George Foreman in 1991 (vs. Holyfield)

[evndrbsn]

were taking the 1971-74 224lb foreman of the norton fight vs the 205lb holy of the buster douglas right correct?

No, I was talking about the same Holyfield who fought Foreman in 1991 at 208 pounds. And anyway, how may times did Foreman fight at 224 lbs in his prime? Not many. Stick with 217 to 220.

[pundit]

Here is my take.
1973 Foreman vs. 1991 Holyfield

KO2 Foreman if Holyfield fights like in 1991.

UD12 Foreman if Holyfield fights smarter and manages not to get cornered - which was VERY hard against the 1970s Foreman. But in this case Holyfield will be on the run for most of the fight.

I also rate Frazier CLEARLY above Holyfield. There is nothing Holyfield could do that prime Frazier couldn't do better.

[evndrbsn]

joe frazier was defintley better than holyfield. frazier would knockout holy too.

Frazier was definitely not better than Holyfield. The only top fifteen fighter Frazier beat was Muhammad Ali. While that was a great accomplishment, he was beating an Ali who had returned from a three year exile only five months prior. When Ali was ready in the two subsequent fights, he beat Frazier both times.

Holyfield beat Foreman, Holmes, and Tyson, who are in most peoples top fifteen. Foreman and Holmes were past their best of course, but were more prepared for their title challenges against Holyfield than Ali was against Frazier in '71. Tyson was past his best, but just as much as Holyfield was. I still believe Evander beat Lennox Lewis in the rematch 115-114, and Lewis was also better than everyone Frazier fought except Ali and maybe Foreman. He was certainly better than Bonavena, Machen, Doug Jones, Chuvalo, Mathis, Quarry, Ellis, Foster, and Bugner.

[evndrbsn]

Here is my take.
1973 Foreman vs. 1991 Holyfield

KO2 Foreman if Holyfield fights like in 1991.

UD12 Foreman if Holyfield fights smarter and manages not to get cornered - which was VERY hard against the 1970s Foreman. But in this case Holyfield will be on the run for most of the fight.

I also rate Frazier CLEARLY above Holyfield. There is nothing Holyfield could do that prime Frazier couldn't do better.

Holyfield could box from the outside better, had better defense, had a better jab, a better right hand, better combination punching, physically stronger, had a longer reach, better recooperative powers, better chin, and fared better against bigger fighters.

So lets see ... Frazier had a superior left hook, although Holyfield didn't have a shabby one either. Both had great conditioning. I still don't see what Frazier did better than Holyfield except the left hook.

Foreman win a 12 round decision over Holyfield? How? When did Foreman prove his conditioning? Against Ali? Against Lyle? Against Young? I thought he looked awful against Peralta in the first fight. You have a better argument saying Foreman TKOs Holyfied in the fourth than saying Foreman wins a decision. Foreman had awful stamina and did not pace himself well enough to win decisions. Thats why when he retired in 1977 he was 45-2-0, with 42 KOs. He went the distance four times and lost one of them. He won an 8-round decision over a 17-15 fighter, a 19-21-2 fighter, and a 10-round decision over undersized Peralta. In the only high profile fight to go the distance, Foreman lost to powder-puff punching Jimmy Young and was so damn exhausted at the end of the fight that he thought he had stigmata in the locker room.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

The only top fifteen fighter Frazier beat was Muhammad Ali. While that was a great accomplishment, he was beating an Ali who had returned from a three year exile only five months prior.

it was the best version of muhammad ali anyone ever beat. ali was unquestionably still a great fighter when frazier beat him. the 1971 ali was better than the 73-74 ali. ali was coming off a stoppage win over bonavena. NO ONE EVER STOPPED bonavena.

When Ali was ready in the two subsequent fights, he beat Frazier both times.

ali beat a past his prime joe frazier twice. ali never beat a prime frazier. a prime frazier whupped ali though.

