Why is George Foreman so highly rated?

[elmersalsa]

I don't recall no boxing writer in the 70s or 80s decade labeling Big George as an all-time great heavyweight after his first retirement. He was considered a big, and powerful puncher and strong boxer that lacked stamina and boxing skills. A brute kind of guy. Especially when he lost to The Greatest and Jimmy Young.

It was in his second career that boxing writers were giving him his props after losing to the great Evander Holyfield by decision in which he gave a spirited performance that he was starting to get his props as one of the best heavyweights ever. Then, when he regained the title, against champion Michael Moorer at age 45 where he got the title of ATG p4p and top 10 heavyweight ever.

What if he never had made a comeback? Would he still be considered a top 10 heavyweight of all time? I don't think he would have been seen then like how he's perceived today.

[Ambling Alp II]

He was more likable in his comeback. He was always smiling, making jokes about what he ate.
That has as much to do with his rating as anything else. He was grossly underrated when he retired the first time.

[Controversial]

I get all the comments, I just wonder if Frazier and Norton were made for him and flatter his record slightly. I could easily see someone like Tyson flattening Frazier and Norton just as quick and I doubt Tyson would be outpointed by someone like Young.

Foreman has to be in the top 10 for sure but although a lot is made of his comeback it should also be remembered his first career lasted just 7.5 years and that included an 15 month break after losing to Ali. He retired aged just 28 and although a lot was made of him being old when he returned he was 38, not really old for a HW that had such a short career the first time around.

Still fantastic achievements but I do believe he had two fairly easy routes to the title and when it came to the crunch he lost to the best men he fought.

[dalcumly]

Two fights I'd have loved to see, because I couldn't predict the outcome, would have been a 1971 version of Foreman against a peak Lennox Lewis and Larry Holmes .
Except for the exhaustion against Ali, I think Foreman (from 1971) would have beaten EVERY heavyweight who ever lived, except the two mentioned above.

[Ezzard]

I get all the comments, I just wonder if Frazier and Norton were made for him and flatter his record slightly. I could easily see someone like Tyson flattening Frazier and Norton just as quick and I doubt Tyson would be outpointed by someone like Young.

Foreman has to be in the top 10 for sure but although a lot is made of his comeback it should also be remembered his first career lasted just 7.5 years and that included an 15 month break after losing to Ali. He retired aged just 28 and although a lot was made of him being old when he returned he was 38, not really old for a HW that had such a short career the first time around.

Still fantastic achievements but I do believe he had two fairly easy routes to the title and when it came to the crunch he lost to the best men he fought.

Frazier and Norton were made for him for sure... But in the same way both he and Liston were made for Ali.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I get all the comments, I just wonder if Frazier and Norton were made for him and flatter his record slightly. I could easily see someone like Tyson flattening Frazier and Norton just as quick and I doubt Tyson would be outpointed by someone like Young.

Foreman has to be in the top 10 for sure but although a lot is made of his comeback it should also be remembered his first career lasted just 7.5 years and that included an 15 month break after losing to Ali. He retired aged just 28 and although a lot was made of him being old when he returned he was 38, not really old for a HW that had such a short career the first time around.

Still fantastic achievements but I do believe he had two fairly easy routes to the title and when it came to the crunch he lost to the best men he fought.

Tyson couldn't flatten Frazier with a bulldozer.

[Controversial]

I get all the comments, I just wonder if Frazier and Norton were made for him and flatter his record slightly. I could easily see someone like Tyson flattening Frazier and Norton just as quick and I doubt Tyson would be outpointed by someone like Young.

Foreman has to be in the top 10 for sure but although a lot is made of his comeback it should also be remembered his first career lasted just 7.5 years and that included an 15 month break after losing to Ali. He retired aged just 28 and although a lot was made of him being old when he returned he was 38, not really old for a HW that had such a short career the first time around.

Still fantastic achievements but I do believe he had two fairly easy routes to the title and when it came to the crunch he lost to the best men he fought.

Tyson couldn't flatten Frazier with a bulldozer.

