BoxRec

I wasn't into boxing in 60s and 70s, but I am pretty sure there were people claiming that old greats were better than Ali, Frazier, Foreman, etc.

Bricks wrote:George foreman mk one on his best day.....destroys Joshua within 4 rounds demolishes him....based on who and what AJ is now......Foreman was a naturally strong brute like Liston before him.......

In terms of height and weight, the physical prime version of George Foreman who captured the world heavyweight title from Joe Frazier in 1973 was no bigger than several modern day rehydrated cruiserweights (i.e. Oleksandr Usyk, Murat Gassiev, Tony Bellew, Marco Huck & Yunier Dorticos).

Whilst I admire “Big” George, he would be considered really “Small” by today’s heavyweight standards (i.e. 30lbs lighter than the average modern-day heavyweight and an inch or two shorter too).

I can very easily provide the stats for the top sixty ranked BoxRec heavyweights if you really need me to justify this claim.

Your appreciation for the old-timers is something to be admired, but you are embellishing the situation far too much.

Enlightened-One wrote:

Bricks wrote:George foreman mk one on his best day.....destroys Joshua within 4 rounds demolishes him....based on who and what AJ is now......Foreman was a naturally strong brute like Liston before him.......

In terms of height and weight, the physical prime version of George Foreman who captured the world heavyweight title from Joe Frazier in 1973 was no bigger than several modern day rehydrated cruiserweights (i.e. Oleksandr Usyk, Murat Gassiev, Tony Bellew, Marco Huck & Yunier Dorticos).

Whilst I admire “Big” George, he would be considered really “Small” by today’s heavyweight standards (i.e. 30lbs lighter than the average modern-day heavyweight and an inch or two shorter too).

I can very easily provide the stats for the top sixty ranked BoxRec heavyweights if you really need me to justify this claim.

Your appreciation for the old-timers is something to be admired, but you are embellishing the situation far too much.

Foremans trainer used to force him to cut weight.

Foreman was a naturally big man and a murderous puncher. Size and weight alone dont generate power.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

Bricks wrote:George foreman mk one on his best day.....destroys Joshua within 4 rounds demolishes him....based on who and what AJ is now......Foreman was a naturally strong brute like Liston before him.......

In terms of height and weight, the physical prime version of George Foreman who captured the world heavyweight title from Joe Frazier in 1973 was no bigger than several modern day rehydrated cruiserweights (i.e. Oleksandr Usyk, Murat Gassiev, Tony Bellew, Marco Huck & Yunier Dorticos).

Whilst I admire “Big” George, he would be considered really “Small” by today’s heavyweight standards (i.e. 30lbs lighter than the average modern-day heavyweight and an inch or two shorter too).

I can very easily provide the stats for the top sixty ranked BoxRec heavyweights if you really need me to justify this claim.

Your appreciation for the old-timers is something to be admired, but you are embellishing the situation far too much.

Foremans trainer used to force him to cut weight.

Foreman was a naturally big man and a murderous puncher. Size and weight alone dont generate power.

George Foreman’s weight was consistent for the 37 bouts he competed in between 1969 & 1973. The more weight he gained from 1974 onwards, the more fleshy he became.

Bricks wrote:Your criteria for who is ranked where appears to be numbers, title defences , statistics etc.

George foreman mk one on his best day.....destroys Joshua within 4 rounds demolishes him....based on who and what AJ is now......Foreman was a naturally strong brute like Liston before him........AJ is more a modern day pumped up bodybuilder...wtf a 41 year old WlAd threw him around like a rag doll in round 5 or 6...and put him down with one shot.....dullian shyte....hurt him.....Foreman was a murderous puncher and strong...a killer......you really do go overboard on very little evidence when it comes to Joshua...

The obsession with stats makes u look foolish eg comments like " Joshua has kayoed everyone- Foreman hasn't"....by that token let me say...Kell Brook is better than SRR as kell only lost once and SRL lost 3 times

WTF are you talking about???? ... Kell Brook is better than Robinson because Ray Leonard lost 3 fight??? ... Lay off the hard liquor dude.

