to count against him. True, Young fought a very good fight. Young likely would have troubled most great fighters that night. However, the really great ones (the top 10-12 all-time heavyweights) probably would have beaten Young.

I do agree that Foreman could have fought better competition both in his early career and especially in his comeback. I don't blame him for fighting tomato cans early on in his comeback. He was off 10 years; it's not like he should have been fighting top contneders right off of the bat. Like Buzz said, he needed to work some of the rust out. He did beat a few guys that were a bit above that; Qawi,Cooney, Coetzer, Stewart etc.
However, he didn't really deserve a title shot against Holyfield. Still, he fought a great fight vs a prime Holyfield. Considering his age, I don't know if anyone else could have been that competitive.
After the loss to Holyfield, he again didn't fight the top contenders. Not only didn't he fight Lewis, Bowe, or Tyson, he didn't fight the guys a little below them like Tucker, Spoon, Tubbs etc. There was actually a lot of depth in the early 90; Rudduck, Mercer, and few others were available.
Foreman wisely picked his spots. He knew he could lose to those guys and that if he kept beating the fringe contenders he would get another shot. He was only going to gamble if a title was on the line.

As for how would have other guys done at the age of 46 vs Moorer; it's hard to say. Moorer didn't have a good chin, but we really have no idea what most of these other great fighters would have had left at that age. Foreman did take a lot punishment against Moorer and it's likely that Moorer could have stopped a lot of once great fighters when they were in their mid-40s.

[The End]

In addition to destroying Frazier and Norton, he also beat Lyle in a life and death struggle and stopped a still capable Chuvalo. However, he was also very protected leading up to the Frazier fight, especially after barely getting the nod against Peralta in their first fight. And let's not forget that in addition to getting stopped by Ali he was also schooled and dropped by Young.

And exactly what risks did he take in his second career that earned him a title shot? It was risky figthing a string of bums and a few past it names? Wouldn't it have been riskier to actually fight some of the guys from that era that many on here seems to enjoy making fun of? There is a reason why Old George never fought Tucker, Spoon, Tubbs, etc. Because he would have gotten beaten.

In an alternate universe where Ali had won the FOTC, it's possible that George would have been nothing more than a Mac Foster type footnote. He may have just faded away after getting beaten by Ali, possibly then losing to a Quarry or Bugner while trying to earn another title shot.

Louis, Liston, Jeffries and possibly Lewis would have probably also walked right through Frazier and Norton. The difference is that most of them also would have had a chance of beating the Zaire Ali and Jimmy Young. It's hard to say about the come from behind KO of Moorer in a second career because none of them, with the possible exception of Liston, would have quit after losing a fight to Young.

I've never seen Joe Frazier disrespected in such a way.

[Ezzard]

I was reading Boxing News 2013 annual last night. A highly venerated publication that I believe is the oldest running boxing magazine in the world. They had a section on the 70s era…with reports and previews from the original copies of Boxing News.

Before the Frazier-Foreman fight there was some speculation that Frazier was a spent force. They picked Frazier to win based on the fact that George was untested. But there were two issues… One that the Ali fight had taken a lot out of Joe and he could no longer climb the mountain and Two that there were suggestions that Frazier was not as dedicated he used to be. He came in for that fight at a career high weight. Maybe it made no difference in the end but it should be noted.

Boxing News also tentatively suggested that Frazier was unfairly held in the last two Ali fights. And that this tipped the result in his favour. They also printed Frazier’s comments that he made complaints to the ref but no action was taken.

The publication scored the first 2 Ali-Norton fights to Ali. But did not offer a score for the third fight.

I’m just putting all this down because it’s interesting. Lots of debate about these guys. And it’s good to hear what was thought at the time and not just retrospectively.

[Ezzard]

Boxing News also suggests that Ali took his foot off the pedal in the mid rounds of the 2nd and 3rd Frazier fights because he knew the storm that was coming in the final third of the fights. In this way he was able to prepare himself for the onslaught a deal with Frazier better.

[misterpunch]

joe was damaged goods after the FOTC i dont think theres much argument on that. foreman scored well in zaire with a few brutal body shots but hardly any effective to the head of ali - i counted very few when i watched it again last week.

[Ambling Alp II]

Not much arguement there? There sure is. He was just 27 years old, and had a grand total of 28 fights. He was in his absolute prime. That is almost as weak the Mike Tyson past his prime excuses.

[misterpunch]

frazier gave everything to win the first ali fight and was busted up badly in the process. have another look. he won it but was never as good again. he may have been in his prime from an age perspective but he was on the slide from the final bell onwards. tyson - as i have stated before - was damaged goods mentally/psychologically well before the douglas fight.

all i can say to you is... look at the fighter not the stats

[Giancarlo]

But Ali, admitted that he was as good as out on his feet at times, didnt he. If ali didnt have that astonishing chin/recovery ability, he loses the fight. That means Foreman was close to winning.

At which points in the fight was Ali out on his feet?

