Oleksandr Usyk vs George Foreman

[tiny_acres]

They are in their prime - exact same height, weight and reach

Usyk is better at boxing
Foreman hits harder

Id go with the better boxer

Funny how today Foreman would not be Big George.
But a smaller than average heavyweight

[Ambling Alp II]

(In the Cobb vs Wilder thread you were quoted as follows)
I actually think Cobb could win this. It could play out like the Cobb-Shavers fight. Cobb took everything Shavers could throw, and the accumulation of his own punches finally stopped Shavers. Wilder doesn't punch as hard as Shavers nor throw nearly as many punches. Cobb could probably survive.
And if this is for 15 rounds, Cobb would have an even better chance to stop Wilder or win a decision.


There are plenty of examples including many involving non greats. Pinklon Thomas was badly faded vs Tyson and Bowe but neither could blow him out in one round. Jimmy Young fought long past his best but never blown out in a round. You can find counter examples but those seem to involve guys who were far more past it than Norton. Shavers was waaaaaaaay farther past his best against Brad Simmons than Norton was vs Cooney and was much older at 43.

I thought Cobb could win. Wouldn't have surprised me, mostly due to Wilder limitations. Not sure what this has to do with Usyk-Foreman anyway.
Pinklon Thomas was not badly faded when he fought Tyson. He was just 29 and very close to his prime. In no way comparable to Norton. How about Thomas when he fought Tommy Morrison? Guess what, Thomas got blown out in the first round. He was 33. Norton was 37 against Cooney.

Not sure why you think it's a big deal that Norton got ko'd by Cooney when he was really was way past it. So Jimmy young never got blown out when he was way past it, so what?
Why are you so obsessed with how badly someone lost when they were way past it?
It's what happened when they were close to their prime that counts.

And again, this had nothing to with Usyk and Foreman. Foreman was a proven great fighter at hw. In real life, usually the proven guy wins. This is the part where you bring up an exception or go off on another tangent about two other fighters who have nothing to do with Foreman and Usyk.

[margaret thatcher]

prime george beats usyk. prime george just put it on so hot and although not the fastest even then, he could still chase guys down pretty well. he'd overwhelm usyk eventually.

usyk beats old slow george by wide ud, a fighter made for usyk to look good against. the power isnt even going to be a factor, george wouldnt land enough. usyk would just pepper him and move, repeat over and over as george trundles forward in slow motion.


disclaimer: *james toney, with 0 title defenses, 0 unifications, and 1 win over a ranked opponent, is more accomplished at cruiser than usyk! all those great wins over craptastic 10 round fighters!!

[oogiebe]

prime george beats usyk. prime george just put it on so hot and although not the fastest even then, he could still chase guys down pretty well. he'd overwhelm usyk eventually.

usyk beats old slow george by wide ud, a fighter made for usyk to look good against. the power isnt even going to be a factor, george wouldnt land enough. usyk would just pepper him and move, repeat over and over as george trundles forward in slow motion.


disclaimer: *james toney, with 0 title defenses, 0 unifications, and 1 win over a ranked opponent, is more accomplished at cruiser than usyk! all those great wins over craptastic 10 round fighters!!

[Cojimar 1946]

(In the Cobb vs Wilder thread you were quoted as follows)
I actually think Cobb could win this. It could play out like the Cobb-Shavers fight. Cobb took everything Shavers could throw, and the accumulation of his own punches finally stopped Shavers. Wilder doesn't punch as hard as Shavers nor throw nearly as many punches. Cobb could probably survive.
And if this is for 15 rounds, Cobb would have an even better chance to stop Wilder or win a decision.


There are plenty of examples including many involving non greats. Pinklon Thomas was badly faded vs Tyson and Bowe but neither could blow him out in one round. Jimmy Young fought long past his best but never blown out in a round. You can find counter examples but those seem to involve guys who were far more past it than Norton. Shavers was waaaaaaaay farther past his best against Brad Simmons than Norton was vs Cooney and was much older at 43.

I thought Cobb could win. Wouldn't have surprised me, mostly due to Wilder limitations. Not sure what this has to do with Usyk-Foreman anyway.
Pinklon Thomas was not badly faded when he fought Tyson. He was just 29 and very close to his prime. In no way comparable to Norton. How about Thomas when he fought Tommy Morrison? Guess what, Thomas got blown out in the first round. He was 33. Norton was 37 against Cooney.

Not sure why you think it's a big deal that Norton got ko'd by Cooney when he was really was way past it. So Jimmy young never got blown out when he was way past it, so what?
Why are you so obsessed with how badly someone lost when they were way past it?
It's what happened when they were close to their prime that counts.