And get out of FANTASY LAND!!! Joshua is a bigger and naturally stronger brute then Foreman EVER was.. Joshua would NOT get bipped to death by a little feather hitter like Jimmy Young... Lil' Georgie went and cried in his milk and then retired for 10 years.. Poor Lil' Georgie couldn't box.

Joshua is NOT pumped up and the farthest thing from a body builder. He does swimming, sprinting, hand speed, foot speed, and body flexibility training routines for hours https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9B3egjd7-C4 He does it to give him speed, finesse, flexibility, range, and agility that stuck-in-the-mud Foreman totally lacked. Foreman was knocked down with "one shot" by a green-horned Jimmy Young who had only 20 wins -- and who hit about 1/10th as hard as Wladimir Klitschko.. Foreman was knocked down 4 times and knocked out once. George lacked flexibility, speed, endurance, and skill and if he concentrated harder on getting those he might have been a good boxer. But he wasn't.

Foreman put on 50 pounds before the Young fight and 80 pounds before the Ali fight... so although he might have beat those guys his endurance was sh!t and he got hurt and beaten by smaller and weaker men... Joshua had 1/8th the experience and rounds of Klitschko had but he finessed an ATG boxing master who hadn't been stopped in 13 years.. In their All-Time Heavyweight Rankings This website ranks Klitschko 6th best Heavyweight all time and ranks Foreman 25th best. Joshua was winning on points when he stopped the master with a 3-knockdown 11th-round KO performance.

It's a credit to AJ that he was able to finesse such a masterful jabber, mover, defender, and counter-puncher -- knock him down 3 times and polish him off in the late rounds while leading on points. Lets be fair. Klitschko had 8 X as many professional rounds coming in and more than 3 X the amateur experience. I rank Joshua as the best Heavyweight so far -- because he's so dedicated and has accomplished so much, so fast.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

Bricks wrote:George foreman mk one on his best day.....destroys Joshua within 4 rounds demolishes him....based on who and what AJ is now......Foreman was a naturally strong brute like Liston before him.......

In terms of height and weight, the physical prime version of George Foreman who captured the world heavyweight title from Joe Frazier in 1973 was no bigger than several modern day rehydrated cruiserweights (i.e. Oleksandr Usyk, Murat Gassiev, Tony Bellew, Marco Huck & Yunier Dorticos).

Whilst I admire “Big” George, he would be considered really “Small” by today’s heavyweight standards (i.e. 30lbs lighter than the average modern-day heavyweight and an inch or two shorter too).

I can very easily provide the stats for the top sixty ranked BoxRec heavyweights if you really need me to justify this claim.

Your appreciation for the old-timers is something to be admired, but you are embellishing the situation far too much.

Foremans trainer used to force him to cut weight.

Foreman was a naturally big man and a murderous puncher. Size and weight alone dont generate power.

Foreman was bigger than Ortiz.

Ortiz isn't as big as Joshua -- but he's bigger than Foreman was... Foreman was in his best shape at 217 for Frazier 1 -- and in the 220's when he carried a slight excess in subsequent fights during his 20's... Ortiz is taller than Foreman was with a much longer reach... He is very trim at 230 -- and he carried a slight excess at 239 for Jennings... Ortiz is a tremendous boxer and puncher -- whereas Foreman had the power, but not the finesse.

Foreman was a slow techniquly limited boxer with arguably the biggest puncher power ever.

Ortiz would beat.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

Bricks wrote:George foreman mk one on his best day.....destroys Joshua within 4 rounds demolishes him....based on who and what AJ is now......Foreman was a naturally strong brute like Liston before him.......

In terms of height and weight, the physical prime version of George Foreman who captured the world heavyweight title from Joe Frazier in 1973 was no bigger than several modern day rehydrated cruiserweights (i.e. Oleksandr Usyk, Murat Gassiev, Tony Bellew, Marco Huck & Yunier Dorticos).

Whilst I admire “Big” George, he would be considered really “Small” by today’s heavyweight standards (i.e. 30lbs lighter than the average modern-day heavyweight and an inch or two shorter too).

