BoxRec

jamesmcdonnell wrote:always thought frazier was a little overrated. Didnt have a long peak, and was a little flattered by the factali wasn't a big puncher. Didnt face a lot of big hitters in his career, and the one really big puncher he faced in foreman, absolutely flattened him twice. Had he faced Lyle and Shavers his resume may well have been a lot less impressive.

I'm a HUGE Frazier fan, but can understand this post.

Of course, he's a very deserving HOFer.

Crease wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Shavers especially wouldve been knocked into next week.

I'm gonna disgaree with you on that one, GI.
Frazier was a level above Shavers.

We do disagree. Id say Frazier is about four or five levels above.

Of course it seems that most on here can’t get past the legend to actually be objective about potential matchups with contemporaries that didn’t happen. There is no argument from me about Frazier being several notches above both Lyle and Shavers, but that’s hardly the point. Frazier was also at least a notch above the sloppy, novice Foreman, but he couldn’t avoid George’s power.

It’s hardly inconceivable that an over confident, somewhat undertrained Frazier could have come in and gotten blasted out by either Lyle or Shavers, both of whom had power similar to Foreman’s. Of course I guess it is inconceivable to many posters here who don’t seem to be able to get past some type of legendary mystical ratings to actually analyze potential matchups based on styles.

I think Shavers would have been particularly problematic for Frazier because Shavers was a decent inside fighter with an excellent uppercut. He struggled with guys who fought from the outside, and that was hardly Joe’s forte. Lyle seems like he would have been a bit easier for Frazier, as confidence was hardly one of his strengths, but he certainly had the power to bounce Frazier around the ring ala Foreman if he would have been able to catch him prior to getting discouraged by Frazier’s tenacity. Of course Frazier could have steamrolled both of them as well, but him getting stopped by either seems like a very reasonable, potential outcome.

I’ve got Frazier 7th on my ATG HW list, but it’s just silly to think that their weren’t quite a few guys rated lower than him all-time who would have been able to catch him and stop him, and Shavers and Lyle are two pretty good examples of guys who might have caught him and stopped him.

And please feel free to fire back with ridiculous claims about how Shavers would have “been knocked into next week” because he had a glass jaw as evidenced by the fact that Quarry was able to stop him by hitting him with about 30 power shots and of course all of those other KOs/TKOs when Shavers was stopped after punching himself out.

The Great John L wrote:Of course it seems that most on here can’t get past the legend to actually be objective about potential matchups with contemporaries that didn’t happen. There is no argument from me about Frazier being several notches above both Lyle and Shavers, but that’s hardly the point. Frazier was also at least a notch above the sloppy, novice Foreman, but he couldn’t avoid George’s power.

It’s hardly inconceivable that an over confident, somewhat undertrained Frazier could have come in and gotten blasted out by either Lyle or Shavers, both of whom had power similar to Foreman’s. Of course I guess it is inconceivable to many posters here who don’t seem to be able to get past some type of legendary mystical ratings to actually analyze potential matchups based on styles.

I think Shavers would have been particularly problematic for Frazier because Shavers was a decent inside fighter with an excellent uppercut. He struggled with guys who fought from the outside, and that was hardly Joe’s forte. Lyle seems like he would have been a bit easier for Frazier, as confidence was hardly one of his strengths, but he certainly had the power to bounce Frazier around the ring ala Foreman if he would have been able to catch him prior to getting discouraged by Frazier’s tenacity. Of course Frazier could have steamrolled both of them as well, but him getting stopped by either seems like a very reasonable, potential outcome.

I’ve got Frazier 7th on my ATG HW list, but it’s just silly to think that their weren’t quite a few guys rated lower than him all-time who would have been able to catch him and stop him, and Shavers and Lyle are two pretty good examples of guys who might have caught him and stopped him.

And please feel free to fire back with ridiculous claims about how Shavers would have “been knocked into next week” because he had a glass jaw as evidenced by the fact that Quarry was able to stop him by hitting him with about 30 power shots and of course all of those other KOs/TKOs when Shavers was stopped after punching himself out.

