BoxRec

We put the great George Foreman 70s version vs Vitaly Klitschko

The other fight would be Foreman's 90s version, the one that gave the great Evander Holyfield a tough fight vs Vitaly.

What would be the outcomes of both fights?

Vitali Klitscko W12 George Foreman 90x

George Foreman 70x beat Vitali by decision or late stoppage

It's one of those hammer versus anvil fights.

Seriously, before we bother to reel off the long long list of dangerous men Foreman beat, does Vitali even have a win comparable to prime 1992 Alex Stewart?

Tuan_Jim wrote:Seriously, before we bother to reel off the long long list of dangerous men Foreman beat, does Vitali even have a win comparable to prime 1992 Alex Stewart?

Yes, for example Sanders or Peter.

Noxy wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:Seriously, before we bother to reel off the long long list of dangerous men Foreman beat, does Vitali even have a win comparable to prime 1992 Alex Stewart?

Yes, for example Sanders or Peter.

Both men were grossly overweight and Sanders was 40 and coming off more than a year layoff.

Scary that those are his 'big wins'.

I see the point you're making Jim but you're selling Vitali short. 1. Those aren't his "big" wins, they're just examples of a couple of bigger names than Alex Stewart 2. Vitali didn't duck anyone, was a fearsome champion for years and both his losses fell well short of being comprehensive. As the Americans like to say - he never "got his ass handed to him". Vitali was the real deal, a huge bloke with a granite chin and knockout punch who would have featured in any era.

Sure, he didn't fight the calibre of fighter George did, then again who did.

Noxy wrote: Vitali didn't duck anyone, was a fearsome champion for years and both his losses fell well short of being comprehensive. As the Americans like to say - he never "got his ass handed to him". Vitali was the real deal, a huge bloke with a granite chin and knockout punch who would have featured in any era.

He ducked out of three more rounds versus Chris Byrd, because "it hurts too bad".

Easy to proclaim a man the "real deal" when he lost to the two best men he faced (one of whom was old, and the other good but not great) and everyone else he beat - everyone - was a flabby mediocrity. Sullivan, Mahone, Johnson, Williams, Sanders, Peter, Briggs . . . etc etc.

I know - not Vitali's fault. But you can't sell a man who in his best fight was ripped to bloody shreds and staggering around gasping after 6 rounds as some man who can compete with anyone in history. Especially when his great wins are against Corrie Sanders and Shannon Briggs.

Really the question ought to be three plausible fights... 70's George, 90's George, and 2000's...

Why the 2000's? Because when Lewis fought Vitali, George said "If Klitschko beats Lewis I will unretire!" and for months on end it was discussed openly of Foreman making a comeback at the age of 54. The hypothetical scenario would be (as I remember it all being laid down then) is Foreman returns for a couple of four round bouts--- after all, it was Foreman who came up with the concept of "Prizefighter" essentially--- and manages to defeat someone along the lines of fringe contendership. This puts him in "line" as a volunteer defense for the newly crowned champion Vitali, and Foreman gets his shot at him.

I remember at the time, that I wasn't sure Foreman could beat Vitali, but was certain he could of possibly beaten Ruiz or Valuev. Anyways--- as for the original two scenarios--- 70's Foreman against Vitali would of been an AWESOME contest, with Foreman tiring out midway, and Klitschko getting a second wind. Would of been a wildly sloppy contest, where both men would of probably hit the floor. Dunno who would of really won that contest--- because say what you will of Vitali, he never kissed canvas EVER and had amazing conditioning and stamina.

As for 90's Foreman... depends on which one showed up... and what I mean by this is that the 90's Foreman fought two different defensive styles. From '87 to the mid 90's Foreman fought with a crab-defense, and this kept him protected, but also made his punch rate lower. Mid 90's on, he fought more with a traditional defensive stance, and was bit more offensive but was also more open to counters. Either way, I think Foreman wouldn't of been able to of effectively of out boxed--- let alone out slug--- Vitali. Too slow.

Vitali Klitschko vs (1970's) George Foreman would be an awesome fantasy fight.
Some will dismiss Vitali because he never lost to Ali or Jimmy Young. And some will dismiss George because he never lost to Byrd or Lennox Lewis. DD

(The bias against modern fighters is baffling to me, but that's another topic that will be argued about until we are all old and talking about how the fighters of the good old days of the 2000's were so much better than the ones in the 2030's :) )
But anyway, I'd say Klitschko vs. Foreman = UD 12 victory for Vitali.