I assume you have actually seen the fight, so point me to these moments.

[Ambling Alp II]

frazier gave everything to win the first ali fight and was busted up badly in the process. have another look. he won it but was never as good again. he may have been in his prime from an age perspective but he was on the slide from the final bell onwards. tyson - as i have stated before - was damaged goods mentally/psychologically well before the douglas fight.

all i can say to you is... look at the fighter not the stats

I agree that Frazier (and Tyson for that matter) weren't as successful in some their subsequent fights. Some of that was due to their opponents. Frazier's losses were to Ali and Foreman.
Take a look at Fraziers subsequent fights:

-Frazier first two fights after the first Ali fight were against lesser fighters. Hard to really compare his performance to his fights against a top opponent. Still, he won by stoppage in 4 rounds and 5 rounds. Given that he was a slow starter and still stopped them fairly early, there is nothing to suggest that he was slipping. Not his best performances, but he likely didn't take them seriously.

-Yes he was destroyed by Foreman. Foreman at his best did that to almost everyone. Very likely that the result would have similar at any stage of Frazier's career. That isn't some smoking gun that he washed up.
-Against Bugner, he had some trouble but still looked good. Bugner was a good fighter who fought well and Frazier still won.

-Frazier lost the 2nd fight to Ali, but there certainly is no embarrassment there. He certainly didn't look bad.
-He then stopped Quarry ( a top contender) in 5 rounds.
-He didn't look great against Jimmy Ellis. However, he gradually imposed his will and stopped Ellis in 9 rounds.
-He lost the 3rd fight to Ali, but it was one a great fight. It was one of the best performances of Frazier's career. That fight took a lot out of both men and accelrated their declines.
-Frazier certainly looked past it the 2nd time vs Foreman, who wasn't as impressive as he had once been. Still, even in that fight, you could see flashes of the once-great Frazier.

You can always make excuses for a guy and the past his prime (or damged goods)is one of the most frequent. Sometimes there is some thing to it, and sometime there isn't.
Age and wear and tear are real reasons why a fighter declines. Almost everything else is BS. Personal problems and not being ready mentally/psychologically is nothing more than the dog ate my homework excuse.

It's also not fair to a guy who beat these guys (Frazier, Tyson in this case) if there really isn't anything to the excuses. Everyone has their personal problems. Not being their mentally/pshycologically is not a legitimate excuse. If you really buy into this nonsense, then you could use that excuse for every opponent that Frazier and Tyson beat.

[misterpunch]

i have to say your look at the career of smokin joe post FOTC bears me out. if anyone counts frazier as an all time great heavy you can really only take that idea up to and including that fight. after that he does not qualify. he beat lesser fighters. he struggled to beat bugner and ellis. he was well beaten by ali 2. you say age and wear and tear are what causes declines. exactly - frazier was worn and torn from FOTC.

your case stating that psychological factors are BS is also weak and shows your less than sound understanding of sports as a whole. a dog ate my homework excuse???? put yourself in the shoes or the mind of mike tyson around the robin givens era - maximum media overload, the like of which has never before or since been seen in boxing. the baddest man ON THE PLANET!!! all you got to do to let that affect you is believe it. tyson believed the hype. he no more needed his skills to win fights - he could intimidate and win.

frazier was not affected mentally in the same way - he just knew in his mind that he wasnt the boss any more, but his decline was a combination of that and the wear and tear of his matches with ali and foreman.

[Ambling Alp II]

After the first Ali fight, Frazier beat Bugner, Ellis and Quarry. That is similar to the competition that he fought before the first Ali fight. He performed as well in the 2nd Ali fight as he did in many fights that won before the first Ali fight. He just happened to be fighting Ali, so he lost. His performance in the 3rd Ali fight was better than almost any of his fights before he fought Ali the first time.

Frazier was worn and torn from the FOTC? Please. That was one fight. He was 27 years old. No reason he couldn't come back from that. And he did. He just unlucky that he had Ali and Foreman to deal with. Many, many fighters have taken more punishment in a fight and had several more great fights. Ali took at least as much punishment in their first fight as Frazier. It's ridiculaus to claim that Frazier lost to Ali the next two times because Frazier was damaged goods. Ali still had great performances after that fight, and he was older than Frazier. No reason Frazier couldn't come back from that. And he did.

I agree that the wear and tear of all 3 of the Ali fights and the Foreman fights were part of his eventual decline. He wasn't the same fighter by the time he fought Foreman the 2nd time. By that time, you could say he he was "damaged goods". However, that was 5 years after the Ali fight. Naturally, the wear and tear and that he was starting to get older started to catch up with him.

As for Tyson, maximum media overload? The likes that have never seen before or since? Please. He was under far less pressure than Jack Johnson, Joe Louis, or Muhammad Ali.
If Tyson believed the hype, that's his problem. Robin Givens? Seriously, thats an excuse? Buster Douglas's mom died before the Tyson fight. Every person in the world has personal problems.

[The End]

:idea: Vitali Klitschko