And again, this had nothing to with Usyk and Foreman. Foreman was a proven great fighter at hw. In real life, usually the proven guy wins. This is the part where you bring up an exception or go off on another tangent about two other fighters who have nothing to do with Foreman and Usyk.

Foreman doesn't have a deep resume at heavyweight though he beat maybe 5 guys ranked in the top 10. And aside from Frazier a lot of these opponents like Lyle, Chuvalo, etc were very unexceptional. Just because some of Usyks better opponents were cruiserweights doesn't mean they couldn't beat past heavyweights. In fact one could reasonably argue that Usyks top 5 opponents would get the better of Foremans top 5 opponents.

[Ambling Alp II]

Calling Foreman's resume isn't deep is beyond absurd. Really calls into question your lack of knowledge.
Outside of Ali and Louis, his resume is as deep as anyone.
You can't just throw out beating Joe Frazier. (Though I know you like to throw out a fighter's biggest win when it suits your case.
Ken Norton was much better than anyone Usyk has beat at heavyweight.
Ron Lyle for that matter as well.
No Frazier, Norton, and Lyle were perfect; no one is. However, they were quality wins beyond question. Only an idiot would argue otherwise.
In comparison, Usyk has a paper-thin resume at hw.

[margaret thatcher]

Calling Foreman's resume isn't deep is beyond absurd. Really calls into question your lack of knowledge.
Outside of Ali and Louis, his resume is as deep as anyone.
You can't just throw out beating Joe Frazier. (Though I know you like to throw out a fighter's biggest win when it suits your case.
Ken Norton was much better than anyone Usyk has beat at heavyweight.
Ron Lyle for that matter as well.
No Frazier, Norton, and Lyle were perfect; no one is. However, they were quality wins beyond question. Only an idiot would argue otherwise.
In comparison, Usyk has a paper-thin resume at hw.

resume paper thin at cruiser too isnt it, lacking wins over '10 round fighters' like michael rush and jason robinson isnt he

if only he had those, instead of beating several top contenders and other champs to clean out the division, maybe his cruiser accomplishments could've matched james toney's (0 title defenses, 0 unifications, 1 win over a top 10 ranked opponent). yes, quality of opposition throughout one's career in a division is alp's thing

[Ambling Alp II]

Good point. Toney's lack of the all-important WBS title defenses is crucial when talking about Foreman-Usyk.

[margaret thatcher]

Good point. Toney's lack of the all-important WBS title defenses is crucial when talking about Foreman-Usyk.

yep, glad you agree. 0 title defenses, 0 unifications, only 1 win over a top ten opponent, but hell, those measly numbers aint mean sheeyat when you've racking up W after W over totally non WBS '10 round fighters' like mike rush. by comparison, poor usyk's '10 round fighter' record falls short in every division, no wonder you rate james toney's cruiser achievements higher tthan usyk's and have uzzy paper thin at hw

although it's also where the likes of wlad klitschko outperform greats like smokin joe lol

[Cojimar 1946]

Calling Foreman's resume isn't deep is beyond absurd. Really calls into question your lack of knowledge.
Outside of Ali and Louis, his resume is as deep as anyone.
You can't just throw out beating Joe Frazier. (Though I know you like to throw out a fighter's biggest win when it suits your case.
Ken Norton was much better than anyone Usyk has beat at heavyweight.
Ron Lyle for that matter as well.
No Frazier, Norton, and Lyle were perfect; no one is. However, they were quality wins beyond question. Only an idiot would argue otherwise.
In comparison, Usyk has a paper-thin resume at hw.

Foreman's win over clear top 10 guys are limited to
Chuvalo, Frazier, Norton, Lyle, Moorer

That's absolutely not a very deep resume for a guy regarded by some as an atg heavyweight. Certainly nothing like Lewis or Holmes. Lewis has Ruddock, Tucker, Bruno, Mercer, McCall, Akinwande, Golota, Holyfield, Tua, Rahman, Vitali Klitschko.
Everybody Usyk beat at cruiserweight was over 175 so they absolutely count in this matchup. We are talking about an era in which top heavyweights averaged around 208 pounds.

Can you back up this idea that Lyle is more skilled than Usyk cruiserweight opponents like Breidis, Hunter, etc. Breidis seems very skilled, Hunter as well.