I can very easily provide the stats for the top sixty ranked BoxRec heavyweights if you really need me to justify this claim.

Your appreciation for the old-timers is something to be admired, but you are embellishing the situation far too much.

Foremans trainer used to force him to cut weight.

Foreman was a naturally big man and a murderous puncher. Size and weight alone dont generate power.

Excellent point james.

People give too much credence to todays boxers who are above 225 lbs the typical 245-260 ilbs fighters....apart from the klitchkos who have been 245 lbs and joshua....the rest have just been big fat slobs.......audley harrison was one such man ,williams,chisora,arreola, the same ....none of them are the puncher wilder is at 218 ilbs...none of them can punch anywhere the level of a fraxier,foreman,tyson or 225lbs Ruddock andd morrison..210 lbs dokes..205lbs shavers and weaver ...hell even 188lbs henry cooper.none had the samespeed either......frank bruno was a better puncher at 224lbs than 244lbs....

Those cruiser weights are not naturally big strong men they have nothing in common with a genetic freak like a foreman or frazier whatever weight hey all are

Jip wrote:Foreman was a slow techniquly limited boxer with arguably the biggest puncher power ever.

Ortiz would beat.

Respectfully jip, ortiz is a 2 round kayo for foreman mk one imo.and 7-8 for old man foreman..hell ortiz looked awful in britain...

But im interested in hearing your reasons for these views

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I don't think fury would fair well at all.

Its a very valid opinion.

Certainly fury mk one who was in awful condition and got knocked down by Cunningham wouldnt ever get past any of the 80s lost generation of heavies on a half decent day for them.....but fury mk 2 the more muscular more defence and move orientated spoiler the guy who beat wlad and pasted chisora the second time....that guy ....a part of me thinks well really hes just a poor mans joe bugner with a crazy personality and confidence out of the ring....another says this guy is a workd class spoiler who knows how to use his size ...who would smother your 25-35-tier onwards ...but really more evidence is needed for my assessment i agree

Bricks wrote:

Jip wrote:Foreman was a slow techniquly limited boxer with arguably the biggest puncher power ever.

Ortiz would beat.

Respectfully jip, ortiz is a 2 round kayo for foreman mk one imo.and 7-8 for old man foreman..hell ortiz looked awful in britain...

But im interested in hearing your reasons for these views

The version of ortiz in britain was a version who was eating to many burritos and focusing on nothing except donuts! I can understand him, why should he train hardcore for those no names? On top he is aging.

The ortiz i am talking about, the prime O who was brutalizing everybody couple years ago, that was a totaly different version. That was a tall super strong boxer who was wrecking everybody, who had good footwork for a heavyweight, a tremendous punching power and without a doubt the best technique of any hw today in the world.

Prime foremon would be to slow to sluggish and to technicly limited for prime ortiz. Ortiz would outmove and outsmart him outjab him with his reach advantage.

I can name you 5 advantages for ortiz, only 1 for foreman

Speed
Footwork
Technique
Punch variation
Reach

For o

Power

For f

Jip wrote:Foreman was a slow techniquly limited boxer with arguably the biggest puncher power ever.

Ortiz would beat him.

Biggest power puncher EVER???? That's why he wasn't able to punch out smaller men like Jimmy Young, Muhammad Ali, the oft knocked out Levi Forte, and China Chinned Tommy Morrison???? ... Foreman was a huge man and big puncher for his day, but he wouldn't be formidable today.

Mike Tyson knocked Alex Stewart out in the 1st round, but a year later Stewart was able to absorb everything Foreman threw... Big Foot Martin was knocked out 12 times in his career...but Foreman could hurt him... Evander Holyfield weighed 208...he easily absorbed everything Foreman threw without blinking

So many guys went the distance with Foreman who Anthony Joshua would send into dreamland... Jimmy Young lost 4 of his next 5 fights after he beat George

Jip wrote:

Bricks wrote:

Jip wrote:Foreman was a slow techniquly limited boxer with arguably the biggest puncher power ever.