Really tough match up for George. I think he is the better fighter with the much better career but I could see him potentially losing this fight.

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Noxy wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:Seriously, before we bother to reel off the long long list of dangerous men Foreman beat, does Vitali even have a win comparable to prime 1992 Alex Stewart?

Yes, for example Sanders or Peter.

Both men were grossly overweight and Sanders was 40 and coming off more than a year layoff.

Scary that those are his 'big wins'.

Mate,

You might want to check the late Corrie Sanders age. Vitali UD over Foreman.

Vitali's punching power was more of a 'wear you down' variety, unless you had a weak chin like say Herbie Hide. You only have to look at Foreman v Alex Stewart to get an idea how tough Foreman would have it. I would see Big George's eyes swelling up sooner and the ref stepping in with Foreman still on his feet but well beaten.

While I rank George Foreman leagues higher than Vitali Klitschko, I think this may be a fight where the lesser ranked man prevails. Foreman would not enjoy the size and strength advantages that he had over many of his better opponents, and furthermore would be taking on a man who's chin and stamina may carry him into the later rounds where George had the tendency to drown. Lastly, while Vitali was no Muhammad Ali in the skills department, he did at least have respectable boxing ability along with a decent wing span and some snap behind his shots. That's a nasty cocktail for Foreman.. We can go on all day about " This one beat Joe Frazier, while that one beat up a fat old Corrie Sanders, " but at the end of the day, I don't think its going to make a difference in the actual chemistry between these two.

drunkenpiper36 wrote:While I rank George Foreman leagues higher than Vitali Klitschko, I think this may be a fight where the lesser ranked man prevails. Foreman would not enjoy the size and strength advantages that he had over many of his better opponents, and furthermore would be taking on a man who's chin and stamina may carry him into the later rounds where George had the tendency to drown. Lastly, while Vitali was no Muhammad Ali in the skills department, he did at least have respectable boxing ability along with a decent wing span and some snap behind his shots. That's a nasty cocktail for Foreman.. We can go on all day about " This one beat Joe Frazier, while that one beat up a fat old Corrie Sanders, " but at the end of the day, I don't think its going to make a difference in the actual chemistry between these two.

Agreed. Nice summary.

The Great John L wrote:

drunkenpiper36 wrote:While I rank George Foreman leagues higher than Vitali Klitschko, I think this may be a fight where the lesser ranked man prevails. Foreman would not enjoy the size and strength advantages that he had over many of his better opponents, and furthermore would be taking on a man who's chin and stamina may carry him into the later rounds where George had the tendency to drown. Lastly, while Vitali was no Muhammad Ali in the skills department, he did at least have respectable boxing ability along with a decent wing span and some snap behind his shots. That's a nasty cocktail for Foreman.. We can go on all day about " This one beat Joe Frazier, while that one beat up a fat old Corrie Sanders, " but at the end of the day, I don't think its going to make a difference in the actual chemistry between these two.

Agreed. Nice summary.

Thanks

drunkenpiper36 wrote:

The Great John L wrote:

drunkenpiper36 wrote:While I rank George Foreman leagues higher than Vitali Klitschko, I think this may be a fight where the lesser ranked man prevails. Foreman would not enjoy the size and strength advantages that he had over many of his better opponents, and furthermore would be taking on a man who's chin and stamina may carry him into the later rounds where George had the tendency to drown. Lastly, while Vitali was no Muhammad Ali in the skills department, he did at least have respectable boxing ability along with a decent wing span and some snap behind his shots. That's a nasty cocktail for Foreman.. We can go on all day about " This one beat Joe Frazier, while that one beat up a fat old Corrie Sanders, " but at the end of the day, I don't think its going to make a difference in the actual chemistry between these two.

Agreed. Nice summary.

Thanks

Well most on here don't seem to understand the concept that just because one fighter is better than another doesn't mean that he's going to beat him. Clearly Foreman is going to be higher on everybodys ATG HW list, but a prepared and non-drug addled Jimmy Young would beat him most nights. Vitali was a very large, well conditioned, strong chinned guy with very good skills and it's hard not to think that he would have had a very good chance of taking George deep and then burying him with volume after George became exhausted. Vitali was very good at follow a plan.

OTOH it's hard to imagine Wlad not panicking and getting stomped by the uber-confident, powerful Foreman.

