The Nuances of the Foreman Frazier I fight

[BoxBuzz]

I'm very impressed with the way this fella breaks down the fights, His descriptions of what is happening is spot on forensically. It's just a near perfect audio description of what the eye can see, (and some can't quite understand, due to the moves being so fast that they can't perceive).

Does anyone else appreciate the degree of accuracy the narrative has in relation to the action? In my opinion it's superb!


I have one very small critical element of feedback:

I'm not sure how much of what is playing out is actually strategized by the fighters, vs simply muscle memory and what some of us call "ring generalship". That ability to "invent on the fly". Ali may have been the best at this, because he figured out a way to beat good boxers, good swarmers, and good punchers. And that skill-set can't be "route in memory" but must be a series of immediate real time proactions and reactions.

Was it Tyson that said "Everybody has a plan until they are punched in the face"? I think Ali was an exception to that rule. He seemed to calm down, and get mentally very busy when he was under the most pressure.

Ali did not follow the basics as good as the best trainers would like to see. That's not to say he didn't have a style, or a series of successful maneuvers that were typical for him and defined him to some degree, (and a route style of "mistakes" as well".) But he wasn't as "etched in stone" with his style as either Foreman or Frazier. And he certainly did not over power his opponents, though he was good at being more "athletic" than most of his rivals. He NEVER seemed to lose his ability to be "working on a plan"........even with Holmes and Berbick, when he probably had no chance.

There was one opponent that was recognized as having perhaps the "right stuff" to beat Ali and diligintly trained to take advantage of every perceived miscue, routine weakness, and strategic set of errors Ali ever advertised in his fights. Ken Norton, and he had a trainer, Eddie Futch that took a vow to make the very best of it.

Futch made it his goal to figure Ali out and stay a step ahead of him and worked with Ken to attempt to make it impossible for Ali to get away with those mistakes. Much credit should be given to the fact that Ali was able, to keep up and stay on a par with a specifically focused,disciplined, well educated fighter/trainer team such as that. Ali was always able to stay competitive despite the type or degree of threat he faced.

Boxer, Puncher, Swarmer, or even educated fighter/trainer teams all came up a bit short, until Ali finally aged out on his own.

[oogiebe]

I'm very impressed with the way this fella breaks down the fights, His descriptions of what is happening is spot on forensically. It's just a near perfect audio description of what the eye can see, (and some can't quite understand, due to the moves being so fast that they can't perceive).

Does anyone else appreciate the degree of accuracy the narrative has in relation to the action? In my opinion it's superb!


I have one very small critical element of feedback:

I'm not sure how much of what is playing out is actually strategized by the fighters, vs simply muscle memory and what some of us call "ring generalship". That ability to "invent on the fly". Ali may have been the best at this, because he figured out a way to beat good boxers, good swarmers, and good punchers. And that skill-set can't be "route in memory" but must be a series of immediate real time proactions and reactions.

Was it Tyson that said "Everybody has a plan until they are punched in the face"? I think Ali was an exception to that rule. He seemed to calm down, and get mentally very busy when he was under the most pressure.

Ali did not follow the basics as good as the best trainers would like to see. That's not to say he didn't have a style, or a series of successful maneuvers that were typical for him and defined him to some degree, (and a route style of "mistakes" as well".) But he wasn't as "etched in stone" with his style as either Foreman or Frazier. And he certainly did not over power his opponents, though he was good at being more "athletic" than most of his rivals. He NEVER seemed to lose his ability to be "working on a plan"........even with Holmes and Berbick, when he probably had no chance.

There was one opponent that was recognized as having perhaps the "right stuff" to beat Ali and diligintly trained to take advantage of every perceived miscue, routine weakness, and strategic set of errors Ali ever advertised in his fights. Ken Norton, and he had a trainer, Eddie Futch that took a vow to make the very best of it.