Serious? I disagree, they were practically the same height and similar reach but Tyson was a good stone heavier, faster and the bigger puncher. Bad match up for Frazier in my book, Tyson by early stoppage.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Couldn't be more serious, love that fight for Frazier. Tyson couldn't fight on the inside or backing up. Joe would eat him for breakfast.

[Tomasino]

Couldn't be more serious, love that fight for Frazier. Tyson couldn't fight on the inside or backing up. Joe would eat him for breakfast.

I've always thought this. Joe would love it in the clinch zone throwing mikes arms off and hooking hard to the body.

[Ambling Alp II]

I get all the comments, I just wonder if Frazier and Norton were made for him and flatter his record slightly. I could easily see someone like Tyson flattening Frazier and Norton just as quick and I doubt Tyson would be outpointed by someone like Young.

Foreman has to be in the top 10 for sure but although a lot is made of his comeback it should also be remembered his first career lasted just 7.5 years and that included an 15 month break after losing to Ali. He retired aged just 28 and although a lot was made of him being old when he returned he was 38, not really old for a HW that had such a short career the first time around.

Still fantastic achievements but I do believe he had two fairly easy routes to the title and when it came to the crunch he lost to the best men he fought.

Frazier and Norton were made for him for sure... But in the same way both he and Liston were made for Ali.

It doesn't matter how long your career was; what matters is what you do in your career.
Foreman did an awful lot in his career.
Yes he lost to the best fighter he ever faced. You could make that claim about almost every fighter that ever lived.
Against the second best fighter he ever faced, he won by crushing him in two rounds.
We can speculate about who else could do it against Frazier. We wouldn't even dream it could be done if Foreman had not actually done it.

The win over Norton is great underrated. If Norton retires at 35, nobody is saying he didn't have a good chin.

As who he beat before winning the title:
Did Tyson, Lewis, Holmes, Marciano, really fight that much better of competition before winning the title?
Did any of them have to beat someone as good as Joe Frazier to win it?

[Controversial]

I get all the comments, I just wonder if Frazier and Norton were made for him and flatter his record slightly. I could easily see someone like Tyson flattening Frazier and Norton just as quick and I doubt Tyson would be outpointed by someone like Young.

Foreman has to be in the top 10 for sure but although a lot is made of his comeback it should also be remembered his first career lasted just 7.5 years and that included an 15 month break after losing to Ali. He retired aged just 28 and although a lot was made of him being old when he returned he was 38, not really old for a HW that had such a short career the first time around.

Still fantastic achievements but I do believe he had two fairly easy routes to the title and when it came to the crunch he lost to the best men he fought.

Frazier and Norton were made for him for sure... But in the same way both he and Liston were made for Ali.

It doesn't matter how long your career was; what matters is what you do in your career.
Foreman did an awful lot in his career.
Yes he lost to the best fighter he ever faced. You could make that claim about almost every fighter that ever lived.
Against the second best fighter he ever faced, he won by crushing him in two rounds.
We can speculate about who else could do it against Frazier. We wouldn't even dream it could be done if Foreman had not actually done it.

The win over Norton is great underrated. If Norton retires at 35, nobody is saying he didn't have a good chin.

As who he beat before winning the title:
Did Tyson, Lewis, Holmes, Marciano, really fight that much better of competition before winning the title?
Did any of them have to beat someone as good as Joe Frazier to win it?

Sure, when I mentioned the length of career I was making reference to Foreman still being a young 38 year old in boxing terms in his comeback. He had a short first career full of a lot of quick wins and then retired at 28 and took 10 years out. I remember a lot being made of his age when he made his comeback, that he was too old blah blah blah but in a way he had the upper hand as he'd been through it all before and still quite fresh.

Of course any fighters record can be torn apart, I was more interested in why pretty much everyone ranked Foreman so highly considering he didn't beat many decent fighters or make many defences.

I still think Frazier and Norton were made for him. Norton was a notoriously slow starter and was dropped several times in early rounds in other fights and of course knocked out by a decent puncher previously (Garcia). I would still have Foreman in my top 10, it's just kinda strange that pretty much every HW in his gets their record torn apart yet Foreman gets left alone.