Holyfield beat Foreman, Holmes, and Tyson, who are in most peoples top fifteen. Foreman and Holmes were past their best of course, but were more prepared for their title challenges against Holyfield than Ali was against Frazier in '71. Tyson was past his best, but just as much as Holyfield was.

woa slow down there. foreman was far far past his prime......he sucked. he couldnt even beat alex stewart, tommy morrison, or axel shulz. the 1990s foreman is overated. any good boxer would beat the 1990s foreman.



more prepared for there title challenges than ali? the 1971 muhammad ali EASILY beats the 1990s larry holmes and 1990s george foreman. in fact the 1971 muhammad ali beats evander holyfield



tyson was far past his best. he was nowhere near the fighter he was in 86-88. it was clear to people close to tyson.




the 1971 muhammad ali was better than anyone holy ever beat. tyson was no longer top 15. the only top 20 heavyweight near there prime holy ever beat was riddick bowe.

He was certainly better than Bonavena, Machen, Doug Jones, Chuvalo, Mathis, Quarry, Ellis, Foster, and Bugner.

holys title reign 67-71 FAR EXCEEEDS anything holy ever accomplished. frazier dominated very quality opponents. holy struggled alot in his prime and was very inconsistent.


prime versions of quarry, ellis were much better than 40 year olds holmes and foreman

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

Holyfield could box from the outside better, had better defense, had a better jab, a better right hand, better combination punching, physically stronger, had a longer reach, better recooperative powers, better chin, and fared better against bigger fighters.

So lets see ... Frazier had a superior left hook, although Holyfield didn't have a shabby one either. Both had great conditioning. I still don't see what Frazier did better than Holyfield except the left hook.

frazier had a much better defense than holyfield. holy couldnt even avoid shots from a 67 year old far past it HORRIBLY SLOW foreman.

frazier was faster, better handspeed, much greater all around puncher, better body attack, much better left hook, equal chin, equal heart, better stamina, more versatile, much more consistent, sharper reflexes, more moble, better head movement, etc



holy struggled alot in his prime and was very inconsistent and had one of the worst title reigns 1990-93 in heavyweight history!

[walshb]

Foget the whole size advantage/disadvantage. The Foreman that destroyed Frazier and Norton is simply to heavy a punching machine for Evander. Also, Holy would not be too difficult to find, he's no Ali remember, so he'd be taking shots and if Bowe could KO him and really hurt him, Foreman will take him out. Foreman was also very accurate in his prime and was punching better in every way. Stamina won't be too important and if Foreman can go 8 rds V Ali throwing absolute bombs, he won't fair too badly.No way Holy knocks George out before the 7th rd.

[evndrbsn]

The only top fifteen fighter Frazier beat was Muhammad Ali. While that was a great accomplishment, he was beating an Ali who had returned from a three year exile only five months prior.

it was the best version of muhammad ali anyone ever beat. ali was unquestionably still a great fighter when frazier beat him. the 1971 ali was better than the 73-74 ali. ali was coming off a stoppage win over bonavena. NO ONE EVER STOPPED bonavena.

When Ali was ready in the two subsequent fights, he beat Frazier both times.

ali beat a past his prime joe frazier twice. ali never beat a prime frazier. a prime frazier whupped ali though.

Holyfield beat Foreman, Holmes, and Tyson, who are in most peoples top fifteen. Foreman and Holmes were past their best of course, but were more prepared for their title challenges against Holyfield than Ali was against Frazier in '71. Tyson was past his best, but just as much as Holyfield was.

woa slow down there. foreman was far far past his prime......he sucked. he couldnt even beat alex stewart, tommy morrison, or axel shulz. the 1990s foreman is overated. any good boxer would beat the 1990s foreman.



more prepared for there title challenges than ali? the 1971 muhammad ali EASILY beats the 1990s larry holmes and 1990s george foreman. in fact the 1971 muhammad ali beats evander holyfield



tyson was far past his best. he was nowhere near the fighter he was in 86-88. it was clear to people close to tyson.




the 1971 muhammad ali was better than anyone holy ever beat. tyson was no longer top 15. the only top 20 heavyweight near there prime holy ever beat was riddick bowe.