What qualifies a fighter for a place in the IBHOF is who they beat and who they lost to. NOT and I repeat NOT how they might have done against someone they didn't fight.

keithmoonhangover wrote:What qualifies a fighter for a place in the IBHOF is who they beat and who they lost to. NOT and I repeat NOT how they might have done against someone they didn't fight.

I totally agree, and find absolutely NO issue with Joe being in the HOF.

My post was in response to the comments regarding how Joe may or may not have performed against other hard punching contemporaries.

The Great John L wrote:Of course it seems that most on here can’t get past the legend to actually be objective about potential matchups with contemporaries that didn’t happen. There is no argument from me about Frazier being several notches above both Lyle and Shavers, but that’s hardly the point. Frazier was also at least a notch above the sloppy, novice Foreman, but he couldn’t avoid George’s power.

It’s hardly inconceivable that an over confident, somewhat undertrained Frazier could have come in and gotten blasted out by either Lyle or Shavers, both of whom had power similar to Foreman’s. Of course I guess it is inconceivable to many posters here who don’t seem to be able to get past some type of legendary mystical ratings to actually analyze potential matchups based on styles.

I think Shavers would have been particularly problematic for Frazier because Shavers was a decent inside fighter with an excellent uppercut. He struggled with guys who fought from the outside, and that was hardly Joe’s forte. Lyle seems like he would have been a bit easier for Frazier, as confidence was hardly one of his strengths, but he certainly had the power to bounce Frazier around the ring ala Foreman if he would have been able to catch him prior to getting discouraged by Frazier’s tenacity. Of course Frazier could have steamrolled both of them as well, but him getting stopped by either seems like a very reasonable, potential outcome.

I’ve got Frazier 7th on my ATG HW list, but it’s just silly to think that their weren’t quite a few guys rated lower than him all-time who would have been able to catch him and stop him, and Shavers and Lyle are two pretty good examples of guys who might have caught him and stopped him.

And please feel free to fire back with ridiculous claims about how Shavers would have “been knocked into next week” because he had a glass jaw as evidenced by the fact that Quarry was able to stop him by hitting him with about 30 power shots and of course all of those other KOs/TKOs when Shavers was stopped after punching himself out.

Awesome post, hilarious.

Lyle couldn't stop Frazier with an automatic weapon. And his power wasn't similar to Foreman's or Shavers.

It always amazes me how many will on the one hand acknowledge Foreman as this impossible blend of raw power, killer instinct and brute savagery (John L not withstanding - or making sense, as usual) yet then use that one bout to deem Frazier as vulnerable to almost anyone with a punch.

Shavers wasnt 1/100th the FIGHTER Foreman was. Power is far from the only factor.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:always thought frazier was a little overrated. Didnt have a long peak, and was a little flattered by the factali wasn't a big puncher. Didnt face a lot of big hitters in his career, and the one really big puncher he faced in foreman, absolutely flattened him twice. Had he faced Lyle and Shavers his resume may well have been a lot less impressive.

Five years as World Heavyweight Champion is not impressive? Be serious.

Tell Jerry Quarry how "top notch" Ernie Shavers was. (Of course Foreman did have concerns about Jerry and avoided him thusly....read up on that if you have the time.) Anyway IMHO Shavers and Lyle would fare about as well against Joe, as a fart might fare in a tornado.

BoxBuzz wrote:Tell Jerry Quarry how "top notch" Ernie Shavers was. (Of course Foreman did have concerns about Jerry and avoided him thusly....read up on that if you have the time.) Anyway IMHO Shavers and Lyle would fare about as well against Joe, as a fart might fare in a tornado.

The big difference in Shavers v Frazier and Foreman v Frazier is that while Shavers and Frazier were about the same size Foreman was so much bigger than Frazier and had a huge reach advantage that he could just wait for Frazier to attack and wallop him.

