BoxRec

James J Jeffries
Jack Johnson
Jack Dempsey
Max Baer

15 rounds (not that that will come into play in some cases DD )
8 ounce gloves.

What happens?

James J Jeffries = I would guess Foreman wins. JJJ had never faced any1 like GF.
Jack Johnson = Johnson wins by TKO around the 11th
Jack Dempsey = Foreman wins by TKO around 6 rounds
Max Baer = Foreman wins TKO around 9 (Bear would hav a punchers chance)

I think George beats Baer but loses to the rest (although Jefferies is a hard pick due to lack of quality film)

George destroys Dempsey & Bear.

I think he ends up stopping Jeffries, but I could see Jim outlasting him.

Jack is 50/50 for me, but I'll lean to George by KO.

yancey wrote:James J Jeffries
Jack Johnson
Jack Dempsey
Max Baer

15 rounds (not that that will come into play in some cases DD )
8 ounce gloves.

What happens?

Whaddaya mean, "some?"

8-ounce gloves, fvck me. You are one sick puppy, Yance.

I'm sure a lot of people would laugh at me for this, but I'd be quietly uneasy about my man tackling Jeffries. I'm confident Foreman would probably win it, mind --- it's a huge step-up for Jeffries to absorb what Foreman can dish out, relative to his real-world adversaries --- but if anyone was tough enough to fight that style (& I'm of the opinion the other noteworthy swarmers of the division are Foreman cannon-fodder), it would be a bigger, stronger (than the other exponents of this style, such as Frazier & Marciano), more athletic fighter with an iron jaw, unending endurance, & a mauling, bruising offense. Probably an early Foreman stoppage, but remember he could not really put out a Chuvalo he landed everything on. This might go that way, or maybe Jeffries survives to beat Foreman late.

Johnson? Please, DF. He is never getting out of the way of Foreman's under-rated speed of assault, & nor is he knocking Foreman out, or surviving the onslaught with chin & heart. Foreman crumples Johnson like a paper cup.

Foreman-Dempsey is perhaps the most exciting. I'm almost certain Foreman wins, but Dempsey has long had my vote ahead of other divisionary luminaries (such as Foreman, Liston, Tyson & co.) as the definitive most aggressive, psychotic offensive champion in the weightclass. He'd rocket out of his corner & take to Foreman as he did Willard, Firpo & co. Foreman knocks him out, IMO, but boy, would it be exciting while it lasts. Three rounds, with possibly both men hitting the deck, & multiple knockdowns of the teak-tough Dempsey assured.

Foreman knocks out Baer, who lacked the defense necessary for such an aggressive fighter to win. Shock for most is Foreman getting lazily off the deck, hurt in round two. Beyond that, Foreman is just too big, too strong up-close. Baer would be overwhelmed by Foreman's superior two-fisted attack (Foreman being a better puncher with his weaker hand, the left, than Baer was with his weaker hand, also the left) & gets knocked out in about four.

In short, Foreman is my bet to win all four fights, with only Jeffries making me truly nervous.

I see Foreman beating all of them.

Dempsey would make a good fight of it. But despite
the savage assault he would muster against George
I see him being stopped.

Jeffries eats a lot of punishment and goes down late,
brave, strong and solid he has little to answer with
when Foreman jabs him.

Baer makes Foreman look polished, each powerful and
crude. Foreman stops Baer late, but it is not an instant
and easy win. More like a compassionate ref stoppage
when Foreman lands hard and un answered blows on
the stubborn baer.

Johnson's supposed defensive genius does not work as
well against a bigger, harder hitting man that is Foreman.
Attempting to parrying shots like those that this version
of Foreman would throw at you is dangerous at best.
Foreman is able to consume Johnson, though we do see
a lot of clinch work and dirty boxing by both men.
Foreman gets the nod in an ugly affair.

That is if all those men but Baer chose not to draw the
colour line ;)

So Johnson, who manhandled Ed Martin, Jeannette, McVey, Langford, Jefferies, Willard for 20 rounds . . can't get out of the way of George Foreman??

That makes zero sense. Johnson is an awful matchup for Foreman, all of the savvy and skill of Young but a much bigger stronger guy with a much harder punch. There is no way Foreman lasts 15 rounds vs Johnson.