He was certainly better than Bonavena, Machen, Doug Jones, Chuvalo, Mathis, Quarry, Ellis, Foster, and Bugner.

holys title reign 67-71 FAR EXCEEEDS anything holy ever accomplished. frazier dominated very quality opponents. holy struggled alot in his prime and was very inconsistent.


prime versions of quarry, ellis were much better than 40 year olds holmes and foreman

Quarry and Ellis are overrated. Foreman was not far, far past his best. At least this version of Foreman could make it to the last round without collapsing all over the place. So what if prime Frazier beat an unprepared Ali? Ali never beat a prime Frazier and Frazier never beat a prime Ali. History books show that Ali beat Frazier two out of three though.

Tyson was not FAR past his best. He was just always overrated.

I think prime Ali beats prime Holyfield, but I don't think Ali of March '71 beats prime Holyfield. Ali did not look very sharp in this bout, in fact, that is what made it such a good fight. Ali was able to get hit and did quite a few times. Ali was not in the best shape conditioning wise in this fight. Holyfield would have edged it out in my opinion. But thats like saying I think Joe Frazier would beat Joe Louis in the same situation. Ali was not ready and it showed. Actually, Foreman did beat Stewart. Look at his record

Any good boxer would beat Foreman? I didn't see Moorer do it. I saw Moorer get KO'd. Moorer gets a lot of criticism for his career as a whole for his comeback. Moorer was a terrific fighter from his jump to heavyweight to his final fight with Holyfield in '97. In fact, Moorer was successful for the most part in his comeback until he was KO'd in 30 seconds at almost age 35 by hard punching David Tua. Give George his credit for his KO of Moorer. About Bonavena, don't forget that Ringo shook Ali in the ninth, the round Ali predicted he would win in. Ali looked terrible in that fight too except for round 15. He wouldn't have gotten that TKO if the ref would have made him go to a neutral corner instead of hover over his opponent like Dempsey did Willard in 1919. Hmm, I seem to remember that Dempsey wasn't allowed to do that against Tunney in 1927 but yet 43 years later Ali can do it agaisnt Bonavena?

[evndrbsn]

Foget the whole size advantage/disadvantage. The Foreman that destroyed Frazier and Norton is simply to heavy a punching machine for Evander. Also, Holy would not be too difficult to find, he's no Ali remember, so he'd be taking shots and if Bowe could KO him and really hurt him, Foreman will take him out. Foreman was also very accurate in his prime and was punching better in every way. Stamina won't be too important and if Foreman can go 8 rds V Ali throwing absolute bombs, he won't fair too badly.No way Holy knocks George out before the 7th rd.

No, Holyfield stops him IN the seventh round. Bowe KO'd a sick Holyfield, it was very clear. Holyfield still nearly stopped Bowe himself in that fight, but had nothing in the tank. Watch the fight again, Holyfield looked awful. I think he had the flu or a version of hepatitis for the third Bowe fight.

[walshb]

Do you think Bowe hits harder than George?
I don't and that's why Holy loses big time, Norton and Frazier couldn't
take his power, nor does Evander

[evndrbsn]

Do you think Bowe hits harder than George?
I don't and that's why Holy loses big time, Norton and Frazier couldn't
take his power, nor does Evander

Holyfield had a much better chin than Norton and Frazier.

Do you think Foreman had better stamina than Foreman? I don't, and that's why Foreman loses big time, he couldn't stay composed against Ali or Young, nor does he against Evander.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

quarry and ellis are overated now? they are certainly much better than 65 year old holmes and foreman. also frazier DOMINATED ellis and quarry. holy struggled with old foreman, old holmes, dokes, C level cooper, ray mercer, moorer, bowe,

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

foreman was past his prime and dehydrated! if u want to critisize foremans loss to young.......then fine i will critisize holys loss to moorer and bowe III

[evndrbsn]

foreman was past his prime and dehydrated! if u want to critisize foremans loss to young.......then fine i will critisize holys loss to moorer and bowe III

At least Holyfield's loss to Moorer was controversial and against Bowe he dropped and nearly stopped a man who had never been dropped before. Also, Bowe never lost a fight other than to Holyfield. Holyfield was dehydrated in his 12th pro fight against Qawi but still won a 15 round decision, something Foreman never could have done. If you are scratching your head, wondering what that is, it is going fifteen tough rounds and coming out that victor.