[sweetsci]

"I don't recall no boxing writer in the 70s or 80s decade labeling Big George as an all-time great heavyweight after his first retirement. He was considered a big, and powerful puncher and strong boxer that lacked stamina and boxing skills. A brute kind of guy. Especially when he lost to The Greatest and Jimmy Young."

Yeah. I do recall boxing writers looking down on George during his first retirement for the reasons you mention. He was not held in high regard between 77 and his comeback.

"I remember a lot being made of his age when he made his comeback, that he was too old blah blah blah..."

Oh yeah. When George came back 38 was indeed considered OLD. I was friends with an acquaintance of Charles Hostetter, an early Foreman comeback opponent, and my friend was like, "Charlie ought to be ashamed himself for getting knocked out by that old man." Remember, Foreman-Cooney was billed as "Two Geezers At Caesars" when Cooney was all of 33.

Foreman's second career helped his ATG status tremendously.

[elmersalsa]

Let's say that the great George Foreman would've never made a comeback and stayed retired since 1977. Where would we put him in the all time heavyweight rankings? In 1987, at the time of his comeback.
Let's see:
1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Johnson
4. Rocky Marciano
5. Jack Dempsey
6. Larry Holmes
7. Joe Frazier
8. Mike Tyson
9. Peter Jackson
10. Sonny Liston
11. John L. Sullivan
12. Ezzard Charles
13. James J. Jeffries
14. George Foreman

Is that the right ranking for Big George by 1987, in the time of his comeback?

[elmersalsa]

Now, I got Big George in the 6th place all-time heavyweight rankings after winning the title for the second time. He made a big jump from 14th to 6th in my view. Or he was a top ten regardless?

Your thoughts.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

My first thought is Peter Jackson over precomeback George, or top 10 in general, is hilarious. You just like to feel special for recognizing a real old name. No way is Jackson top 20.

[GPTM1403]

When rating him, ignore his second career.
His first career he had two losses. One was to Ali, the greatest heavyweight ever. The other was to Young. Anyone who saw Young around is time knows how good he was.

He beat Joe Frazier in his prime. In two rounds. Is there any other heavyweight who crushed anyone close to Frazier ? No.

Foreman crushed Norton in two rounds. People like to say Norton didn't have a good chin, which is nonsense. The Shavers and Cooney fights were when he was past it. This is a huge win for Foreman. It's more impressive than almost any other heavyweight's best win.

Yes he almost got knocked out by Lyle. The key word being almost. The bottom line is it is a KO5 over a very good heavyweight.

Ali and Louis are 1-2, Foreman has as good of a case as to being #3 as anyone else.

bar rating him as high as 3 I agree with all this, in his first career Foreman was a wrecking ball and if anything the Lyle fight enhanced him because he came through it. Lets be honest, Tyson as an example got lots of respect for the Ruddock fights but when you look across the board he never really managed to turn around losing fights that way so if we're even handed Foreman deserves respect for it. What he did to a prime Joe Frazier is frightening.

[Ezzard]

I guess the manner of the wins doesn't mean as much to me as the way he mentally capitulated in and out of the ring.

Schmeling's best wins were Louis and Sharkey...on a par with George's best two. George has a few more contenders on his record. But he didn't have the same all round ability as Schmeling...who could win a fight in a variety of ways.

Sharkey has Wills and Godfrey...again to me Sharkey has more to his overall game.

I'd rank all three close to one another at their peaks.

[HomicideHenry]

In his first incarnation.... He was something to behold: 22-4 as an amateur (in total from '66-'68) just 26 fights he won the gold medal before turning pro at the age of 20.... Once a professional, it's hard to imagine a man having such a ridiculously high success rate against the opponents he went up against from his pro debut until his retirement in 1977....

