George Foreman (1973) - undisputed HW champion 2017 ?

[ValMar]

Man ! An excellent post !

[Enlightened-One]

Maybe, when he was sixteen........

Have you checked Foreman's official weight when he competed during the early seventies, which was captured on the day of the fight?

He'd only need to lose the same sort of weight that welterweights like Peterson, Thurman, Ortiz and Maidana had to, with the official weigh-in's currently taking place the day prior (i.e. 15lbs to 18lbs) to make the cruiserweight limit.

Tony Bellew's and David Haye's rehydration weight was on a par with Foreman's official weight when they both competed as cruiserweights, with both men being about the same height as Big George. I'm confident that with a little bit of research, I can name other cruiserweights that rehydrate to Foreman's official weight during the early seventies.

Big George was a natural HW, obviously. You are right considering some current CWs, but Foreman's body type was quite different....
I am afraid that we are off topic, by the way...

George Foreman’s mathematical average weight was 217lbs from the start of his career through until the end of 1973. He was 217.5lbs when he faced Joe Frazier in 1973. He was 6’ 3.5” in height.

George Foreman’s height and weight in 1973 meant that his general size was almost certainly comparable to rehydrated versions of the following modern day world-rated cruiserweights:
• Oleksandr Usyk
• Murat Gassiev
• Tony Bellew
• Marco Huck
• Yunier Dorticos

This stance could be strengthened further if we looked at the size of cruiserweights that competed five to ten years ago (i.e. such as rehydrated versions of Guillermo Jones, David Haye, Enzo Maccarinelli, Steve Cunningham etc.).

Now it should be abundantly clear to deduce that the 1973 version of George Foreman would have had to endure a massive size disadvantage when competing against the current crop of world-rated heavyweights… and we’re talking a few inches in height and approx. 30lbs in weight:
• Tyson Fury = 265lbs; 6' 9"
• Wladimir Klitschko = 245lbs; 6' 6"
• Deontay Wilder = 228lbs; 6' 7"
• Kubrat Pulev = 253lbs; 6' 4.5"
• Luis Ortiz = 241lbs; 6' 4"
• Anthony Joshua = 249lbs; 6' 6"
• Joseph Parker = 246lbs; 6' 4"

From the start of his career through until 1973, the average George Foreman opponent was typically 6’ 0” in height, weighing around the 206lbs mark, which could easily be argued to be smaller than the vast majority of rehydrated versions of the world-rated cruiserweights competing today.

For sure, George Foreman carried enough power that would have helped him score a few upsets over some of today’s big name heavyweights, but his optimal weight class (in terms of size and effectiveness) would have been at cruiserweight.

Therefore, if the 1973 version of George Foreman was competing today, his preferred division would almost certainly be cruiserweight, a weight-class he could easily make, because he would have had to endure too much of a size disadvantage against modern era heavyweights.

From reading the above response, you should be able to ascertain my on-topic opinion on the matter and also my thoughts about how unreasonable your comparison is.

[ValMar]

OMG, Big George had destroyed Joe Frazier and Ken Norton, but he would surely have problems with Kubrat Pulev and Joseph Parker ???

[Enlightened-One]

OMG, Big George had destroyed Joe Frazier and Ken Norton, but he would surely have problems with Kubrat Pulev and Joseph Parker ???

Up until the first Ali fight, when he was at his prime, the 5’ 11” Joe Frazier typically weighed 203lbs. Kenny Norton’s average weight was only 207lbs prior to his bout with Foreman. So it can easily be concluded that both men were smaller than rehydrated versions of today’s crop of cruiserweights.

What makes you think that a defensively irresponsible, highly-durable and powerful cruiserweight like the 1973 version of George Foreman, that rarely employed the jab and didn't know how to take a backward step, could be capable of walking through today’s heavyweight giants?

There are other versions of George Foreman to consider that would have been far more competitive against today’s heavyweight behemoths than the 1973 version.