[walshb]

Fraziers chin was granite. Foreman didn't clean KO him did he. Holy had a good chin, but BertCooper who doesn't hit as hard as George had him almost clean KO'd only for he could not follow up. The reason Holy loses is because he's too easily hit, he hasn't got the Ali cuteness. If George is allowed to unload whic I think he will, Holyfield's chin, good as it was is not going to take 4-5 clean shots. Frazier's chin was at least as good

[pundit]

Here is my take.
1973 Foreman vs. 1991 Holyfield

KO2 Foreman if Holyfield fights like in 1991.

UD12 Foreman if Holyfield fights smarter and manages not to get cornered - which was VERY hard against the 1970s Foreman. But in this case Holyfield will be on the run for most of the fight.

I also rate Frazier CLEARLY above Holyfield. There is nothing Holyfield could do that prime Frazier couldn't do better.

Holyfield could box from the outside better, had better defense, had a better jab, a better right hand, better combination punching, physically stronger, had a longer reach, better recooperative powers, better chin, and fared better against bigger fighters.

Very much a matter of opinion. In my book Frazier was physcially MUCH stronger than Holyfield. He was very hard to hit cleanly, in contrast to Holyfield. Neither boxed very well form the outside, but Frazier was better in getting inside and had the more effective weapons once there. Frazier's chin was no worse than Holyfield's at all, he stood straight after being knocked down 6 times by Foreman. And if you want to see a great example in recuperative ability, watch Frazier-Bonavena I.

Btw, even a smart Holyfiled would most likely lose by KO to a 1970s Foreman - the UD is conditional on Holyfield not getting cornered, but he would get cornered in all likelihood. The 1970s Foreman was a master in cutting off the ring.

[dempseyfire]

The Holyfield who fought Foreman was the best Evander who ever fought. Great endurance, speed, combination punching, foot movement etc. He was up against a tough customer in the 42 yr old Foreman.

HOWEVER

Those who claim that George had anything on the George of the 70s is simply wrong. Foreman, despite his often wreckless style, had better stamina then the 1990s Foreman, plus was much quicker, better work-rate, more snap=more power, much quicker feet etc.

Holyfield does not last the distance vs that Foreman. He simply got hit way too much. In EVERY fight. Those who are saying Evander had a bad gameplan vs Foreman and would somehow stick and move to a decision over George are living in dreamland . . .when did Evander EVER do that? He was never a slickster like Jimmy Young and he could and would be drawn into a brawl. Just like vs Dokes, and Cooper, and Mercer, and Bowe (even in the rematch he slugged it out with Bowe for many parts of that fight and was in major trouble in the final round)

Those arguing about 217 or 225 are missing the point. Foreman was a naturally bigger man than Evander, period. Evander could be 205 or 215, he is going to be facing a bigger, stronger, heavier hitting fighter who can jab and cut off the ring. Holyfield puts up a great showing but ultimately falls.

[Cojimar 1945]

I find it impressive that a 42 year old Foreman lasted the distance against Holyfield. It does seem that Holyfield outlanded him by a good margin.

[evndrbsn]

The Holyfield who fought Foreman was the best Evander who ever fought. Great endurance, speed, combination punching, foot movement etc. He was up against a tough customer in the 42 yr old Foreman.

HOWEVER

Those who claim that George had anything on the George of the 70s is simply wrong. Foreman, despite his often wreckless style, had better stamina then the 1990s Foreman, plus was much quicker, better work-rate, more snap=more power, much quicker feet etc.