[margaret thatcher]

alp thinks james toney had a more decorated cruiser career than usyk, i dont think you'll get anywhere with him on uzzy

[Ambling Alp II]

Calling Foreman's resume isn't deep is beyond absurd. Really calls into question your lack of knowledge.
Outside of Ali and Louis, his resume is as deep as anyone.
You can't just throw out beating Joe Frazier. (Though I know you like to throw out a fighter's biggest win when it suits your case.
Ken Norton was much better than anyone Usyk has beat at heavyweight.
Ron Lyle for that matter as well.
No Frazier, Norton, and Lyle were perfect; no one is. However, they were quality wins beyond question. Only an idiot would argue otherwise.
In comparison, Usyk has a paper-thin resume at hw.

Foreman's win over clear top 10 guys are limited to
Chuvalo, Frazier, Norton, Lyle, Moorer

That's absolutely not a very deep resume for a guy regarded by some as an atg heavyweight. Certainly nothing like Lewis or Holmes. Lewis has Ruddock, Tucker, Bruno, Mercer, McCall, Akinwande, Golota, Holyfield, Tua, Rahman, Vitali Klitschko.
Everybody Usyk beat at cruiserweight was over 175 so they absolutely count in this matchup. We are talking about an era in which top heavyweights averaged around 208 pounds.

Can you back up this idea that Lyle is more skilled than Usyk cruiserweight opponents like Breidis, Hunter, etc. Breidis seems very skilled, Hunter as well.

First you always seem to forget a couple of key factors in Top 10 lists. One is that the top 10 in one era is not the same as the Top 10 in another. Som eras are much stronger than others. Foreman fought in the best heavyweight era of all time.

i.e, you can't count a win over Akinwande as the same as beating Joe Frazier. But you are here.
You also can't count a win over the #1 guy as the same as the #10 guy.

OK, let's take a look at Usyks wins over guys that are 175 or above. So pretend that the cruiserweight division didn't exist. Everyone over 175 is competing against ech other. If you had to make your Top 10 list at the time that Usyk fought them, would you really rate Breidis or Hunter in the Top 10? Of course not. So, stop bringing them up.

Hunter? Seriously? The guy wasn't even a Top 10 Cruiserweight.

Usyk's resume is a joke compared to Foreman's.

[margaret thatcher]

hunter had an easier time at heavyweight than cruiserweight funnily enough and was ranked top 10 for a while. its no wonder - cruiser was very hot while usyk was there and guys like gassiev and briedis and huck were all succesful champs and top 3-5 fighters with respectable places in all time lists. usyk of course beat all in their backyards. then you had another tier of solid fighters like glowacki, who spent a few years in the top 5, hunter himself, bellew. again usyk beat them all in their backyards. hell, even guys like mchunu - beating lebedev and much favoured hw contender chambers - were utterly miles ahead of the '10 round fighter' crew

if we want to be consistent about quality of resume, that poops all over, say, fighting a bunch of utterly mediocre usa domestic level bois and a single world top 10 opponent, never bothering to defend or unify lol

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

This is a great fight
Usyk is better than jimmy young. Hes more technically sound than Norton

George punches harder

Perfect matchmaking

[Cojimar 1946]

Calling Foreman's resume isn't deep is beyond absurd. Really calls into question your lack of knowledge.
Outside of Ali and Louis, his resume is as deep as anyone.
You can't just throw out beating Joe Frazier. (Though I know you like to throw out a fighter's biggest win when it suits your case.
Ken Norton was much better than anyone Usyk has beat at heavyweight.
Ron Lyle for that matter as well.
No Frazier, Norton, and Lyle were perfect; no one is. However, they were quality wins beyond question. Only an idiot would argue otherwise.
In comparison, Usyk has a paper-thin resume at hw.

Foreman's win over clear top 10 guys are limited to
Chuvalo, Frazier, Norton, Lyle, Moorer

That's absolutely not a very deep resume for a guy regarded by some as an atg heavyweight. Certainly nothing like Lewis or Holmes. Lewis has Ruddock, Tucker, Bruno, Mercer, McCall, Akinwande, Golota, Holyfield, Tua, Rahman, Vitali Klitschko.
Everybody Usyk beat at cruiserweight was over 175 so they absolutely count in this matchup. We are talking about an era in which top heavyweights averaged around 208 pounds.

Can you back up this idea that Lyle is more skilled than Usyk cruiserweight opponents like Breidis, Hunter, etc. Breidis seems very skilled, Hunter as well.

First you always seem to forget a couple of key factors in Top 10 lists. One is that the top 10 in one era is not the same as the Top 10 in another. Som eras are much stronger than others. Foreman fought in the best heavyweight era of all time.

i.e, you can't count a win over Akinwande as the same as beating Joe Frazier. But you are here.
You also can't count a win over the #1 guy as the same as the #10 guy.