You can't parry the punches of a bigger man? Says who? Byrd made a whole career out of it, and Kevin Johnson used a pedestrian parry defense to last 12 rounds with Vitali Klitschko. You just don't see many fighters parrying nowadays b/c it's not taught and it takes skill to utilize correctly.

They way Johnson parried and the way Byrd and K Johnson were different.

Yes I know I am told time and time again that Johnson is rthe best defensive
fighter ever. But I do not think that his defence is as solid as many have
advertised.

I can imagine him goig the distance with George. But I do not see him beating
him.

You do not see to many guys parrying these days because more people
double up on the jab, left hook from the jab, use different angles and
bend their knee's/ You did not see too many people parrying like Johnson
did in the past either. Sure you can do it, but would Johnson be as effective
as he was against lesser punching men than say a '73 Foreman?

I must confess I have not seen ALOT of Johnsons complete fights only
those on YT and some incomplete bouts post 1908 I have on tape. So
sadly I have not seen his younger self. BUT from what I have seen
this is how I feel about it.

And I do not like to make such a call on incomplete viewings.

dempseyfire wrote:So Johnson, who manhandled Ed Martin, Jeannette, McVey, Langford, Jefferies, Willard for 20 rounds . . can't get out of the way of George Foreman??

That makes zero sense. Johnson is an awful matchup for Foreman, all of the savvy and skill of Young but a much bigger stronger guy with a much harder punch. There is no way Foreman lasts 15 rounds vs Johnson.

You can't parry the punches of a bigger man? Says who? Byrd made a whole career out of it, and Kevin Johnson used a pedestrian parry defense to last 12 rounds with Vitali Klitschko. You just don't see many fighters parrying nowadays b/c it's not taught and it takes skill to utilize correctly.

He is nowhere near as mobile as the Young who faced a past-prime (though, obviously, still dangerous) Foreman. Johnson essentially fought flat-footed, & used his size & strength advantages to mount an offense in picking away the punches of his opponents --- size & strength advantages which simply would not be there in this fight, & unlike so many of Johnson's contemporaries, Foreman fought at an up-tempo & punched in combination. Look at how many of Johnson's foes threw two or three punches & then stopped dead. Some of them feared the return-fire of a bigger man, with a solid punch --- Foreman would not fear Johnson, nor would he respect his guard. Did you really mean to bring up Jeffries? Six years of inactivity & 100lbs. of shed weight, with no tune-up bout Jeffries!? Guess what a peak Foreman makes of him? Jeffries would've been better off being put through a meat-grinder. That holds no weight in besting Foreman.

Willard? Very big, strong guy, & Johnson was more than a little past his prime, for sure. However, Johnson failed to hurt Willard sufficiently as to keep him off --- & Willard was nowhere near as aggressive or capable a finisher as Foreman. His attack looks pedestrian by comparison, & it is. McVey, Jeanette & Langford were ducked in absolutely shameless fashion. It was appalling. How developed was McVey when Johnson fought him again? Unless Johnson is going to fight a Foreman still in High School, its weight in the discussion is suspect.

This idea that Johnson is going to emulate his defensive wizardry by standing flat-footed & parrying Foreman --- with an eye to actually winning --- cannot stand. Johnson had a punch & he can hurt Foreman, but he cannot KO him whilever Foreman is fresh. Foreman is just too tough for that, as the fight with Lyle exhibited. Is Johnson going to out-manoeuvre Foreman, as Young did? I highly doubt that --- Johnson was about economy of footwork, & making you miss while he was at close-range.

Foreman would cripple Johnson, IMO.

i could see Johnson's defensive style meaning he could hardly lift his hands after 6 or 7 rounds, from the beating his shoulders etc received.

Fine, Johnson, a master at quickly changing angles and who could fight flat-footed or on his toes (he does for parts of the Ketchel fight), not "nearly as mobile as Young"?

Parrying doesn't work now b/c people double jab and hook off it? Not only is that wrong, but that implies no-one ever did that in Johnson's time, which is also wrong.

Couldn't keep Willard off him? Willard lasted b/c he made Johnson be the aggressor, Willard didn't start coming forward until around the 21st-22nd round.