Futch made it his goal to figure Ali out and stay a step ahead of him and worked with Ken to attempt to make it impossible for Ali to get away with those mistakes. Much credit should be given to the fact that Ali was able, to keep up and stay on a par with a specifically focused,disciplined, well educated fighter/trainer team such as that. Ali was always able to stay competitive despite the type or degree of threat he faced.

Boxer, Puncher, Swarmer, or even educated fighter/trainer teams all came up a bit short, until Ali finally aged out on his own.

Nice post. Ali was gifted. I don't use that term flippantly.

[Ambling Alp II]

Given his natural talents, it would not have been smart for him to fight conventionally. Normally, a trainer wouldn't want a fighter to fight like that at all. For Ali, it made sense. And Ali was a fighter who adapted to his opponent and when he got older he adapted his style to what he could still physically could do.

I really liked the analysis of the Foreman-Frazier fight for a couple of reasons. First, it shows that Foreman was a lot more than just a tremendous puncher.
2. It shows that boxing is a lot more than height, weight, and reach. Or even speed, power and chin. It is a sport that involves a lot of different skills, tactics, and strategies.

[oogiebe]

Given his natural talents, it would not have been smart for him to fight conventionally. Normally, a trainer wouldn't want a fighter to fight like that at all. For Ali, it made sense. And Ali was a fighter who adapted to his opponent and when he got older he adapted his style to what he could still physically could do.

I really liked the analysis of the Foreman-Frazier fight for a couple of reasons. First, it shows that Foreman was a lot more than just a tremendous puncher.
2. It shows that boxing is a lot more than height, weight, and reach. Or even speed, power and chin. It is a sport that involves a lot of different skills, tactics, and strategies.

Nice post! Great points! 100% agree, especially on Foreman. I really loved that analysis.

[APerno]

Just want to do some agreeing! -- Frazier never beats Foreman; styles do make fights. -- Ali was the best at changing tactics mid fight; his 'rope a dope' tactic was in fact an act of desperation not a preconceived strategy; Ali himself said that he had to come up with something new quick because Foreman's footwork was too good. -- Which then brings us to Foreman the 'big puncher,' of course he was more than just a big puncher (and we all should have realized it even back then; I didn't.) The man was taught his (cross-arm) defense by the Old Mongoose and his footwork by some guy who could 'cut off the ring' on Willie Pep; of course George Foreman could box.

[oogiebe]

Just want to do some agreeing! -- Frazier never beats Foreman; styles do make fights. -- Ali was the best at changing tactics mid fight; his 'rope a dope' tactic was in fact an act of desperation not a preconceived strategy; Ali himself said that he had to come up with something new quick because Foreman's footwork was too good. -- Which then brings us to Foreman the 'big puncher,' of course he was more than just a big puncher (and we all should have realized it even back then; I didn't.) The man was taught his (cross-arm) defense by the Old Mongoose and his footwork by some guy who could 'cut off the ring' on Willie Pep; of course George Foreman could box.

Forgot Saddler was part of his team. Nice post Perno! I've always thought that Foreman's skills were underrated, probably due to his incredible thudding power.

[Tony1244]

I love boxing. I love it for all the reasons why you do. I'm very much into the techniques and strategies and NUANCES behind the fights and of the fighters themselves. To that point, I'm sharing this video that examines the 'little' things/tactics that Foreman used in his historic and devastating KO of a favored champion, Joe Frazier. George wasn't only a puncher, but learned what to use to maximize his natural gifts. Hope you appreciate this!

Thanks for this It's like boxing-porn.

[oogiebe]

It's a really terrific series of break-downs that I found so interesting and informative.

[Tony1244]

It's Great! GF only lost to master boxers Ali and Jimmy Young in his first pro career.

What other HWs throughout the years do you think could have beaten GF of the 1970s? Holmes and Lewis come up.

I always thought from his present era, Bugner could have given GF trouble.

What about Walcott? He's a bit small, but kind of reminded me of Jimmy Young.

[oogiebe]

It's Great! GF only lost to master boxers Ali and Jimmy Young in his first pro career.

What other HWs throughout the years do you think could have beaten GF of the 1970s? Holmes and Lewis come up.