Again, he was all wrong for Frazier.

ThatOne wrote:The big difference in Shavers v Frazier and Foreman v Frazier is that while Shavers and Frazier were about the same size Foreman was so much bigger than Frazier and had a huge reach advantage that he could just wait for Frazier to attack and wallop him.

Again, he was all wrong for Frazier.

There he goes again...To him, Frazier was in his prime when he fought Big George. This is full of crap.

elmersalsa wrote:

ThatOne wrote:The big difference in Shavers v Frazier and Foreman v Frazier is that while Shavers and Frazier were about the same size Foreman was so much bigger than Frazier and had a huge reach advantage that he could just wait for Frazier to attack and wallop him.

Again, he was all wrong for Frazier.

There he goes again...To him, Frazier was in his prime when he fought Big George. This is full of crap.

He was the ripe old age of twenty nine. Big George was all wrong for Joe Frazier. As the great Cus D'Amato said "no swarmer can ever beat George Foreman." Even if he was a bit past his prime the fight was so one sided that it's impossibe to think of any other outcome.

If you watch both of them fight simple physics suggest Frazier could never beat Big George.

elmersalsa wrote:

ThatOne wrote:The big difference in Shavers v Frazier and Foreman v Frazier is that while Shavers and Frazier were about the same size Foreman was so much bigger than Frazier and had a huge reach advantage that he could just wait for Frazier to attack and wallop him.

Again, he was all wrong for Frazier.

There he goes again...To him, Frazier was in his prime when he fought Big George. This is full of crap.

Well, he did it again.

Apparently age 29 is the same for all categories of fighters to his way of thinking.

Frazier was most definitely past his prime for Foreman in Jamaica.

As you and I have pointed out countless times, Frazier was having trouble with tomato cans
post-FOTC. He had definitely lost his desire for the game.

But what the heck, 29 is 29 is 29, right?

yancey wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

ThatOne wrote:The big difference in Shavers v Frazier and Foreman v Frazier is that while Shavers and Frazier were about the same size Foreman was so much bigger than Frazier and had a huge reach advantage that he could just wait for Frazier to attack and wallop him.

Again, he was all wrong for Frazier.

There he goes again...To him, Frazier was in his prime when he fought Big George. This is full of crap.

Well, he did it again.

Apparently age 29 is the same for all categories of fighters to his way of thinking.

Frazier was most definitely past his prime for Foreman in Jamaica.

As you and I have pointed out countless times, Frazier was having trouble with tomato cans
post-FOTC. He had definitely lost his desire for the game.

But what the heck, 29 is 29 is 29, right?

Was he past his prime? Of course but you guys are trying to make this into a Louis-Marciano, Ali-Holmes, Leonard-Cammacho, Tyson-McBride situation. That's absurd. It was one of the most lopsided title defenses in the history of heavyweight boxing.

The fight was not even remotely competitive. Some fights you can watch and envision a boxer making an adjustment here or there and winning and alas they do. Are you arguing that Frazier was so shot after the FOTC at the ripe old age of 29 that he couldn't even be competitive enough to cause a rational person to envision a different outcome?

And as far a Frazier looking diminished against tomato cans in his two prior fights. Last I checked it too him a total of nine rounds to dispatch of his opponents.

Like I said it's simple physics. When a 5'11, 6'00 boxer with a 71 inch reach tries to swarm an equally skilled 6'4 230 pound boxer with a 82 inch reach it's not going to end well for him. Ask Cus.

P.S. I'm trying to distill your argument. After he got shellacked by Foreman he still had enough to beat solid heavyweight contenders like Joe Bugner and Jerry Quarry and to take Muhammad Ali to Hell and back but he didn't have enough in roughly the same time period to even give Foreman a fight. Please explain that to me and why the styles of the respective boxers had nothing to do with it.

Owl wrote:

ThatOne wrote:

elmersalsa wrote: There he goes again...To him, Frazier was in his prime when he fought Big George. This is full of crap.