Johnson made smaller and bigger opponents a like wary of coming in with much b/c he was arguably the best counter-puncher in HW history.

Marciano and Dempsey both would of had a good chance against George, more so than Frazier did, mainly because when they bobbed and weaved they bent their knees, while Frazier bent down---thus getting caught flush on the chin by uppercuts. I think they would have the punchers chance at betaing Foreman, as do I think Baer would. The Baer/Foreman encounter would be alot like the Foreman/Lyle encounter imho.

As for Jeffries, I see him going the distance with Foreman. Who wins the decision, is anyone's guess. But Jeffries would and could match Foreman for size, power, and ability. Jeffries often said he retired because he was sick and tired of fighting smaller men, for Jeffries was practically a giant for the era.

HomicideHenry wrote:Marciano and Dempsey both would of had a good chance against George, more so than Frazier did, mainly because when they bobbed and weaved they bent their knees, while Frazier bent down---thus getting caught flush on the chin by uppercuts. I think they would have the punchers chance at betaing Foreman, as do I think Baer would. The Baer/Foreman encounter would be alot like the Foreman/Lyle encounter imho.

As for Jeffries, I see him going the distance with Foreman. Who wins the decision, is anyone's guess. But Jeffries would and could match Foreman for size, power, and ability. Jeffries often said he retired because he was sick and tired of fighting smaller men, for Jeffries was practically a giant for the era.

George Foreman never fought fifteen rounds in his life & if it came to such a crunch against Jeffries, he'd not make it here.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:So Johnson, who manhandled Ed Martin, Jeannette, McVey, Langford, Jefferies, Willard for 20 rounds . . can't get out of the way of George Foreman??

That makes zero sense. Johnson is an awful matchup for Foreman, all of the savvy and skill of Young but a much bigger stronger guy with a much harder punch. There is no way Foreman lasts 15 rounds vs Johnson.

You can't parry the punches of a bigger man? Says who? Byrd made a whole career out of it, and Kevin Johnson used a pedestrian parry defense to last 12 rounds with Vitali Klitschko. You just don't see many fighters parrying nowadays b/c it's not taught and it takes skill to utilize correctly.

He is nowhere near as mobile as the Young who faced a past-prime (though, obviously, still dangerous) Foreman. Johnson essentially fought flat-footed, & used his size & strength advantages to mount an offense in picking away the punches of his opponents --- size & strength advantages which simply would not be there in this fight, & unlike so many of Johnson's contemporaries, Foreman fought at an up-tempo & punched in combination. Look at how many of Johnson's foes threw two or three punches & then stopped dead. Some of them feared the return-fire of a bigger man, with a solid punch --- Foreman would not fear Johnson, nor would he respect his guard. Did you really mean to bring up Jeffries? Six years of inactivity & 100lbs. of shed weight, with no tune-up bout Jeffries!? Guess what a peak Foreman makes of him? Jeffries would've been better off being put through a meat-grinder. That holds no weight in besting Foreman.

Willard? Very big, strong guy, & Johnson was more than a little past his prime, for sure. However, Johnson failed to hurt Willard sufficiently as to keep him off --- & Willard was nowhere near as aggressive or capable a finisher as Foreman. His attack looks pedestrian by comparison, & it is. McVey, Jeanette & Langford were ducked in absolutely shameless fashion. It was appalling. How developed was McVey when Johnson fought him again? Unless Johnson is going to fight a Foreman still in High School, its weight in the discussion is suspect.

This idea that Johnson is going to emulate his defensive wizardry by standing flat-footed & parrying Foreman --- with an eye to actually winning --- cannot stand. Johnson had a punch & he can hurt Foreman, but he cannot KO him whilever Foreman is fresh. Foreman is just too tough for that, as the fight with Lyle exhibited. Is Johnson going to out-manoeuvre Foreman, as Young did? I highly doubt that --- Johnson was about economy of footwork, & making you miss while he was at close-range.

Foreman would cripple Johnson, IMO.

Well they used to fight 25-30 rounds in those days often in the mid day heat. Johnson could be mobile when he wanted to,I have seen him be mobile in places, but knowing he may have to fight 25 rounds meant he very often didnt think it worthwhile to use those tactics hence the economy of movement. Do try and actually understand the different era of boxing Johnson competed in before you make your judge judy verdict on Johnson.