OK, let's take a look at Usyks wins over guys that are 175 or above. So pretend that the cruiserweight division didn't exist. Everyone over 175 is competing against ech other. If you had to make your Top 10 list at the time that Usyk fought them, would you really rate Breidis or Hunter in the Top 10? Of course not. So, stop bringing them up.

Hunter? Seriously? The guy wasn't even a Top 10 Cruiserweight.

Usyk's resume is a joke compared to Foreman's.

Breidis and Hunter absolutely should be among top 10 opponents. A top 8 list would probably be
1 Gassiev
2 Joshua
3 Breidis
4 Hunter
5 Glowacki or Dubois
7 Chisora
8 Huck
In a H2H matchup it seems they would have an excellent chance against Foremans best opponents given the stylistic matchup. How many Breidis fights have you seen?

[Ambling Alp II]

You completely misunderstood what I said. I did not say that they were not in the Top 10 of Usyks opponents.

I was saying that you if you want to count cruiserweights as hws when ranking Usyk as a hw, you have to treat them as heavyweights. So put the cruiserweights that he fought in along with the heavyweights. Would any of them be a a Top 10 heavwyweight,? Remember, this isn't pound for pound. This is just asa heavyweight.
Pretend that the cruiserweight never existed. Gassiev, Bredies and those other legendary cruiserweights would not have been in the Top 10 of the heavyweight rankings.

By far, the best heavyweight opponent that Usyk is Anthony Joshua. Anthony Joshua is nowhere near the level of some of the guys that Foreman fought.

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

You completely misunderstood what I said. I did not say that they were not in the Top 10 of Usyks opponents.

I was saying that you if you want to count cruiserweights as hws when ranking Usyk as a hw, you have to treat them as heavyweights. So put the cruiserweights that he fought in along with the heavyweights. Would any of them be a a Top 10 heavwyweight,? Remember, this isn't pound for pound. This is just asa heavyweight.
Pretend that the cruiserweight never existed. Gassiev, Bredies and those other legendary cruiserweights would not have been in the Top 10 of the heavyweight rankings.

By far, the best heavyweight opponent that Usyk is Anthony Joshua. Anthony Joshua is nowhere near the level of some of the guys that Foreman fought.

Gassiev and hunter would certainly be (hunter was). Bellew probably was too after the haye wins. Briedis too after drilling charr

[margaret thatcher]

Pretend that the cruiserweight never existed. Gassiev, Bredies and those other legendary cruiserweights

ya, i mean, these top 3 ranked cruisers and unified champs might not live up to the unranked '10 round fighters'' that elevate james toney's cruiser career above usyks for you - murderers like wes martin, tel porter, saul montana, sione 'son of james fryerson' asipeli, and courtney butler......but they were still pretty legendary tbh, glad that despite your totally consistent adherence to quality of resume you at least acknowledge that

[Ambling Alp II]

You completely misunderstood what I said. I did not say that they were not in the Top 10 of Usyks opponents.

I was saying that you if you want to count cruiserweights as hws when ranking Usyk as a hw, you have to treat them as heavyweights. So put the cruiserweights that he fought in along with the heavyweights. Would any of them be a a Top 10 heavwyweight,? Remember, this isn't pound for pound. This is just asa heavyweight.
Pretend that the cruiserweight never existed. Gassiev, Bredies and those other legendary cruiserweights would not have been in the Top 10 of the heavyweight rankings.

By far, the best heavyweight opponent that Usyk is Anthony Joshua. Anthony Joshua is nowhere near the level of some of the guys that Foreman fought.

Gassiev and hunter would certainly be (hunter was). Bellew probably was too after the haye wins. Briedis too after drilling charr

Not one of these guys (Gassiev, Hunter, Bellew or Briedis) have ever been ranked in the Top 10 heavyweight in Ring Magazine's Annual Rankings. Hunter has never even made it as a Cruiserweight. And this has been in a very weak heavyweight era.

None of these guys are remotely close to Joe, Frazier, Ken Norton or Ron Lyle. Or even Chuvalo for that matter.
Usyk's resume as a hw is a joke compared to Foreman's.
Foreman's is easily Top 10. No reason for Usyk to be Top 50.

[margaret thatcher]

hunter has been ring magazine ranked, at least as high as #7. also ranked as high as #6 by the transnational boxing ranking board

but i get it, he was no wes martin

[Cojimar 1946]

You completely misunderstood what I said. I did not say that they were not in the Top 10 of Usyks opponents.

I was saying that you if you want to count cruiserweights as hws when ranking Usyk as a hw, you have to treat them as heavyweights. So put the cruiserweights that he fought in along with the heavyweights. Would any of them be a a Top 10 heavwyweight,? Remember, this isn't pound for pound. This is just asa heavyweight.
Pretend that the cruiserweight never existed. Gassiev, Bredies and those other legendary cruiserweights would not have been in the Top 10 of the heavyweight rankings.

