BoxRec

Could Evander Holyfield survive the early storm that is sure to come and then decision or tko a tiring Big George or would he succumb to that storm as did so many other victims...

It's seems the way to beat Big George was to survive him by sticking, moving, and holding and hope he got tired...Evander did a lot of that against Tyson...Would it work against George? Would it be enough? Was he strong enough?

I think the young Foreman would have been too big and strong for Holyfield. He was as big as a fit Riddick Bowe, and punched harder.

oliverfennell wrote:I think the young Foreman would have been too big and strong for Holyfield. He was as big as a fit Riddick Bowe, and punched harder.

There was a raging debate on another board...I am ambivalent...It's sounds trite but if you could weather the early storm you had a shot because Young George would tire out...Old George let the fight come to him...

I do know you don't go in there and trade punches...

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:I think the young Foreman would have been too big and strong for Holyfield. He was as big as a fit Riddick Bowe, and punched harder.

There was a raging debate on another board...I am ambivalent...It's sounds trite but if you could weather the early storm you had a shot because Young George would tire out...Old George let the fight come to him...

I do know you don't go in there and trade punches...

Some would say the older Foreman was actually the better fighter. Certainly he had better stamina and/or strategic mind.

oliverfennell wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:I think the young Foreman would have been too big and strong for Holyfield. He was as big as a fit Riddick Bowe, and punched harder.

There was a raging debate on another board...I am ambivalent...It's sounds trite but if you could weather the early storm you had a shot because Young George would tire out...Old George let the fight come to him...

I do know you don't go in there and trade punches...

Some would say the older Foreman was actually the better fighter. Certainly he had better stamina and/or strategic mind.

The old George was the more complete boxer...I don't know if he was the more effective boxer if you equate effective with winning...Young George never loses close or if you want controversial decisions to Tommy Morrison and Shannon Briggs and never wins a close or controversial decision to Axel Shultz...He disposes of them quickly...

Something tells me that the young George would have won, and I mostly base this on Holyfield's own statement that the older version of Foreman hit him harder than any opponent ever had, that even a jab rattled his teeth...the younger George was faster, more viscous and presumably hit harder than he did in his comeback...the only chance for Holyfield is that because George was more viscous and hot headed back then, that he would wear his ownself out, or be too wild and lazy in the ring and be countered. The older George wasn't so easily countered or worn down.

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:quote]

Some would say the older Foreman was actually the better fighter. Certainly he had better stamina and/or strategic mind.

The old George was the more complete boxer...I don't know if he was the more effective boxer if you equate effective with winning...Young George never loses close or if you want controversial decisions to Tommy Morrison and Shannon Briggs and never wins a close or controversial decision to Axel Shultz...He disposes of them quickly...

I tend to agree. I wasn't saying I personally believe the old George was better, just that it has been said.

oliverfennell wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:quote]

Some would say the older Foreman was actually the better fighter. Certainly he had better stamina and/or strategic mind.

The old George was the more complete boxer...I don't know if he was the more effective boxer if you equate effective with winning...Young George never loses close or if you want controversial decisions to Tommy Morrison and Shannon Briggs and never wins a close or controversial decision to Axel Shultz...He disposes of them quickly...

I tend to agree. I wasn't saying I personally believe the old George was better, just that it has been said.

I guess it's a semantic point...Old Foreman had more tools but Young George Foreman didn't seem to needs as many tools because he had incredible power...He didn't have to "box"...

It's like the Ali argument...Was he a great technical boxer? No...He went outside instead of inside of hooks...He moved his head away from a punch instead of to the side...He held his hands too low... He didn't square up when he threw a punch, et cetera...

But he had unbelievable hand and foot speed, incredible reflexes. a feel for the angles of the ring, and heart...

That made him one of the greatest boxers of all time...

TOIH08 wrote about Ali - "He didn't square up when he threw a punch, et cetera..."

Please explain what you mean.

John Galt wrote:TOIH08 wrote about Ali - "He didn't square up when he threw a punch, et cetera..."

Please explain what you mean.