Obviously, that is a potential factor --- but it is potential only. Why? While Johnson's conditions were significant, it doesn't mean you can just blindly attribute this dancing style to him either, since we never saw it.

12 rounds, 25 rounds, 12 ounce gloves, 2 ounce gloves, midday, midnight...Foreman cripples Johnson.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Obviously, that is a potential factor --- but it is potential only. Why? While Johnson's conditions were significant, it doesn't mean you can just blindly attribute this dancing style to him either, since we never saw it.

12 rounds, 25 rounds, 12 ounce gloves, 2 ounce gloves, midday, midnight...Foreman cripples Johnson.

I agree Foreman wins..... I just dont see Johnson being crippled or the fight being easy. Johnson was versatile, and as tough as nails,a hard man in a hard era....my conclusion by no means is a Foreman win certain or as easy as you suggest.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Obviously, that is a potential factor --- but it is potential only. Why? While Johnson's conditions were significant, it doesn't mean you can just blindly attribute this dancing style to him either, since we never saw it.

12 rounds, 25 rounds, 12 ounce gloves, 2 ounce gloves, midday, midnight...Foreman cripples Johnson.

Look at the full film available vs Ketchel, there are parts of the fight Johnson is bouncing around on his toes.

In any case, to say guy who had incredible reflexes, awesome counter-punching abilities, could change angles in a split second, who was durable, had a great left jab, all who saw him marveled at his boxing skills, and you say a George Foreman "cripples" him . . that's going against everything we know of Johnson and is akin to saying that Sam Peter "cripples" Ali. It's just going against logic, Foreman by KO over struggling I could even live with, but Foreman is not going in and whitewashing Jack Johnson . . no-one ever did that and he would not be the first.

dempseyfire wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Obviously, that is a potential factor --- but it is potential only. Why? While Johnson's conditions were significant, it doesn't mean you can just blindly attribute this dancing style to him either, since we never saw it.

12 rounds, 25 rounds, 12 ounce gloves, 2 ounce gloves, midday, midnight...Foreman cripples Johnson.

Look at the full film available vs Ketchel, there are parts of the fight Johnson is bouncing around on his toes.

In any case, to say guy who had incredible reflexes, awesome counter-punching abilities, could change angles in a split second, who was durable, had a great left jab, all who saw him marveled at his boxing skills, and you say a George Foreman "cripples" him . . that's going against everything we know of Johnson and is akin to saying that Sam Peter "cripples" Ali. It's just going against logic, Foreman by KO over struggling I could even live with, but Foreman is not going in and whitewashing Jack Johnson . . no-one ever did that and he would not be the first.

Ah yes it was the Ketchel fight, I couldn't remember as I used to have a video tape of Johnson from the marshall cavendish series. Johnson was a gifted and very very tough man. Way ahead of his time I think its fair to say.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Obviously, that is a potential factor --- but it is potential only. Why? While Johnson's conditions were significant, it doesn't mean you can just blindly attribute this dancing style to him either, since we never saw it.

12 rounds, 25 rounds, 12 ounce gloves, 2 ounce gloves, midday, midnight...Foreman cripples Johnson.

I don't think the fighter ever lived who could "cripple" Jack Johnson. Beatable? Yes. Overrated? In my judgment, yes. But still a great heavyweight champion, and not likely to be "crippled" by anyone.

raylawpc wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Obviously, that is a potential factor --- but it is potential only. Why? While Johnson's conditions were significant, it doesn't mean you can just blindly attribute this dancing style to him either, since we never saw it.

12 rounds, 25 rounds, 12 ounce gloves, 2 ounce gloves, midday, midnight...Foreman cripples Johnson.

I don't think the fighter ever lived who could "cripple" Jack Johnson. Beatable? Yes. Overrated? In my judgment, yes. But still a great heavyweight champion, and not likely to be "crippled" by anyone.

The late great Harry Carpenter rated Johnson very very highly most knowledgable boxing historians do.

Johnson would beat Foreman. He would spoil and clinch... Move that inch or two so that he wasn't taking the full force of any shots that did come through. He'd slowly rathcet up the counters and end Foreman some time after 10.