BoxRec

Who wins?

ThatOne wrote:Who wins?

I wouldn't bet on Joe at even money.

That should tell you whom I think the match up favors. As a Frazier fan, I would be covering my eyes and praying in the first three rounds.

Unlike a certain Ali groupie or two around these parts, I have no problem grasping reality. The match up of styles for Frazier is not good.

OTOH, IF Frazier gets it to round 4 in good shape, his chances should definitely be on the rise.

If Frazier gets him to round 9, GF would most likely be reduced to a blubbering, slobbering, unviable tissue mass.

We all could hear Irene wailing from across the Pacific.

p.s. If I'm Yank Durham, I have Frazier good and warmed up before entering the ring. I counsel Joe to try to be careful as hell in the early going. I'm also politicking before the fight stressing that the ref has to stop any positioning moves by GF. Frazier HAS to get inside, inside those big, clubbing punches, lay his head on Foreman's chest, and work the body. 1973 GF was a monster. All this could be for naught, but that is what I do.

No wailing from me. Im quite comfortable imagining it.

Foreman would win. While I think Frazier was less than 100% when they fought in 1973, the nature of his loss was so devastating and absolute that I have a hard time seeing it any other way for 1970 Frazier. Joe did not have it in him to be careful and any attempt at boxing carefully would most likely have him out of there even sooner. Fraziers only chance would imo be to tag Foreman with something huge early in round one and either stop him (no one is ko proof) or at least make George think twice for a while.

Frazier wins this one. I cannot see it other way. The KO that Foreman did back in '73 was a great win, but he did not beat the real Frazier, just the name. By '73, Frazier was not the same and it showed. In the previous year in '72, two tomato cans, Ron Stander and Terry Daniels, lasted with Frazier for 5 rounds. If the fight was pre-'72 those two tomato cans would have not lasted no more than 2 rounds a piece. That FOTC with Ali was brutal. He was never the same after that.

elmersalsa wrote:Frazier wins this one. I cannot see it other way. The KO that Foreman did back in '73 was a great win, but he did not beat the real Frazier, just the name. By '73, Frazier was not the same and it showed. In the previous year in '72, two tomato cans, Ron Stander and Terry Daniels, lasted with Frazier for 5 rounds. If the fight was pre-'72 those two tomato cans would have not lasted no more than 2 rounds a piece. That FOTC with Ali was brutal. He was never the same after that.

Why? Is your DVD player busted? Everyone else can watch the actual fight & see it just fine.

yancey wrote:OTOH, IF Frazier gets it to round 4 in good shape, his chances should definitely be on the rise.

That sounds reasonable. Foreman is a big favorite, but even a WAY past it, flabby Frazier showed that he could adapt enough to survive for a while in a rematch, so I think it's pretty reasonable to imagine a prime Frazier doing very well, and possibly winning, if he and Foreman fought a series of fights at their respective primes. He'd probably get bounced around the first fight and then do quite well in a rematch.

elmersalsa wrote:Frazier wins this one. I cannot see it other way. The KO that Foreman did back in '73 was a great win, but he did not beat the real Frazier, just the name. By '73, Frazier was not the same and it showed. In the previous year in '72, two tomato cans, Ron Stander and Terry Daniels, lasted with Frazier for 5 rounds. If the fight was pre-'72 those two tomato cans would have not lasted no more than 2 rounds a piece. That FOTC with Ali was brutal. He was never the same after that.

I most definitely agree with you that Foreman did not beat the real Frazier in Jamaica. Totally agree with you that Frazier was never, ever the same after the FOTC.

'70 Frazier has a viable chance against '73 Foreman, but things have to go right.

The style match up is not good for Frazier, but he was so great in that '67 to '70 era that he may just overcome it. He needs to get a good early shot in and attach himself to George. I think there would have been a good chance that Foreman would have wilted under a body barrage if Frazier got it into the mid rounds.

Foreman cannot be allowed to push off Joe and position him like he did in Jamaica.

The Great John L wrote:

yancey wrote:OTOH, IF Frazier gets it to round 4 in good shape, his chances should definitely be on the rise.

That sounds reasonable. Foreman is a big favorite, but even a WAY past it, flabby Frazier showed that he could adapt enough to survive for a while in a rematch, so I think it's pretty reasonable to imagine a prime Frazier doing very well, and possibly winning, if he and Foreman fought a series of fights at their respective primes. He'd probably get bounced around the first fight and then do quite well in a rematch.

He fought a more patient fight the second time. But to me watching a retreating Frazier with a little side step was sad to see. It only delayed the inevitable. It would be like watching Larry Csonka run off tackle instead of right up the middle.

ThatOne wrote:

The Great John L wrote:

yancey wrote:OTOH, IF Frazier gets it to round 4 in good shape, his chances should definitely be on the rise.

That sounds reasonable. Foreman is a big favorite, but even a WAY past it, flabby Frazier showed that he could adapt enough to survive for a while in a rematch, so I think it's pretty reasonable to imagine a prime Frazier doing very well, and possibly winning, if he and Foreman fought a series of fights at their respective primes. He'd probably get bounced around the first fight and then do quite well in a rematch.

He fought a more patient fight the second time. But to me watching a retreating Frazier with a little side step was sad to see. It only delayed the inevitable. It would be like watching Larry Csonka run off tackle instead of right up the middle.

We agree on something Frazier, ThatOne. Good analogy using Csonka.