Ortiz would beat.

Respectfully jip, ortiz is a 2 round kayo for foreman mk one imo.and 7-8 for old man foreman..hell ortiz looked awful in britain...

But im interested in hearing your reasons for these views

The version of ortiz in britain was a version who was eating to many burritos and focusing on nothing except donuts! I can understand him, why should he train hardcore for those no names? On top he is aging.

The ortiz i am talking about, the prime O who was brutalizing everybody couple years ago, that was a totaly different version. That was a tall super strong boxer who was wrecking everybody, who had good footwork for a heavyweight, a tremendous punching power and without a doubt the best technique of any hw today in the world.

Prime foremon would be to slow to sluggish and to technicly limited for prime ortiz. Ortiz would outmove and outsmart him outjab him with his reach advantage.

I can name you 5 advantages for ortiz, only 1 for foreman

Speed
Footwork
Technique
Punch variation
Reach

For o

Power

For f

Now that's a great post!!! ... I agree whole heartedly

Kalan wrote:

Jip wrote:Foreman was a slow techniquly limited boxer with arguably the biggest puncher power ever.

Ortiz would beat him.

Biggest power puncher EVER???? That's why he wasn't able to punch out smaller men like Jimmy Young, Muhammad Ali, the oft knocked out Levi Forte, and China Chinned Tommy Morrison???? ... Foreman was a huge man and big puncher for his day, but he wouldn't be formidable today.

Mike Tyson knocked Alex Stewart out in the 1st round, but a year later Stewart was able to absorb everything Foreman threw... Big Foot Martin was knocked out 12 times in his career...but Foreman could hurt him... Evander Holyfield weighed 208...he easily absorbed everything Foreman threw without blinking

So many guys went the distance with Foreman who Anthony Joshua would send into dreamland... Jimmy Young lost 4 of his next 5 fights after he beat George

Foreman was a shell of himself when he fought Young, and ancient when he fought big foot Martin. Foreman's power was nowhere near as impressive when he returned, he didn't have the same snap on his shots, not surprisingly.

Shut up about Joshua, his best win to date is over a 41 year old Wlad, who himself his hardly known for an exceptional chin, and Joshua had to drop him 4 times to stop him - see, we can both pick holes can't we?

It may have slipped your notice Kalan, but Ali was never knocked out by anyone - Holyfield was one of the toughest men to ever enter the ring, yet your going to have a pop at Foreman for not KOing him when he was himself well past his prime.

Your very selecting in your criticism.

Obviously you choose to ignore Foreman's utter annihilation of Frazier, not once but twice, in one of the chilling sets of clubbings ever seen.

Bricks wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: In terms of height and weight, the physical prime version of George Foreman who captured the world heavyweight title from Joe Frazier in 1973 was no bigger than several modern day rehydrated cruiserweights (i.e. Oleksandr Usyk, Murat Gassiev, Tony Bellew, Marco Huck & Yunier Dorticos).

Whilst I admire “Big” George, he would be considered really “Small” by today’s heavyweight standards (i.e. 30lbs lighter than the average modern-day heavyweight and an inch or two shorter too).

George Foreman’s weight was consistently in line with a rehydrated cruiserweight for the 37 bouts he competed in between 1969 & 1973. The more weight he gained from 1974 onwards, the more fleshy he became.

I can very easily provide the stats for the top sixty ranked BoxRec heavyweights if you really need me to justify this claim.

Your appreciation for the old-timers is something to be admired, but you are embellishing the situation far too much.

Foremans trainer used to force him to cut weight.

Foreman was a naturally big man and a murderous puncher. Size and weight alone dont generate power.

Excellent point james.

People give too much credence to todays boxers who are above 225 lbs the typical 245-260 ilbs fighters....apart from the klitchkos who have been 245 lbs and joshua....the rest have just been big fat slobs.......audley harrison was one such man ,williams,chisora,arreola, the same ....none of them are the puncher wilder is at 218 ilbs...none of them can punch anywhere the level of a fraxier,foreman,tyson or 225lbs Ruddock andd morrison..210 lbs dokes..205lbs shavers and weaver ...hell even 188lbs henry cooper.none had the samespeed either......frank bruno was a better puncher at 224lbs than 244lbs....