Holyfield does not last the distance vs that Foreman. He simply got hit way too much. In EVERY fight. Those who are saying Evander had a bad gameplan vs Foreman and would somehow stick and move to a decision over George are living in dreamland . . .when did Evander EVER do that? He was never a slickster like Jimmy Young and he could and would be drawn into a brawl. Just like vs Dokes, and Cooper, and Mercer, and Bowe (even in the rematch he slugged it out with Bowe for many parts of that fight and was in major trouble in the final round)

Those arguing about 217 or 225 are missing the point. Foreman was a naturally bigger man than Evander, period. Evander could be 205 or 215, he is going to be facing a bigger, stronger, heavier hitting fighter who can jab and cut off the ring. Holyfield puts up a great showing but ultimately falls.

It seems like everyone is going to disagree with me about who would win between prime Foreman and prime Holyfield. Fine. But how the hell did 70s George have better stamina than 90s Foreman? He didn't! Foreman threw every punch to knock his opponent out. They were wild, telegraphed swings. Its why he doesn't have a lot of first round KOs. Fighters that were able to withstand that early barrage had a good chance to beat him. Ali just laid on the ropes and let Foreman beat on him, and guess what, Foreman got gassed quickly and then KO'd. Ali could take a terrific shot to the head and to the gut, but guess what, so could Holyfield.

Holyfield TKO 7 Foreman

[pundit]

The Holyfield who fought Foreman was the best Evander who ever fought. Great endurance, speed, combination punching, foot movement etc. He was up against a tough customer in the 42 yr old Foreman.

HOWEVER

Those who claim that George had anything on the George of the 70s is simply wrong. Foreman, despite his often wreckless style, had better stamina then the 1990s Foreman, plus was much quicker, better work-rate, more snap=more power, much quicker feet etc.

Holyfield does not last the distance vs that Foreman. He simply got hit way too much. In EVERY fight. Those who are saying Evander had a bad gameplan vs Foreman and would somehow stick and move to a decision over George are living in dreamland . . .when did Evander EVER do that? He was never a slickster like Jimmy Young and he could and would be drawn into a brawl. Just like vs Dokes, and Cooper, and Mercer, and Bowe (even in the rematch he slugged it out with Bowe for many parts of that fight and was in major trouble in the final round)

Those arguing about 217 or 225 are missing the point. Foreman was a naturally bigger man than Evander, period. Evander could be 205 or 215, he is going to be facing a bigger, stronger, heavier hitting fighter who can jab and cut off the ring. Holyfield puts up a great showing but ultimately falls.

It seems like everyone is going to disagree with me about who would win between prime Foreman and prime Holyfield. Fine. But how the hell did 70s George have better stamina than 90s Foreman? He didn't! Foreman threw every punch to knock his opponent out. They were wild, telegraphed swings. Its why he doesn't have a lot of first round KOs. Fighters that were able to withstand that early barrage had a good chance to beat him. Ali just laid on the ropes and let Foreman beat on him, and guess what, Foreman got gassed quickly and then KO'd.

FIRST, who else but Ali could profit from Foreman's allegedly poor stamina (and Jimmy Young when Foreman was out of shape)

SECOND, Ali could profit from this at 4 am in the morning, 90 degrees, and 90 percent humidity; and only because Foreman fought for 180 seconds in each round, while Ali fought for 10-20.

THIRD, Foreman slugged without pause for 7 1/2 rounds. I know few fighters who could do that.

Which means: the 1970s Foreman had very godd stamina indeed.

[evndrbsn]

The Holyfield who fought Foreman was the best Evander who ever fought. Great endurance, speed, combination punching, foot movement etc. He was up against a tough customer in the 42 yr old Foreman.

HOWEVER

Those who claim that George had anything on the George of the 70s is simply wrong. Foreman, despite his often wreckless style, had better stamina then the 1990s Foreman, plus was much quicker, better work-rate, more snap=more power, much quicker feet etc.

