Heavyweights: Riddick Bowe vs George Foreman

[dempseyfire]

Norton was backed up by Garcia, Foreman, Cooney, and Shavers. He didn't do too well in any of those fights. Norton was a heavy favorite to beat Shavers, so he must not have been too old for that one. He did get revenge on Garcia after Garcia had gone downhill. Quarry had good technique but was too small for Norton plus he was out of shape (flabby) when they fought. Eddie Futch trained Frazier and Norton and he considered Bowe his best heavyweight.

If you think Lyle beats Bowe, you are delusional. Lyle was a good. solid fighter, but he was no Riddick Bowe. I suspect that many of you read too many Ali bios written by Ali fans who inflate the 70s heavyweights to make Ali more impressive.

You bring up guys like Tyson to show the effects of age on a fighter. Tyson's problem was drugs/alcohol and not having an interest in boxing. Age had little to do with his demise.

And yes I will say it again. Put George Foreman, with his boxing skills in the body of Jimmy Young and you have a club fighter. Foreman's skills did not make him a champion, his strength did.

If strength made you HW champion Tye Fields would be undisputed.

Age had little to do with Tyson's demise??? I'll let that comment stand by itself. . . .

Norton was already 35 vs Shavers, and approaching 40 vs Cooney.

Quarry too small for Norton? Jeez Louise . . .how come he wasn't too small for Lyle, Shavers, Foster, Mathis etc?

And Futch if I recall correctly said Bowe had the "potential" to be his best HW but didn't live up to it.

[Cojimar 1945]

Bowe's resume is rather unimpressive aside from Holyfield. The guy was thrashed twice by Andrew Golota. However, I don't see anyone ranking Golota highly.

[Luigi1985]

Foreman brutally in just some rounds, because it´s a matchup where only one man can win, and that´s Foreman. Bowe lacked defense, he was often totally open for head shots. Bowe had a decent chin, but he wouldn´t survive against "Big George" IMO...


Foreman KO 4 Bowe

[bobbyd]

This ones a genuine pick em.Could easily go either way.Whoever has the better night basically.I see Foreman gettin the duke twice in a best of three trilogy.Foreman stops em in 9 in bout 1,Bowe outpoints em in bout 2 and foreman outpoints bowe in bout 3. 8)

[Cojimar 1945]

Bowe was badly beaten up twice by Golota. How do people who rate Bowe highly explain these debacles? While Bowe one can accept that Bowe was not at his absolute peak for these fights he was still quite young and was coming off a win over Holyfield.

[Robinson]

I think Bowe was fast, fit and very well prepared for that brief period of time that he won and held the title. He was bigger than Foreman, had more tools and had a smart corner.

I think it would be a fight with dull points in it, mixed with moments of intense fury. After the sixth round Foreman would be frustrated and tired. He would begin to feel the size of Bowe. Sure he would give Bowe alot of trouble, Bowe did have a good chin, and even in his less than best days still had a good recovery from big shots.

I honestly think that Bowe wins a late round stoppage.

Frazier and Norton were great fighters, sure. Norton also had trouble against bigger more powerful punchers than himself. Frazier did as well, but Foreman just had his number.

The 1991 versions of both men would make for a more sustained fight. I think Bowe would win a close decision, but that older version of Foreman with his Archie Moore cross defence would look to counter more often and would try to set traps for an always offensive, but well jabbing Bowe.

I love Foreman, and more girl friend hates it when I go against her favourite HW. But in this match I just prefer Bowe.

Kym

[theone]

He was bigger than Foreman, had more tools and had a smart corner.

Fatter and taller. Not stronger. Foreman's jab was better, more powerful, his chin was better and his right hand was harder.

After the sixth round Foreman would be frustrated and tired.

Despite the popular Myth, Foreman's stamina wasn't terrible. In fact it was better than Bowe's. Bowe wouldn't have last 4 rounds in Zaire.

[DaveV17]

edit

[Cojimar 1945]

Foreman was heavier in his comeback than during his first career but I didn't think increased weight was considered to be correlated with increased power since most heavyweights put on weight as they age yet people don't seem to feel that power increase greatly as a result.

[Cojimar 1945]

If Bowe is so good why coulden't he handle Golota?

[Robinson]

Because Bowes greatness lasted such a short period of time.

Heck, Golota had only a brief stint of greatness as well.

Kym

[Cojimar 1945]

How do we know exactly when Bowe's prime was? He was only 28/29 years old for the two Golota fights. It seems odd that he would have deteriorated so quickly.

[ringsider]

I can't believe there are 65 responses to this make believe match!!!

Foreman KO within 6. Another no brainer.

[dempseyfire]

For the work-rate and tempo he set, Foreman's stamina in the 70s was pretty damn good.

Forget the Ali fight, his stamina never looked that bad in his other 70s fights. I think there were other circumstances contributing to his performance there, not to take away the great victory for Ali.

Look at both Peralta fights . . .he's throwing lots of HARD punches for 3 minutes of each round, and he doesn't noticeably tire until the 10th round, and in the rematch he was still trong enough to stop Gregorio. Or on Youtube see his fight with Dino Dennis . . from the 3rd and 4th rounds he literally goes ape-shit on Dennis, battering him fron pillar to post . . .the wide majority of fighters would've needed to step back and take a breather, but Foreman keeps on hammering the game Italian until the fight is stopped. He should have paced himself better and that was a weakness but he would go at the pace Wlad went vs Brewster in their first fight for 10 rounds, while Klitschko collapsed after 5.