Those cruiser weights are not naturally big strong men they have nothing in common with a genetic freak like a foreman or frazier whatever weight hey all are

Whilst I can understand the reason why you'd applause someone that shares your opinion, the facts I've listed are not only irrefutable in nature, but they also have undeniable real-world implications.

It's your prerogative to perceive history through nostalgic rose-tinted glasses, where your naivety blinds you from questioning accomplishments that have been embellished to the point they've become myths, but the actual objective truths of reality is the fact that Foreman would be undersized compared to today's heavyweight behemoths and he would also be far less effective today than he was forty years ago.

If George Foreman was competing today, he'd almost certainly be a cruiserweight, because he's simply too small to be effective in the heavyweight division.

Enlightened-One wrote:

Bricks wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:


Foremans trainer used to force him to cut weight.

Foreman was a naturally big man and a murderous puncher. Size and weight alone dont generate power.

Excellent point james.

People give too much credence to todays boxers who are above 225 lbs the typical 245-260 ilbs fighters....apart from the klitchkos who have been 245 lbs and joshua....the rest have just been big fat slobs.......audley harrison was one such man ,williams,chisora,arreola, the same ....none of them are the puncher wilder is at 218 ilbs...none of them can punch anywhere the level of a fraxier,foreman,tyson or 225lbs Ruddock andd morrison..210 lbs dokes..205lbs shavers and weaver ...hell even 188lbs henry cooper.none had the samespeed either......frank bruno was a better puncher at 224lbs than 244lbs....

Those cruiser weights are not naturally big strong men they have nothing in common with a genetic freak like a foreman or frazier whatever weight hey all are

Whilst I can understand the reason why you'd applause someone that shares your opinion, the facts I've listed are not only irrefutable in nature, but they also have undeniable real-world implications.

It's your prerogative to perceive history through nostalgic rose-tinted glasses, where your naivety blinds you from questioning accomplishments that have been embellished to the point they've become myths, but the actual objective truths of reality is the fact that Foreman would be undersized compared to today's heavyweight behemoths and he would also be far less effective today than he was forty years ago.

If George Foreman was competing today, he'd almost certainly be a cruiserweight, because he's simply too small to be effective in the heavyweight division.

No he wouldn't, no more than Tyson would have been.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

Bricks wrote:
Excellent point james.

People give too much credence to todays boxers who are above 225 lbs the typical 245-260 ilbs fighters....apart from the klitchkos who have been 245 lbs and joshua....the rest have just been big fat slobs.......audley harrison was one such man ,williams,chisora,arreola, the same ....none of them are the puncher wilder is at 218 ilbs...none of them can punch anywhere the level of a fraxier,foreman,tyson or 225lbs Ruddock andd morrison..210 lbs dokes..205lbs shavers and weaver ...hell even 188lbs henry cooper.none had the samespeed either......frank bruno was a better puncher at 224lbs than 244lbs....

Those cruiser weights are not naturally big strong men they have nothing in common with a genetic freak like a foreman or frazier whatever weight hey all are

Whilst I can understand the reason why you'd applause someone that shares your opinion, the facts I've listed are not only irrefutable in nature, but they also have undeniable real-world implications.

It's your prerogative to perceive history through nostalgic rose-tinted glasses, where your naivety blinds you from questioning accomplishments that have been embellished to the point they've become myths, but the actual objective truths of reality is the fact that Foreman would be undersized compared to today's heavyweight behemoths and he would also be far less effective today than he was forty years ago.

If George Foreman was competing today, he'd almost certainly be a cruiserweight, because he's simply too small to be effective in the heavyweight division.

No he wouldn't, no more than Tyson would have been.

When ‘Iron’ Mike was at his destructive best (prior to his defeat to ‘Buster’ Douglas) for the first 37 bouts of his career, his opponents typically weighed 212lbs (excl. four anomalous fighters), which means that he dominated a bunch men that were the physical equivalent of rehydrated modern-day cruiserweights.