Holyfield does not last the distance vs that Foreman. He simply got hit way too much. In EVERY fight. Those who are saying Evander had a bad gameplan vs Foreman and would somehow stick and move to a decision over George are living in dreamland . . .when did Evander EVER do that? He was never a slickster like Jimmy Young and he could and would be drawn into a brawl. Just like vs Dokes, and Cooper, and Mercer, and Bowe (even in the rematch he slugged it out with Bowe for many parts of that fight and was in major trouble in the final round)

Those arguing about 217 or 225 are missing the point. Foreman was a naturally bigger man than Evander, period. Evander could be 205 or 215, he is going to be facing a bigger, stronger, heavier hitting fighter who can jab and cut off the ring. Holyfield puts up a great showing but ultimately falls.

It seems like everyone is going to disagree with me about who would win between prime Foreman and prime Holyfield. Fine. But how the hell did 70s George have better stamina than 90s Foreman? He didn't! Foreman threw every punch to knock his opponent out. They were wild, telegraphed swings. Its why he doesn't have a lot of first round KOs. Fighters that were able to withstand that early barrage had a good chance to beat him. Ali just laid on the ropes and let Foreman beat on him, and guess what, Foreman got gassed quickly and then KO'd.

FIRST, who else but Ali could profit from Foreman's allegedly poor stamina (and Jimmy Young when Foreman was out of shape)

SECOND, Ali could profit from this at 4 am in the morning, 90 degrees, and 90 percent humidity; and only because Foreman fought for 180 seconds in each round, while Ali fought for 10-20.

THIRD, Foreman slugged without pause for 7 1/2 rounds. I know few fighters who could do that.

Which means: the 1970s Foreman had very godd stamina indeed.

Very good stamina would have been finishing the fight. Plus, Foreman was gassed by the fifth round.

Ali would have beaten Foreman at any time, in any temperature.

[Cojimar 1945]

I suspect 70s Foreman threw more punches than 90s Foreman. Has anyone counted how many punches Foreman threw in various fights in the 70s?

With regards to the guys who beat Bowe I seem to recall Golota whipping Bowe twice. Saying Holyfield was the only one to beat him seems a bit off.

[evndrbsn]

I suspect 70s Foreman threw more punches than 90s Foreman. Has anyone counted how many punches Foreman threw in various fights in the 70s?

With regards to the guys who beat Bowe I seem to recall Golota whipping Bowe twice. Saying Holyfield was the only one to beat him seems a bit off.

Golota got himself DQ'd twice when he was beating around on Bowe, so I guess he got a moral victory but not an official one.

Yes, the 70s Foreman threw more punches and thats why his stamina suffered. He didn't know how to pace himself. He learned poise in his comeback.

[generic screen name]

People vastly overrate the 70's Foreman. He was first and foremost a slugger and one dimensional. Yeah he was good at cutting off the ring, but if a guy was low and moved forward they were taylor made for Foreman.

People also vastly underrate Holyfield. Holyfield had the whole offensive arsenal, he can fight/box can do anything offensively. I'm sure the Holyfield camp would study Foreman (As they did when he was older), and do what they could to win. For a natural Cruiserweight, he sure did alot in the heavyweight division.

A Holyfield win is never out of the question.

[dempseyfire]

Seems like people have been watching too much Ali-Foreman.


That is one og George's WORST fights. He keeps up the same pace vs Peralta and is still throwing heavy leather in the 9th-10th rounds. In Zaire Foreman, whether due to the heat, ropes, Ali, drugging . . .whatever, George looked a lot more lethargic and gassed than he ever did. Watch Foreman vs Frazier II, Norton, Chuvalo, both Peralta fights. The guy who uses the jab as a major weapon in his arsenal. That fighter is too much for the Real Deal.

BTW Evander's 200 lb weight shows that he naturally was never more than a small HW. Heavyweight fighters gain weight with age, while Evander has LOST weight. He needed the shakes and weights to get over 200. On his own he's in the 180s-190s, without coming down from a heigher weight (like Dempsey and Marciano did) Evander size wise is more like an Ezzard Charles.