[Well most on here don't seem to understand the concept that just because one fighter is better than another doesn't mean that he's going to beat him. Clearly Foreman is going to be higher on everybodys ATG HW list, but a prepared and non-drug addled Jimmy Young would beat him most nights. Vitali was a very large, well conditioned, strong chinned guy with very good skills and it's hard not to think that he would have had a very good chance of taking George deep and then burying him with volume after George became exhausted. Vitali was very good at follow a plan.

OTOH it's hard to imagine Wlad not panicking and getting stomped by the uber-confident, powerful Foreman.

Absolutely and I agree completely. The only time I use a fighter's resume or ranking to pick him over another is when they are so well matched that a stylistic argument is virtually impossible to make a case. Other than that, I think we can come up with a lot of match ups where a high ranking fighter can potentially lose to one of lesser status.

I think you gents sum up my feelings on this too.

And Vitali would go in knowing he has to get through those first 5 rounds. And he'd be clinching and mauling his way through them. George on the other hand would know the final third of the fight would be a big problem for him. He has that ticking clock against him. And when he tried to hold back a little against Young it backfired.

I think a Dempsey or a Tyson has more chance of getting rid of Vitali quickly because they put the punches together so well.

drunkenpiper36 wrote:While I rank George Foreman leagues higher than Vitali Klitschko, I think this may be a fight where the lesser ranked man prevails. Foreman would not enjoy the size and strength advantages that he had over many of his better opponents, and furthermore would be taking on a man who's chin and stamina may carry him into the later rounds where George had the tendency to drown. Lastly, while Vitali was no Muhammad Ali in the skills department, he did at least have respectable boxing ability along with a decent wing span and some snap behind his shots. That's a nasty cocktail for Foreman.. We can go on all day about " This one beat Joe Frazier, while that one beat up a fat old Corrie Sanders, " but at the end of the day, I don't think its going to make a difference in the actual chemistry between these two.

not drunken at all, this piper ...

drunkenpiper36 wrote:While I rank George Foreman leagues higher than Vitali Klitschko, I think this may be a fight where the lesser ranked man prevails. Foreman would not enjoy the size and strength advantages that he had over many of his better opponents, and furthermore would be taking on a man who's chin and stamina may carry him into the later rounds where George had the tendency to drown. Lastly, while Vitali was no Muhammad Ali in the skills department, he did at least have respectable boxing ability along with a decent wing span and some snap behind his shots. That's a nasty cocktail for Foreman.. We can go on all day about " This one beat Joe Frazier, while that one beat up a fat old Corrie Sanders, " but at the end of the day, I don't think its going to make a difference in the actual chemistry between these two.

I rank a prime Foreman well over the old, inactive Lewis who beat Klitschko. That fight proved that vs an elite fighter with a big jab, Vitali is suddenly not dominant like vs the lumbering oafs he excelled against in most of his career. Foreman's jab was top notch and he also kept up a fast pace. Vitali will have his moments but George's jab and body work will have Vitlai exhausted and taking big shots by the later rounds.

dempseyfire wrote:

drunkenpiper36 wrote:While I rank George Foreman leagues higher than Vitali Klitschko, I think this may be a fight where the lesser ranked man prevails. Foreman would not enjoy the size and strength advantages that he had over many of his better opponents, and furthermore would be taking on a man who's chin and stamina may carry him into the later rounds where George had the tendency to drown. Lastly, while Vitali was no Muhammad Ali in the skills department, he did at least have respectable boxing ability along with a decent wing span and some snap behind his shots. That's a nasty cocktail for Foreman.. We can go on all day about " This one beat Joe Frazier, while that one beat up a fat old Corrie Sanders, " but at the end of the day, I don't think its going to make a difference in the actual chemistry between these two.

I rank a prime Foreman well over the old, inactive Lewis who beat Klitschko. That fight proved that vs an elite fighter with a big jab, Vitali is suddenly not dominant like vs the lumbering oafs he excelled against in most of his career. Foreman's jab was top notch and he also kept up a fast pace. Vitali will have his moments but George's jab and body work will have Vitlai exhausted and taking big shots by the later rounds.