I always thought from his present era, Bugner could have given GF trouble.

What about Walcott? He's a bit small, but kind of reminded me of Jimmy Young.

Holmes vs George would've been interesting; Walcott too small I think; Bugner doesn't have enough movement to frustrate Foreman and not enough power to keep him off either. Holmes is the one that's really compelling to me. Wasn't as fast as Ali but fast enough and had that great strong jab and more power than Ali had. Not to mention amazing recuperative powers (see Shavers II).

[Tony1244]

It's Great! GF only lost to master boxers Ali and Jimmy Young in his first pro career.

What other HWs throughout the years do you think could have beaten GF of the 1970s? Holmes and Lewis come up.

I always thought from his present era, Bugner could have given GF trouble.

What about Walcott? He's a bit small, but kind of reminded me of Jimmy Young.

Holmes vs George would've been interesting; Walcott too small I think; Bugner doesn't have enough movement to frustrate Foreman and not enough power to keep him off either. Holmes is the one that's really compelling to me. Wasn't as fast as Ali but fast enough and had that great strong jab and more power than Ali had. Not to mention amazing recuperative powers (see Shavers II).

I would have favored Larry against GF in 77 or 78 for many of the reasons you mentioned. I agree on Bugner, but he may have been able to take Foreman into the middle rounds which was no easy task back then.

I looked up Walcott. Two inches shorter and about 12 LBS less than an in shape Young. I'll remain agnostic on that one.

[oogiebe]

It's Great! GF only lost to master boxers Ali and Jimmy Young in his first pro career.

What other HWs throughout the years do you think could have beaten GF of the 1970s? Holmes and Lewis come up.

I always thought from his present era, Bugner could have given GF trouble.

What about Walcott? He's a bit small, but kind of reminded me of Jimmy Young.

Holmes vs George would've been interesting; Walcott too small I think; Bugner doesn't have enough movement to frustrate Foreman and not enough power to keep him off either. Holmes is the one that's really compelling to me. Wasn't as fast as Ali but fast enough and had that great strong jab and more power than Ali had. Not to mention amazing recuperative powers (see Shavers II).

I would have favored Larry against GF in 77 or 78 for many of the reasons you mentioned. I agree on Bugner, but he may have been able to take Foreman into the middle rounds which was no easy task back then.

I looked up Walcott. Two inches shorter and about 12 LBS less than an in shape Young. I'll remain agnostic on that one.

Fair enough! Hope you are well Tony!

[Tony1244]

Holmes vs George would've been interesting; Walcott too small I think; Bugner doesn't have enough movement to frustrate Foreman and not enough power to keep him off either. Holmes is the one that's really compelling to me. Wasn't as fast as Ali but fast enough and had that great strong jab and more power than Ali had. Not to mention amazing recuperative powers (see Shavers II).

I would have favored Larry against GF in 77 or 78 for many of the reasons you mentioned. I agree on Bugner, but he may have been able to take Foreman into the middle rounds which was no easy task back then.

I looked up Walcott. Two inches shorter and about 12 LBS less than an in shape Young. I'll remain agnostic on that one.

Fair enough! Hope you are well Tony!

Hope you are well also. Thought I was until this IBS crap in the last few days.

[oogiebe]

I would have favored Larry against GF in 77 or 78 for many of the reasons you mentioned. I agree on Bugner, but he may have been able to take Foreman into the middle rounds which was no easy task back then.

I looked up Walcott. Two inches shorter and about 12 LBS less than an in shape Young. I'll remain agnostic on that one.

Fair enough! Hope you are well Tony!

Hope you are well also. Thought I was until this IBS crap in the last few days.

IBS "crap." LMAO! No seriously it's horrible. A real good bud of mine has it so severe he's constantly in bed when he's not working.

[Tuan_Jim]

It's Great! GF only lost to master boxers Ali and Jimmy Young in his first pro career.

What other HWs throughout the years do you think could have beaten GF of the 1970s? Holmes and Lewis come up.