It's a Who's Who of boxing: Chuck Wepner (his 4th fight!), Gregorio Peralta, Joe Frazier (twice), Ken Norton, Ron Lyle, etc. outside of the losses to Ali and Young, Foreman appeared unstoppable.... In his comeback? For a man nearly 40 and 300+ pounds removed for ten years of competition, he blew every one of the skeptics away (even when losing) against the likes of Dwight Qawi, Bert Cooper, Gerry Cooney, Adilson Rodriguez, Alex Stewart, etc. and eventually would win the title back at age 45.

The irony is that the returning Foreman was more dangerous than his earlier self in the sense that he was more conditioned, more patient, more skilled, and not prone to fits of rage. The only drawback was that he was slower: hence why he lost to guys like Tommy Morrison and Evander Holyfield before getting to Michael Moorer, and also why he ducked Tony Tucker and instead fought guys like Axel Shulz. Collectively, all things considered, he's a top ten all time great. He's not Larry Holmes, he's not Joe Louis, he's not Muhammad Ali.... but arguably he could have defeated any of them, on any given night.... especially the bobbing and weaving types like Dempsey, Marciano and Tyson.

[elmersalsa]

My first thought is Peter Jackson over precomeback George, or top 10 in general, is hilarious. You just like to feel special for recognizing a real old name. No way is Jackson top 20.

The great Peter Jackson was the second best heavyweight of his era, behind the great John L. Sullivan. He had more longevity than John L.

Let's check out his record.

[Jaywheel]

We know who he is. Not Top Ten.

[Ambling Alp II]

I guess the manner of the wins doesn't mean as much to me as the way he mentally capitulated in and out of the ring.

Schmeling's best wins were Louis and Sharkey...on a par with George's best two. George has a few more contenders on his record. But he didn't have the same all round ability as Schmeling...who could win a fight in a variety of ways.

Sharkey has Wills and Godfrey...again to me Sharkey has more to his overall game.

I'd rank all three close to one another at their peaks.

The manner of the win is not end all be all, but it has to count for something.
Schmeling did beat Louis and Sharkey. However the Sharkey win was by a foul in which the referee didn't even see the low blow. That doesn't compare to knocking Ken Norton out in two rounds.
Sharkey beat Wills and Godfrey. Wills was ancient and Godfrey was nowhere near as as good as Joe Frazier or even Ken Norton.

Sharkey also was inconsistent and lost several times.
Schmeling lost to Steve Hamas.

Foreman was as mentally strong as either of them.

[Ambling Alp II]

Let's say that the great George Foreman would've never made a comeback and stayed retired since 1977. Where would we put him in the all time heavyweight rankings? In 1987, at the time of his comeback.
Let's see:
1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Johnson
4. Rocky Marciano
5. Jack Dempsey
6. Larry Holmes
7. Joe Frazier
8. Mike Tyson
9. Peter Jackson
10. Sonny Liston
11. John L. Sullivan
12. Ezzard Charles
13. James J. Jeffries
14. George Foreman

Is that the right ranking for Big George by 1987, in the time of his comeback?

#14 is absurd.

I have him #3 and I ignore his second career. Granted there are several guys who are close whom you could argue for #3.
He was clearly better than Liston, Jeffries and Tyson. Rating Jackson, Sullivan and Charles ahead of him is unbelievable.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

My first thought is Peter Jackson over precomeback George, or top 10 in general, is hilarious. You just like to feel special for recognizing a real old name. No way is Jackson top 20.

The great Peter Jackson was the second best heavyweight of his era, behind the great John L. Sullivan. He had more longevity than John L.

Let's check out his record.

Sullivan is nowhere near top 10 either. By all means, go check out his record and rate him properly.

[elmersalsa]

My first thought is Peter Jackson over precomeback George, or top 10 in general, is hilarious. You just like to feel special for recognizing a real old name. No way is Jackson top 20.

The great Peter Jackson was the second best heavyweight of his era, behind the great John L. Sullivan. He had more longevity than John L.

Let's check out his record.

Sullivan is nowhere near top 10 either. By all means, go check out his record and rate him properly.

John L. held the title for ten years. Of course, he had that color line thing.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Jeff hostetler was a super bowl winning QB. Then he signed with the raiders.