By far, the best heavyweight opponent that Usyk is Anthony Joshua. Anthony Joshua is nowhere near the level of some of the guys that Foreman fought.

Hunter was a top 10 ranked heavyweight and I would say Gassiev and Breidis would have been as well had they chosen to fight at heavyweight. There are possibly other people like Glowacki who might have made the top 10. It's hard to know how they deal with the size difference and if the skill difference is enough to overcome the gap.

But objectively where is the evidence for Foremans opponents being better skilled than someone like Breidis or Hunter? They don't have a huge size advantage to fall back on like Fury or Joshua.

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

You completely misunderstood what I said. I did not say that they were not in the Top 10 of Usyks opponents.

I was saying that you if you want to count cruiserweights as hws when ranking Usyk as a hw, you have to treat them as heavyweights. So put the cruiserweights that he fought in along with the heavyweights. Would any of them be a a Top 10 heavwyweight,? Remember, this isn't pound for pound. This is just asa heavyweight.
Pretend that the cruiserweight never existed. Gassiev, Bredies and those other legendary cruiserweights would not have been in the Top 10 of the heavyweight rankings.

By far, the best heavyweight opponent that Usyk is Anthony Joshua. Anthony Joshua is nowhere near the level of some of the guys that Foreman fought.

Gassiev and hunter would certainly be (hunter was). Bellew probably was too after the haye wins. Briedis too after drilling charr

Not one of these guys (Gassiev, Hunter, Bellew or Briedis) have ever been ranked in the Top 10 heavyweight in Ring Magazine's Annual Rankings. Hunter has never even made it as a Cruiserweight. And this has been in a very weak heavyweight era.

None of these guys are remotely close to Joe, Frazier, Ken Norton or Ron Lyle. Or even Chuvalo for that matter.
Usyk's resume as a hw is a joke compared to Foreman's.
Foreman's is easily Top 10. No reason for Usyk to be Top 50.

Got it.
Ring mag is what matters, not official rankings.

Ron lyle? Chuvalo? Hahaha

Of course foreman has a better resume nobody argued that

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

hunter has been ring magazine ranked, at least as high as #7. also ranked as high as #6 by the transnational boxing ranking board

but i get it, he was no wes martin

He set up a straw man that we are saying usyk has a better resume than foremam. That is absurb.

Usyks skill set is clearly world class, hes a hof fighter, and george could be out boxed plus he has no size advantage over usyk either. His only advantage is punching power

[margaret thatcher]

ya alpy is fond of that tactic, although he is particularly weird about usyk.

james toney being a more decorated cruiserweight than usyk is one of the silliest things ive read from someone who likes to play the quality of resume card

usyk's obviously a very very good fighter. he has the right skills to have success against foreman, though i think the young george gets him and beats him down eventually. old george would be whitewashed.

[Ambling Alp II]

Gassiev and hunter would certainly be (hunter was). Bellew probably was too after the haye wins. Briedis too after drilling charr

Not one of these guys (Gassiev, Hunter, Bellew or Briedis) have ever been ranked in the Top 10 heavyweight in Ring Magazine's Annual Rankings. Hunter has never even made it as a Cruiserweight. And this has been in a very weak heavyweight era.

None of these guys are remotely close to Joe, Frazier, Ken Norton or Ron Lyle. Or even Chuvalo for that matter.
Usyk's resume as a hw is a joke compared to Foreman's.
Foreman's is easily Top 10. No reason for Usyk to be Top 50.

Got it.
Ring mag is what matters, not official rankings.

Ron lyle? Chuvalo? Hahaha

Of course foreman has a better resume nobody argued that

As long as I have been a member, On Boxrec History we have always gone by the Ring Ratings. What are supposed to do, go by the WBC or IBF or WBA? Come on.
Look at Dubois for the Usyk fight. The WBA magically makes him the #1 contender to hype up the fight. WBC, IBF, WBO don't even have the guy ranked at all.

Ron Lyle is a hahaha? Really? Ron Lyle ?
Usyk fights literally once a year, and who is it against? Daniel Dubois? Is stopping a guy like that like that in 9 rounds supposed to something in his favor?

The gigantic difference in resume is important. The resume is the proof. The resume is what actually happened when the fighters fought quality competition, not just some boxrec poster pontificating on the supposed qualities of their guy. Who usually wins between a guy who has proven himself against a lot of quality competition and one who hasn't? The proven guy. Foreman more than proved himself. Usyk, no.