He was the ripe old age of twenty nine. Big George was all wrong for Joe Frazier. As the great Cus D'Amato said "no swarmer can ever beat George Foreman." Even if he was a bit past his prime the fight was so one sided that it's impossibe to think of any other outcome.

If you watch both of them fight simple physics suggest Frazier could never beat Big George.

It may explain why Tyson thought of George foreman as a destroyer and that he would never face him.

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/boxing-ne ... zo1609.php

ThatOne, it is a persistent mission of Yance and Elmer to brutally overstate how far removed the undefeated, undisputed, 29-year-old champion was.

If Frazier struggled with Stander & Daniels, Im a Chinaman.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:ThatOne, it is a persistent mission of Yance and Elmer to brutally overstate how far removed the undefeated, undisputed, 29-year-old champion was.

If Frazier struggled with Stander & Daniels, Im a Chinaman.

sigh....

Note to Self: Have patience with Irene. He is quite clueless on the real state of Frazier post-FOTC. Must not take away from victory of his hero by telling the truth.

Owl wrote:

ThatOne wrote:

Owl wrote: It may explain why Tyson thought of George foreman as a destroyer and that he would never face him.

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/boxing-ne ... zo1609.php

Good stuff and quite accurate in my opinion.

Agree that it is most likely accurate.

I have always said Foreman was a bad match up stylistically for Frazier. I was a pretty hard core boxing fan back then and can sincerely say that fight made me very apprehensive as a Frazier fan. Was disappointed, but not surprised at all what happened. 4-1 was out of line for those who were aware that Frazier had definitely lost his edge, both physically and mentally, after climbing his mountain in '71.

I made a note to myself as far back as '68 when I saw Foreman punch the Russian senseless in the Olympics that here was someone that could be future trouble for Frazier.

With all that said, here is what I sincerely feel. Prime Frazier of '69-'70 has a viable chance of overcoming the style disadvantage, getting a good shot in early, staying real tight and ultimately taking Foreman out to deep water and drowning him. It would take the absolute eye of the tiger edge that prime Joe had and a referee that would do his job and immediately put an end to the pushing off tactics that Foreman brought to that fight.

It is not the impossibility some of you fellows seem to think.

I think another thing to George's advantage was that he was about to demonstrate (via Frazier) his greatness. Had he already dispensed with some serious challengers I think Joe would have prepared in a different manner. But big George was an "unknown quantity" about to become very well known, as a result of that fight.

A bit like Liston Clay......Liston would not, could not imagine what he was in for...Nor could Frazier.

Yes both Clay and Foreman showed promise before these fights, which brought some excitement to the bout, but in both cases the public felt these two were both about to be fed to the grinder.

Instead, they took over the "Grinder" status in the wake of these fights.

yancey wrote:

Owl wrote:

ThatOne wrote: http://www.eastsideboxing.com/boxing-ne ... zo1609.php

Good stuff and quite accurate in my opinion.

Agree that it is most likely accurate.

I have always said Foreman was a bad match up stylistically for Frazier. I was a pretty hard core boxing fan back then and can sincerely say that fight made me very apprehensive as a Frazier fan. Was disappointed, but not surprised at all what happened. 4-1 was out of line for those who were aware that Frazier had definitely lost his edge, both physically and mentally, after climbing his mountain in '71.

I made a note to myself as far back as '68 when I saw Foreman punch the Russian senseless in the Olympics that here was someone that could be future trouble for Frazier.

With all that said, here is what I sincerely feel. Prime Frazier of '69-'70 has a viable chance of overcoming the style disadvantage, getting a good shot in early, staying real tight and ultimately taking Foreman out to deep water and drowning him. It would take the absolute eye of the tiger edge that prime Joe had and a referee that would do his job and immediately put an end to the pushing off tactics that Foreman brought to that fight.

It is not the impossibility some of you fellows seem to think.