I've only watched that second Foreman-Frazier fight one time and that was years ago.

Never want to see it again.

Frazier was a shot fighter by then and it was indeed sad to see him getting away from what he was about.

ThatOne wrote:

The Great John L wrote:

yancey wrote:OTOH, IF Frazier gets it to round 4 in good shape, his chances should definitely be on the rise.

That sounds reasonable. Foreman is a big favorite, but even a WAY past it, flabby Frazier showed that he could adapt enough to survive for a while in a rematch, so I think it's pretty reasonable to imagine a prime Frazier doing very well, and possibly winning, if he and Foreman fought a series of fights at their respective primes. He'd probably get bounced around the first fight and then do quite well in a rematch.

He fought a more patient fight the second time. But to me watching a retreating Frazier with a little side step was sad to see. It only delayed the inevitable. It would be like watching Larry Csonka run off tackle instead of right up the middle.

I agree, it was really the only time I felt sad watching Frazier and that includes the Cummings fight. The only reason he lasted a few more rounds the second time was that Foreman had adopted (foolishly) a more measured style following Zaire.

I wonder if any swarmer could have beat George Foreman.

ThatOne wrote:I wonder if any swarmer could have beat George Foreman.

I dont

yancey wrote:

ThatOne wrote:Who wins?

I wouldn't bet on Joe at even money.

I wouldn't bet on Joe at 25 to 1. He can't beat George.

Stylistically I can't think of a worse match up and when you throw in the height and reach discrepancy a Frazier win becomes infathomable.

ThatOne wrote:Stylistically I can't think of a worse match up and when you throw in the height and reach discrepancy a Frazier win becomes infathomable.

I could see Joe winning this time, big time...Just ask the great Ali in their first meeting. Smokin' Joe was so hard to hit cleanly.

Frazier over Foreman, Duran over Hearns. What's next? Corrales over Mayweather? Tito over Hopkins?

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Frazier over Foreman, Duran over Hearns. What's next? Corrales over Mayweather? Tito over Hopkins?

Chico was weight-drained & distracted by a court case. Tito wasn't allowed to use his special wraps.

Yep, Foreman for me.

It's as bad a stylistic matchup for Frazier as Tommy was for Duran.

Bullcrap! I don't see it that way. Ali could not hit him as cleanly as he wanted it to in first fight. And he was faster than Foreman.

elmersalsa wrote:Bullcrap! I don't see it that way. Ali could not hit him as cleanly as he wanted it to in first fight. And he was faster than Foreman.

Ali and Foreman are two different fighters. Ali fought backing up. Foreman waited for you to attack him and then he would wallop you.

If they fought one hundred times Foreman would beat him one hundred times. Maybe you need to watch both fights again. They weren't even close enough to imagine how Frazier could make the necessary adjustments to win.

ThatOne wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Bullcrap! I don't see it that way. Ali could not hit him as cleanly as he wanted it to in first fight. And he was faster than Foreman.

Ali and Foreman are two different fighters. Ali fought backing up. Foreman waited for you to attack him and then he would wallop you.

If they fought one hundred times Foreman would beat him one hundred times. Maybe you need to watch both fights again. They weren't even close enough to imagine how Frazier could make the necessary adjustments to win.

Maybe you need to see Smoking Joe in his prime. That fight with Foreman in a way, was a FLUKE. The only thing GREAT was that he beat an undefeated champion at the time. But that champion already lost something after the Fight of the Century. He fought 2 tomato cans after that, and those tomato cans lasted 5 rounds. In his prime, Smokin' Joe would have smoked them before the second round. There was no bobbing nor weaving. The desire of fighting was not there. Even some boxing experts at the time was questioning Frazier's will to fight after the Fight of the Century. He already banked 2 million dollars. He had a singing R&B group or band and was not training like he used to. It was clearly that he lost it. He lost something.

I wonder what the pick in this forum would be if we match the Frazier in his prime against a Foreman in decline or when he fought Jimmy Young. What would they say? Foreman would also ahniliate Joe? Oh, Foreman must be Superman!

"Maybe you need to see Smoking Joe in his prime. That fight with Foreman in a way, was a FLUKE. The only thing GREAT was that he beat an undefeated champion at the time. But that champion already lost something after the Fight of the Century. He fought 2 tomato cans after that, and those tomato cans lasted 5 rounds. In his prime, Smokin' Joe would have smoked them before the second round. There was no bobbing nor weaving. The desire of fighting was not there. Even some boxing experts at the time was questioning Frazier's will to fight after the Fight of the Century. He already banked 2 million dollars. He had a singing R&B group or band and was not training like he used to. It was clearly that he lost it. He lost something." elmersalsa

I agree 1000% with the above assessment of Joe Frazier post-FOTC.

He most definitely was NOT the same force in the ring after 3/8/71.

I couldnt get past the word, "fluke," to see if I agreed or not

Goodnight, Irene wrote:I couldnt get past the word, "fluke," to see if I agreed or not

Elmer is a pretty smart guy - I think it was just poor word choice. I don't think it was a fluke, by the dictionary definition of the word, and he meant Foreman was fortunate to meet Frazier when he did.

That said, I'm not so sure Frazier could have done much better even at his absolute best against any 1972-1977 version of Foreman. I love Joe Frazier - he's my favorite champion of all-time. But sometimes there is somebody out there against whom you just don't match up well.