Bowe to the contrary showed strong stamina in one fight, Holyfield I, in all of his other notable fights I always remember him puffing pretty heavily and getting fairly sloppy in the later rounds. I definetely don't see him having a stamina edge over Foreman. And while slightly taller and chubbier, I see a 26 year old Foreman having a noticeable strength advantage as well.

[tko123]

Foreman was much stronger, had a much better chin and even when he was 40+ he would have KO'd Bow with ease in 3 or less.

[C.J.Rock]

Foreman KO 2

Riddick Bowe was bigger, longer, stronger and much more skilled.. no way Foreman beats him. Too slow and easy to hit AND Riddick had enough power to make Foreman think twice.

by the way .. KO 2 is a absolutely laughable pick.

Joe Frazier and Ken Norton were both better fighters than Bowe, who had a very poor defense. Your entitled to your opinion, but at least George fought more than one world class opponent during his career, unlike the somewhat timid Bowe. Bowe may have lasted longer, but he would have been stomped.

Bowe would never have had the cajonnes to get in the ring with Foreman He was scared stiff of Lewis too he only liked beating on smaller guys

[I Feel Fine]

Forget the Ali fight, his stamina never looked that bad in his other 70s fights. I think there were other circumstances contributing to his performance there, not to take away the great victory for Ali.

But isn't that what you're doing, in effect?

Ali had ways of tiring out an opponent that Peralta did not have. Plus they were in Zaire where it was much hotter. I agree with your premise, Foreman's stamina isn't as bad as some would make it out to be, but I wouldn't agree with your dismissing the Ali fight.

Surprising how long this thread has gone on. Not sure why anyone is arguing so fervently for Bowe. As much as I love Holyfield, prime Foreman is a much more dangerous fighter, and Holyfield gave Bowe all he could handle.

[HomicideHenry]

Now that I really think about it, I don't think George would have knocked out Bowe as easily as some would think...if you watch the two Golota fights when Bowe was at his very worst, he took the most tremendous shots and somehow was still standing. It was actually sad and I was cussin at my television because the referee wouldn't stop it.

But if Bowe could take Golota's best shots when he was at his very worst, and still have enough to hurt and drop the 'Foul Pole' once, twice...I think George would have a helluva problem knocking Bowe out for a while.

I think a TKO would happen around the 7th-8th round, for George, but he himself would get knocked down once, twice himself I believe.

[dempseyfire]

Forget the Ali fight, his stamina never looked that bad in his other 70s fights. I think there were other circumstances contributing to his performance there, not to take away the great victory for Ali.

But isn't that what you're doing, in effect?

Ali had ways of tiring out an opponent that Peralta did not have. Plus they were in Zaire where it was much hotter. I agree with your premise, Foreman's stamina isn't as bad as some would make it out to be, but I wouldn't agree with your dismissing the Ali fight.
.

Not really. I'm not saying without those circumstances (incredibly loose ropes, Foreman being in a completely hostile environment and being forced to stay in the country when he wanted to leave, possible tampering with his water) Ali STILL doesn't win, but I think they have to be acknowledged in regards to a discussion of Foreman's performance in Zaire.

[I Feel Fine]

The loose ropes had little to do with it. Ali fought more effectively in the corners than he did on the ropes, and obviously you can't bend the corners. I'm not saying he would have been more effective if the ropes had been tighter, but there's no reason to assume he wouldn't have been as effective.

Foreman was professional, and if he had been fighting someone else the crowd would have been silent by round 2. If the Jamaican crowd had been radically pro-Frazier would Frazier have won beaten Foreman?

[dempseyfire]

The loose ropes had little to do with it. Ali fought more effectively in the corners than he did on the ropes, and obviously you can't bend the corners. I'm not saying he would have been more effective if the ropes had been tighter, but there's no reason to assume he wouldn't have been as effective.

Foreman was professional, and if he had been fighting someone else the crowd would have been silent by round 2. If the Jamaican crowd had been radically pro-Frazier would Frazier have won beaten Foreman?

Ali didn't lean WAY back against those ropes throughout the fight to avoid Foreman's head shots? Come on, that was a pretty sizable benefit. No loose ropes and some of those bombs to the head land on Ali's knoggin.

[I Feel Fine]

Ali didn't lean WAY back against those ropes throughout the fight to avoid Foreman's head shots?

Did I say he didn't?

What I said was that Ali was effective in the corners, and he could not lean "WAY" back in the corners, he had to stand straight up. In the corners Foreman landed nothing on Ali, and Ali landed some of his better shots of the fight.

In Manila the ropes were tighter and Ali spent more time in the corners than on the ropes. Perhaps he would have done the same in Zaire if the ropes had been tighter. Ali also moved more in the fight than people say he did, he wasn't rope-a-doping 100% of the time against Foreman.

Loose ropes or not, crowd or not, Ali had distinct qualities and a style advantage over Foreman that had little to do with outside circumstances. Again, I agree with your premise that 70's Foreman's stamina isn't quite as bad as some make it out to be, but I don't agree with dismissing the Ali fight as a way of trying to prove that.

[Tantum]