I just don't see how you get past the physical advantages that Foreman brings to the table.
How does a six foot tall, two hundred five pound guy with a seventy one inch reach get inside a six foot four, two hundred twenty five pound guy with a eighty two inch reach with one of the hardest punches in heavyweight history. I just don't see it.

Back to the article I linked. Who knows how much of it is true. But the point that Tyson's speed and by extension Frazier's speed would be of limited value because they could never get close enough to use it makes sense. If Tyson and Frazier were 6'4, 230 pounds with eighty two inch reaches I would make both of them with their styles favorites over Foreman but they weren't.

Well, the Foreman camp must have been terrified of Frazier getting inside and staying tight to Foreman, hence the pushing off strategy in Jamaica.

I don't know if it was Moore or Sadler who came up with the pushing off tactics but they got away with it.

Trust me, if the prime (not the pillsbury doughboy, over-confident, under-prepared, partying Jamaica version) eye of the tiger, buzz saw Frazier gets in tight early on Foreman and gets in a good liver shot, things quite possibly have turned out much differently. Foreman confessed he was scared of Joe and Big George may well have dogged it under intense, inside body punching.

I said "quite possibly", I would never have put much money on this one.

But I would have grabbed me some of that 25-1 somebody offered.

Foreman was not a good inside fighter. And after 5 rounds, he began losing his stamina. Smokin Joe stamina was one the very best. He was like a car warming up each round that passes. And when he was at full gear and smoking, oh boy, what a fighting machine he was.

Foreman might have more physical advantages. But those advantages cannot be measured with heart, grit and determination, including stamina.

I guess Ron Lyle would have been all wrong for Frazier, too. He dropped Foreman plenty of times. "Oh, it was Foreman's layoff after the Ali fight they say"

Jimmy Young gave Foreman a boxing lesson. I guess he saw Virgin Mary or Jesus in the sky, according to Big George.

yancey wrote:Well, the Foreman camp must have been terrified of Frazier getting inside and staying tight to Foreman, hence the pushing off strategy in Jamaica.

I don't know if it was Moore or Sadler who came up with the pushing off tactics but they got away with it.

Trust me, if the prime (not the pillsbury doughboy, over-confident, under-prepared, partying Jamaica version) eye of the tiger, buzz saw Frazier gets in tight early on Foreman and gets in a good liver shot, things quite possibly have turned out much differently. Foreman confessed he was scared of Joe and Big George may well have dogged it under intense, inside body punching.

I said "quite possibly", I would never have put much money on this one.

But I would have grabbed me some of that 25-1 somebody offered.

You forgot to add, wheelchair-bound, no?

I love how you sprinkle these Foreman quotes paying homage to Frazier as though they mean anything, but not a peep about anything Frazier ever said to contradict your ever more warped fantasy Frazier could EVER hang with Foreman.

"Listen, the only thing I did wrong was sign that contract, OK?" - Joe Frazier.

elmersalsa wrote:Foreman was not a good inside fighter. And after 5 rounds, he began losing his stamina. Smokin Joe stamina was one the very best. He was like a car warming up each round that passes. And when he was at full gear and smoking, oh boy, what a fighting machine he was.

Foreman might have more physical advantages. But those advantages cannot be measured with heart, grit and determination, including stamina.

I guess Ron Lyle would have been all wrong for Frazier, too. He dropped Foreman plenty of times. "Oh, it was Foreman's layoff after the Ali fight they say"

Jimmy Young gave Foreman a boxing lesson. I guess he saw Virgin Mary or Jesus in the sky, according to Big George.

What part of "styles make fights" don't you understand? Joe Frazier and Jimmy Young were as different fighters, as well, night and day.

That's like saying because Foreman destroyed Norton and Norton beat Ali that Foreman would destroy Ali. That's like saying because Frankie Randall beat Julio Ceasar Chavez Jr. and Julio Ceasar Chavez Jr. beat Hector Camacho that Frankie Randall could beat Hector Camacho too.