Its true that Lewis was near shot when he beat Klitschko. He was approaching 38 years of age, a career high 256 lbs, off for a year and in the last fight of his life. But he still had some tools that even a prime Foreman lacked. His reach, jab, and boxing skills were more conducive to being able to land flush on Vitali and dare I say his defense was better too. Still, even with these additional attributes, Lewis was losing the first 4 rounds of that fight, getting tagged regularly and fading fast. In order for Foreman to win that fight in the exact or similar fashion we'd have to assume that he'd land just as effectively as Lewis without taking too many shots in the interim. Also, that he'd open a cut of similar or greater severity, and that he'd be able to linger around long enough to capitalize on the opportunity. Frankly I think a man with poor defensive skills, lesser boxing ability, limited stamina and noticeably less size would have the odds stacked against him. That's not to say that George Foreman "couldn't" have beaten Vitali Klitschko, but favoring him to do it isn't something that I'd be able to do with much confidence.

drunkenpiper36 wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:

drunkenpiper36 wrote:While I rank George Foreman leagues higher than Vitali Klitschko, I think this may be a fight where the lesser ranked man prevails. Foreman would not enjoy the size and strength advantages that he had over many of his better opponents, and furthermore would be taking on a man who's chin and stamina may carry him into the later rounds where George had the tendency to drown. Lastly, while Vitali was no Muhammad Ali in the skills department, he did at least have respectable boxing ability along with a decent wing span and some snap behind his shots. That's a nasty cocktail for Foreman.. We can go on all day about " This one beat Joe Frazier, while that one beat up a fat old Corrie Sanders, " but at the end of the day, I don't think its going to make a difference in the actual chemistry between these two.

I rank a prime Foreman well over the old, inactive Lewis who beat Klitschko. That fight proved that vs an elite fighter with a big jab, Vitali is suddenly not dominant like vs the lumbering oafs he excelled against in most of his career. Foreman's jab was top notch and he also kept up a fast pace. Vitali will have his moments but George's jab and body work will have Vitlai exhausted and taking big shots by the later rounds.

Its true that Lewis was near shot when he beat Klitschko. He was approaching 38 years of age, a career high 256 lbs, off for a year and in the last fight of his life. But he still had some tools that even a prime Foreman lacked. His reach, jab, and boxing skills were more conducive to being able to land flush on Vitali and dare I say his defense was better too. Still, even with these additional attributes, Lewis was losing the first 4 rounds of that fight, getting tagged regularly and fading fast. In order for Foreman to win that fight in the exact or similar fashion we'd have to assume that he'd land just as effectively as Lewis without taking too many shots in the interim. Also, that he'd open a cut of similar or greater severity, and that he'd be able to linger around long enough to capitalize on the opportunity. Frankly I think a man with poor defensive skills, lesser boxing ability, limited stamina and noticeably less size would have the odds stacked against him. That's not to say that George Foreman "couldn't" have beaten Vitali Klitschko, but favoring him to do it isn't something that I'd be able to do with much confidence.

I'd strongly disagree that the Lewis who fought Vitali had all of these tools Foreman lacked. A prime Foreman had a better jab (even vs Lennox's prime), just as varied punching arsenal, and while not as skillful, is in the same ballpark .. George's skills are heavily under-rated because people focus on the Zaire fight in which George fought stupidly and overconfident. Frankly, I never saw Lewis cut off the ring as skillfully as Foreman did Norton. And the size difference is negligible. Foreman would land more than Lewis did vs Vitali and land more hurtful shots . . .Lewis's timing that night was atrocious.

I'd strongly disagree that the Lewis who fought Vitali had all of these tools Foreman lacked. A prime Foreman had a better jab (even vs Lennox's prime), just as varied punching arsenal, and while not as skillful, is in the same ballpark .. George's skills are heavily under-rated because people focus on the Zaire fight in which George fought stupidly and overconfident. Frankly, I never saw Lewis cut off the ring as skillfully as Foreman did Norton. And the size difference is negligible. Foreman would land more than Lewis did vs Vitali and land more hurtful shots . . .Lewis's timing that night was atrocious.

[/quote]

I don't think Foreman was unskilled. I just think he had the wrong "kind" of skills for this type of fight. George in the 70's had a solid two-fisted attack. He could tie a man up well in the clinches. He knew the value of working the body and could cut of the ring fairly effectively. I'm not sure that these would be the right tools he'd need for fighting Vitali and I don't concur that his jab was better than Lewis's at any stage in their careers, but we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

drunkenpiper36 wrote:I don't think Foreman was unskilled. I just think he had the wrong "kind" of skills for this type of fight. George in the 70's had a solid two-fisted attack. He could tie a man up well in the clinches. He knew the value of working the body and could cut of the ring fairly effectively. I'm not sure that these would be the right tools he'd need for fighting Vitali and I don't concur that his jab was better than Lewis's at any stage in their careers, but we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

The biggest difference between the Foreman and Lewis jabs is that Lewis actually knew what do with his jab. George did finally figure it out, but not until he was on Social Security.