I always thought from his present era, Bugner could have given GF trouble.

What about Walcott? He's a bit small, but kind of reminded me of Jimmy Young.

No way would Holmes ever beat the 70's Foreman. I think he would meet the outer limits of his toughness and wind up spread-eagled at some point, just as he was versus Tyson.

I don't know why you think Bugner would trouble Foreman. He would feel Foreman's power and withdraw into his shell for 12 painful rounds. Walcott would be a problem for a while because of his fine skills, but GF catches him at some point.

I think Young benefited from the sweltering Puerto Rican heat. Foreman's power-boxing wasn't suited to such exotic climes, and still it was razor-thin.

[Onetimeonly]

I'd favor Holmes over George at anytime. Holy field too.

[Tuan_Jim]

Holmes was a level below Ali, Foreman and Frazier.

[Tony1244]

I'd favor Holmes over George at anytime. Holy field too.

Agree with you on Holmes but not Holyfield. My guess is Holy would have fallen to GF like Norton did.

Someone mentioned the Puerto Rican heat. GF was from Houston. He could handle a warm night in March.

[Tuan_Jim]

I'd favor Holmes over George at anytime. Holy field too.

Agree with you on Holmes but not Holyfield. My guess is Holy would have fallen to GF like Norton did.

Someone mentioned the Puerto Rican heat. GF was from Houston. He could handle a warm night in March.

Being from Houston means you can fight 36 minutes in 90 degree heat?

I don't think you thought that remark through.

[Tony1244]

I'd favor Holmes over George at anytime. Holy field too.

Agree with you on Holmes but not Holyfield. My guess is Holy would have fallen to GF like Norton did.

Someone mentioned the Puerto Rican heat. GF was from Houston. He could handle a warm night in March.

Being from Houston means you can fight 36 minutes in 90 degree heat?

I don't think you thought that remark through.

Was it 90 degrees? I think where you are from is a factor in how you deal with extreme temperatures. His style then where he wasn't relaxed in the ring is a much bigger factor. There is no reason to believe GF could have beaten Young, Ali, or Holmes back then in any temperature. Styles make fights.

[Ambling Alp II]

Styles can influence fights, but they don't make fights. I would lean towards Holmes over Foreman, but Foreman would certainly have a chance. I do think if Foreman got Holmes in trouble, he would probably put him away. He was usually a very good finisher.

Foreman did seem off against Young, not to take anything from Young who fought a great fight. If Foreman was at his best, it would have been interesting.

Ali, Louis, and Holmes (by a slight margin) are the only fighters who beat Foreman more often than not. A few others would have a serious chance.

[Tuan_Jim]

Agree with you on Holmes but not Holyfield. My guess is Holy would have fallen to GF like Norton did.

Someone mentioned the Puerto Rican heat. GF was from Houston. He could handle a warm night in March.

Being from Houston means you can fight 36 minutes in 90 degree heat?

I don't think you thought that remark through.

Was it 90 degrees? I think where you are from is a factor in how you deal with extreme temperatures. His style then where he wasn't relaxed in the ring is a much bigger factor. There is no reason to believe GF could have beaten Young, Ali, or Holmes back then in any temperature. Styles make fights.

There's no reason to believe he could beat Young because he lost a razor thin decision to him one time in tropical heat? Do you actually think before you write?

And why is Holmes a lock to beat him? Because he beat Muhammad Ali's corpse? Went life & death with an old Norton, who at his peak was vanquished in two by Foreman? Controlling Earnie Shavers and George Foreman are two very different things.

[oogiebe]

Being from Houston means you can fight 36 minutes in 90 degree heat?

I don't think you thought that remark through.

Was it 90 degrees? I think where you are from is a factor in how you deal with extreme temperatures. His style then where he wasn't relaxed in the ring is a much bigger factor. There is no reason to believe GF could have beaten Young, Ali, or Holmes back then in any temperature. Styles make fights.

There's no reason to believe he could beat Young because he lost a razor thin decision to him one time in tropical heat? Do you actually think before you write?