George Foreman’s average weight from the start of his career until the end of 1973 (when he was at his physical prime) was pretty much consistently 217lbs. During the same time period, the average weight of his opponents was only 206lbs.

The average weight of a current top 60 heavyweight fighter is 247lbs, with the vast majority of them taller than the men that Mike Tyson and George Foreman faced.

Check the facts for yourself - you'll surely concede the accuracy of the information that I've conveyed.

People often make a premeditated decision to ignore real-world irrefutable facts if they don't adhere to their preferred narrative, so I don't expect you to compromise your mind-set in light of the evidence that I've presented to you.

It's clear that your opinion will not change, even when there's an overwhelming amount of evidence that contradicts your stance.

I love how ofteN EO refers to his own arguments as irrefutable

Counter-puncher wrote:I love how ofteN EO refers to his own arguments as irrefutable

I always fact-check my claims prior to making them and if you attempted to verify the accuracy of the information that I convey, you'll inevitably concur that my use of the word "irrefutable" is entirely responsible.

You see, the moron doesn't even understand how irrefutably idiotic he sounds.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Foreman was a shell of himself when he fought Young .... Shut up about Joshua, his best win to date is over a 41 year old Wlad, who himself his hardly known for an exceptional chin, and Joshua had to drop him 4 times to stop him .... It may have slipped your notice Kalan, but Ali was never knocked out by anyone .... Obviously you choose to ignore Foreman's utter annihilation of Frazier, not once but twice, in one of the chilling sets of clubbings ever seen.

Let's take those loads of crap 1 crap load at a time... Foreman was a prime 20's something stud when little feather punching Jimmy Young beat him up, knocked him down, and scored a major upset before losing 4 out of his next 5 fights .... A young Foreman had the boxing skills of a novice and never learned how to relax and jab until he was in his late 30's. After that his ability to pace himself allowed him to get fat and out-of-shape. If you combined the thinking, calculating Foreman with the young Foreman you would have had a good fighter.

Wladimir Klitschko was an ATG Heavyweight Champion ranked way above Foreman by this website in their ATGreatest list... WK fought the fight of his life against Joshua and gave us a Heavyweight Title Fight for the ages. Joshua did not deck Wlad 4 X. He decked him once in the 5th but got a little careless trying to put WK away and got nailed by a big right that was a lot harder than the right hand little feather punching Jimmy Young decked Foreman with. AJ got knocked down -- just like Foreman, Ali, Frazier, Norton, Holmes, and all but 2 Heavyweight Champions in History got knocked down. This is the hurt business.

Joshua boxed carefully and intelligently in the 7th and 8th telling Wlad "Come get it man." He knew Wlad was powerless to finish him off. He started attacking hard again in the 9th, 10th, and 11th and polished Klitschko off like a true finisher should -- with a couple more brutal knockdowns and a savage assault on the ropes in the 11th. He had plenty time left to get Klitschko out of there. Wlad hadn't been stopped in over 13 years, and hadn't been knocked down in over 10 years since he a absorbed a few years of teachings from Emmanuel Steward.

Ali was knocked out by Larry Holmes... He wasn't cut. He wasn't injured. He got badly beaten up and stopped -- so FO with that BS... He's on Holmes' KO record

Frazier was a tiny, short heavy who was very easy to hit.. He had 20 pounds of blubber on his body.. Naturally Foreman dribbled him around like a fat basketball

Ali finished on his feet against both holmes and berbick.

You have ti be a troll, nobody is THAT blinkered.

Kalan and EO on the same thread breaks all kind of new ground for the amount of groundless self-certainty in one thread

Counter-puncher wrote:Kalan and EO on the same thread breaks all kind of new ground for the amount of groundless self-certainty in one thread

I've hardly expressed any comments on this thread... and those few that I have supplied have been mainly factually-based.

If facts pîss you off, then you need to stop being overly-sensitive, since I cannot be held personally responsible for the events that take place in the real world.