If you guys feel that a size disadvantage of few inches in height and 30lbs+ in weight can easily be dismissed as being meaningless…

Why don't we compare Sugar Ray Robinson to today's world-rated cruiserweights? Why not consider Khaosai Galaxy versus the current crop of top lightweights?

[ValMar]

Frankly, Frazier was two levels above current Pulev and Parker. He was competitive against the best ever HW...

[Enlightened-One]

Frankly, Frazier was two levels above current Pulev and Parker. He was competitive against the best ever HW...

Many of the top heavyweight fighters that competed 44 years ago were physically smaller than rehydrated versions of today's world-rated cruiserweights.

The heavyweight division during 2016 is a completely different weight class than its 1973 equivalent.

Put it this way, Tyson Fury would have been ten inches taller and 60lbs+ heavier than the prime Joe Frazier. Would that be considered a "fair" fantasy fight?

Why are you ignoring my facts? Does the dimensions of fighters not matter to you?

[lillywhite14]

Funny how people call you a troll with a difference of opinion to them what an absolute joke
Fury is unbeaten and hasnt been any where near being beaten with proper tactics, Fury stepped up when he had to with klit and imo would do the same to big George. Foreman was shown to be susceptible to being outboxed and got knocked out which is a fact. Yes Foreman was a monster puncher who moved like a mummy he wouldn't stand a chance against a fast slick moving awkward spider arm fighter like Fury.

Big bad John McDermott beat him in their first fight and was robbed. He was beating him in their rematch too until Tyson stepped up and ended matters.

[Oiky]

Funny how people call you a troll with a difference of opinion to them what an absolute joke
Fury is unbeaten and hasnt been any where near being beaten with proper tactics, Fury stepped up when he had to with klit and imo would do the same to big George. Foreman was shown to be susceptible to being outboxed and got knocked out which is a fact. Yes Foreman was a monster puncher who moved like a mummy he wouldn't stand a chance against a fast slick moving awkward spider arm fighter like Fury.

Big bad John McDermott beat him in their first fight and was robbed. He was beating him in their rematch too until Tyson stepped up and ended matters.

Tyson has come on leaps and bounds since then, I think foreman is a legend and an animal and I book him highly but I agree fury would've out boxed him.

Was early days in his career back when he fought McDermott

[Lackeos]

Fury might be able to beat Foreman, or he might not. Also, there are assorted logistical challenges to unifying belts and becoming undisputed.

[Enlightened-One]

I can’t believe that people can so easily dismiss a size disadvantage of six inches in height and roughly 45lbs in weight, when they say they're honestly convinced that the 1973 version of George Foreman would beat Tyson Fury.

The size discrepancy between the 1973 version of George Foreman and Tyson Fury is roughly the same as the physical difference between Roman Gonzalez and Gennady Golovkin!



If people that frequent this forum genuinely believe that size really doesn’t matter, why aren’t they creating threads demanding to know the reason why GGG is ducking Chocolatito?

People have also claimed that because George Foreman defeated Joe Frazier, he’d have no problem with some of the top heavyweights competing today. Well let’s look at that claim…

Jean Marc Mormeck is the same height and weight as the version of Joe Frazier that we saw face 'Big' George Foreman in 1973, so if we compare the Frenchman against Wladimir Klitschko, we’d be able to gauge how small Smokin' Joe actually was in comparison to current heavyweights:

And let’s not forget that Jean Marc Mormeck (who is far more ripped and muscular than Smokin' Joe) is actually a relatively small cruiserweight in comparison to the top 200lbs guys competing today (i.e. Oleksandr Usyk, Murat Gassiev & Tony Bellew), as he was the world champion when the weight limit in that weight class was only 190lbs.

[ValMar]

Frankly, Frazier was two levels above current Pulev and Parker. He was competitive against the best ever HW...

Many of the top heavyweight fighters that competed 44 years ago were physically smaller than rehydrated versions of today's world-rated cruiserweights.