And why is Holmes a lock to beat him? Because he beat Muhammad Ali's corpse? Went life & death with an old Norton, who at his peak was vanquished in two by Foreman? Controlling Earnie Shavers and George Foreman are two very different things.

When GF fought Young, he was no where near his prime self. He was a young man with diminished self-confidence who was trying to prove that he had stamina. I watched that fight. Foreman didn't press at all in the early going and by the time he did, Young was taking full advantage of George's stamina issues. All credit to Young who was elusive as hell, but that wasn't GF. Holmes had a damn good chance vs Foreman, but I wouldn't say it's a lock. Holmes had a great jab (powerful), better power than Ali, and enough movement to frustrate George. Also, Holmes recuperative powers were all world! I'd like to see it though!

[Tony1244]

Being from Houston means you can fight 36 minutes in 90 degree heat?

I don't think you thought that remark through.

Was it 90 degrees? I think where you are from is a factor in how you deal with extreme temperatures. His style then where he wasn't relaxed in the ring is a much bigger factor. There is no reason to believe GF could have beaten Young, Ali, or Holmes back then in any temperature. Styles make fights.

There's no reason to believe he could beat Young because he lost a razor thin decision to him one time in tropical heat? Do you actually think before you write?

And why is Holmes a lock to beat him? Because he beat Muhammad Ali's corpse? Went life & death with an old Norton, who at his peak was vanquished in two by Foreman? Controlling Earnie Shavers and George Foreman are two very different things.

If Foreman and Young hadn't fought, you'd be calling everyone an idiot for saying Young could have beaten Foreman.

Puerto Rico, especially in March, is not tropical. It's subtropical. Learn up.

"Razor thin decision." LOL. He got his ass handed to him.

Holmes is one of the greatest fighters of all time and that obviously has nothing to do with his 1980 fight with Ali. Maybe you think GF could have beaten Holmes , but Foreman didn't believe he could beat Holmes or he wouldn't have retired. If you know anything about boxing from that era, GF wanted to fight again after Leon beat Ali because he knew Leon was tailor made for him. When Ali beat Leon in the rematch, God changed his mind again.

Go easy on the "do you think before you write?" I've read melatonin works wonders for PMS.

[Tony1244]

Was it 90 degrees? I think where you are from is a factor in how you deal with extreme temperatures. His style then where he wasn't relaxed in the ring is a much bigger factor. There is no reason to believe GF could have beaten Young, Ali, or Holmes back then in any temperature. Styles make fights.

There's no reason to believe he could beat Young because he lost a razor thin decision to him one time in tropical heat? Do you actually think before you write?

And why is Holmes a lock to beat him? Because he beat Muhammad Ali's corpse? Went life & death with an old Norton, who at his peak was vanquished in two by Foreman? Controlling Earnie Shavers and George Foreman are two very different things.

When GF fought Young, he was no where near his prime self. He was a young man with diminished self-confidence who was trying to prove that he had stamina. I watched that fight. Foreman didn't press at all in the early going and by the time he did, Young was taking full advantage of George's stamina issues. All credit to Young who was elusive as hell, but that wasn't GF. Holmes had a damn good chance vs Foreman, but I wouldn't say it's a lock. Holmes had a great jab (powerful), better power than Ali, and enough movement to frustrate George. Also, Holmes recuperative powers were all world! I'd like to see it though!

I understand why Foreman got tired in Zaire. He was punching close to nonstop and loading up on every shot. But I always wondered why GF tired so quickly against Young. He wasn't doing anything!

I understand your theory about Foreman lacking confidence after Zaire. But here's something to put in the pipe: Foreman never fought anyone like Ali and Young until he fought Ali and Young. Peralta gave him some trouble, but we all should agree Ali and Young were much better than Peralta.

Could the GF who stepped into the ring against Frazier in '73 have beaten Jimmy Young in '77? We will never know. My guess is "no." I'm sure some people here are certain that they do know, but I'm sure they've never been wrong about a real present day fight.