The heavyweight division during 2016 is a completely different weight class than its 1973 equivalent.

Put it this way, Tyson Fury would have been ten inches taller and 60lbs+ heavier than the prime Joe Frazier. Would that be considered a "fair" fantasy fight?

Why are you ignoring my facts? Does the dimensions of fighters not matter to you?

The size is important factor, but not the most important one. What about Tyson and Holyfield, or current Haye or Povetkin ? Speaking about fantasy fights, I think recent (or 2015 version) Fury would beat Frazier by UD, but he would be defeated by Ali, and destroyed by Foreman.

[Rexob]

Have you checked Foreman's official weight when he competed during the early seventies, which was captured on the day of the fight?

He'd only need to lose the same sort of weight that welterweights like Peterson, Thurman, Ortiz and Maidana had to, with the official weigh-in's currently taking place the day prior (i.e. 15lbs to 18lbs) to make the cruiserweight limit.

Tony Bellew's and David Haye's rehydration weight was on a par with Foreman's official weight when they both competed as cruiserweights, with both men being about the same height as Big George. I'm confident that with a little bit of research, I can name other cruiserweights that rehydrate to Foreman's official weight during the early seventies.

Big George was a natural HW, obviously. You are right considering some current CWs, but Foreman's body type was quite different....
I am afraid that we are off topic, by the way...

George Foreman’s mathematical average weight was 217lbs from the start of his career through until the end of 1973. He was 217.5lbs when he faced Joe Frazier in 1973. He was 6’ 3.5” in height.

George Foreman’s height and weight in 1973 meant that his general size was almost certainly comparable to rehydrated versions of the following modern day world-rated cruiserweights:
• Oleksandr Usyk
• Murat Gassiev
• Tony Bellew
• Marco Huck
• Yunier Dorticos

This stance could be strengthened further if we looked at the size of cruiserweights that competed five to ten years ago (i.e. such as rehydrated versions of Guillermo Jones, David Haye, Enzo Maccarinelli, Steve Cunningham etc.).

Now it should be abundantly clear to deduce that the 1973 version of George Foreman would have had to endure a massive size disadvantage when competing against the current crop of world-rated heavyweights… and we’re talking a few inches in height and approx. 30lbs in weight:
• Tyson Fury = 265lbs; 6' 9"
• Wladimir Klitschko = 245lbs; 6' 6"
• Deontay Wilder = 228lbs; 6' 7"
• Kubrat Pulev = 253lbs; 6' 4.5"
• Luis Ortiz = 241lbs; 6' 4"
• Anthony Joshua = 249lbs; 6' 6"
• Joseph Parker = 246lbs; 6' 4"

From the start of his career through until 1973, the average George Foreman opponent was typically 6’ 0” in height, weighing around the 206lbs mark, which could easily be argued to be smaller than the vast majority of rehydrated versions of the world-rated cruiserweights competing today.

For sure, George Foreman carried enough power that would have helped him score a few upsets over some of today’s big name heavyweights, but his optimal weight class (in terms of size and effectiveness) would have been at cruiserweight.

Therefore, if the 1973 version of George Foreman was competing today, his preferred division would almost certainly be cruiserweight, a weight-class he could easily make, because he would have had to endure too much of a size disadvantage against modern era heavyweights.

From reading the above response, you should be able to ascertain my on-topic opinion on the matter and also my thoughts about how unreasonable your comparison is.

Couldn't put it better myself excellent post

[lillywhite14]

I knew I should have kept out of here!

Have fun chaps

[ValMar]

In the fantasy land, it would be their chances (per cent) against young and vicious George Foreman :
-Joshua : 10 %
- Klitschko : 8 %
- Ortiz, Haye : 5 %
- Povetkin, Parker, Wilder : 4 %
-Stiverne, Fury, Pulev, Price : 2 %

[Badhusker]

George Foreman 1973

...Compared with present-day fighters...

... Compared to a fighter that competed almost 44 years ago... about a fictional situation ... and if the 1973 version of George Foreman was around today, he'd almost certainly compete at cruiserweight.

He averaged about 225 in his prime. You are beyond stupid.

[Enlightened-One]

...Compared with present-day fighters...

... Compared to a fighter that competed almost 44 years ago... about a fictional situation ... and if the 1973 version of George Foreman was around today, he'd almost certainly compete at cruiserweight.

He averaged about 225 in his prime. You are beyond stupid.

Once you've mastered the basics, like knowing how to inhale, exhale, blink and read the title of this thread, then you can apologise for your moronic response.

"You are beyond stupid."

You really are your own worst enemy at times.

[ldlamb]

The best athletes became boxers in the past.

Way more options now.

Foreman is three levels above most current HW's In skill level.

Size difference would not matter except against the very, very best of today's game.

[Bard of Boxrec]

Cue someone coming in and talking about 'THESE GUYS TODAY ARE JUST, UH, SO BIG!'

I was kinda half-joking when I said this at the start of the thread but no, the people with this argument actually still exist apparently

[ldlamb]

Looking at the size numbers you posted.

Wilder's are pretty similar to Gerry Cooney

And Ortiz's are about the same as Buster Mathis Sr.

I'm not sure there is a huge talent difference between those guys.
And the best of the 70s and 80s HW's were able to handle them.

[Enlightened-One]

Looking at the size numbers you posted.

Wilder's are pretty similar to Gerry Cooney

And Ortiz's are about the same as Buster Mathis Sr.

I'm not sure there is a huge talent difference between those guys.
And the best of the 70s and 80s HW's were able to handle them.

Are you paying attention to the thread title?

[ldlamb]

My post was a direct response to the list you made, of what I assume are who you think are the big Heavyweights that George would have to face.

[ValMar]

We have been talking about Foreman's size (an average HW) instead of his punch power (perhaps the best ever)....

[Bard of Boxrec]

We have been talking about Foreman's size (an average HW) instead of his punch power (perhaps the best ever)....

But..but...but THESE GUYS TODAY ARE JUST SO BIGGGG LOOK HOW BIG THEY ARE THEY ARE GIANTS

AND TYSON FURY GOT BACK UP AGAINST CUNNINGHAM AND PAJKIC SO HOW WILL HE NOT GET UP AGAINST COTTON FISTED GEORGE FOREMAN WHO WAS ACTUALLY A CRUISERWEIGHT LIKE THOSE GUYS

HOW WOULD SOMEONE LIKE JOE FRAZIER DEAL WITH THE SIZE OF TYE FIELDS, TYE FIELDS IS JUST SO BIG GUYS HIS BIGNESS IS JUST TOO MUCH FOR A SMALL LITTLE GUY LIKE JOE

OK WILDER GOT DECKED VS SCONIERS AND LOOKS LIKE BAMBI ON ROLLERSKATES AND THEY HAVEN'T MATCHED HIM WITH A DECENT PUNCHER HIS WHOEL CAREER BUT BIG BIG BIG IT WOULD REQUIRE A NICOLAY VALUEV WHO IS BIGGERER TO BEAT HIM BECAUSE HE'S MORE BIG

OK WLAD KLIT GOT MARMALISED BY SMALL GUYS LIKE 6'2 LAMON BREWSTER AND DECKED HARD BY SAM PETER BUT THEN HE WON VS A LOT OF SMALL GUYS WHICH DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE SMALL GUYS JUST SUCKED IT JUST MEANS BIG BIG BIG SIZE SIZE (NUTRITION MODERN TRAINING METHODS)

[Rexob]

You must admit though that Frazier was a bit overrated, with only one big win on his record against an opponent who was coming off a long layoff?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

You must admit though that Frazier was a bit overrated, with only one big win on his record against an opponent who was coming off a long layoff?