Ali could hit from either shoulder with equal facility...He didn't have to arrange himself side on...Even at 32 and past his prime he was blasting Big George Foreman with right hand leads which you know is almost an insult to your opponent because it takes so much longer than a left to deliver because when a right handed boxer stands his left foot and left hand are much further out thus making the right take much longer to deliver:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyR7n3A5abo

I know you gentlemen are all about experts so I will defer to one...Can we qualify former light heavyweight champion and boxing journalist , Jose Torres as an expert ?

"In terms of his style of fighting Ali did everything wrong . But it all turned our right. He was the greatest fighter in the history of boxing because he took risks. He would consciously, purposely do something that is physically wrong to show the world that boxing was more a psychological than a physical debate."

For example, he never threw a punch below the jaw. I became champion with a body punch , and a lot of fighters became winners with that, but Ali never punched to the body. He would pull back to evade punches. It's like if a train comes toward you, you move to one side or you move to the other to avoid being hit. If you move backwards without getting off the track the train will kill you, unless you're Muhamad Ali. He believed in the magic of men in the ring and would not get caught by the train."

Decagon.....sometimes you make sense. And sometimes I think you may have read of few of my more inspired contributions........the physics of boxing can be quantified and argued.....but the metaphysics of boxing just may trump their cousins. Sort of a spin on the "size of the dog in the fight vs the size of the fight in the dog" logic.

And it is sound and reasoned logic... for those who have bothered to read "The Universe in a nutshell" or "A brief history of Time. Which could be considered great pugilistic publications....with the right context in mind.

BoxBuzz wrote:Decagon.....sometimes you make sense. And sometimes I think you may have read of few of my more inspired contributions........the physics of boxing can be quantified and argued.....but the metaphysics of boxing just may trump their cousins. Sort of a spin on the "size of the dog in the fight vs the size of the fight in the dog" logic.

And it is sound and reasoned logic... for those who have bothered to read "The Universe in a nutshell" or "A brief history of Time. Which could be considered great pugilistic publications....with the right context in mind.

Who is decagon?

And I think Jose Torres nailed it...I also think that's why some old timers still haven't come around...

Prime Foreman would've wrecked Holyfield. As good a boxer Holyfield was whenever he got hit hard he'd start trading with his opponents whether or not they were more powerful than him, and against Foreman that was essentially suicidal. Foreman would come out swinging and Holyfield would try to return fire, only he wouldn't last long enough to really do much damage and get taken out Frazier-style (either fight), maybe even quicker because I think Frazier had a better chin.

I like Holyfield. I think Foreman was a great but very beatable fighter. Holyfield had what it takes to soak it up and come back stronger.

I think big Foreman that faced Holyfield was in tremendous
condition..he was a better composed man, better schooled
as a boxer-strategist and had a good defensive style (even
though he managed to eat so many punches).

I dont think size is going to make that much of a difference
in a prime for prime match up....old George was big and strong,
while the younger George was younger, smaller and had more
pop in his shots.

I think Holyfield wins this fight...he manages to stop a fading
George late in the fight. Prime George did not have the longevity
that a 1992 Bowe or a 1991 Foreman had.

Good match up..could of course go either way...but I feel that
Foreman loses to this young, aggressive over blown cruiserweight.

i believe a prim george would have blown holy away much like he did to frazier and norton

I think his style and activity levels would prevent that from
happening.

Norton never had a great punch rate for the most part and
never seemed to fare well against power punching sluggers
as we know.

Frazier seemed to pick up the action around the 3rd to 4th round
and a guy like Foreman was just not going to let that happen.

Whereas Holyfield could pick it up from the word go. I think if
the Holyfield that fought Bowe in the first round in 1992 and
Douglas he would do well to put a peak Foreman away.

Fun fight though...

but holyfield would make the mistake of having an exchange with foreman which is why i believe he would get blown out he was a great combo puncher but took alot of punches at times and i believe foreman would catch him early

p4p1 wrote:but holyfield would make the mistake of having an exchange with foreman which is why i believe he would get blown out he was a great combo puncher but took alot of punches at times and i believe foreman would catch him early

You do not beat Foreman by trading with him...You beat him with a lot of movement and holding on for dear life when he gets close...

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

p4p1 wrote:but holyfield would make the mistake of having an exchange with foreman which is why i believe he would get blown out he was a great combo puncher but took alot of punches at times and i believe foreman would catch him early

You do not beat Foreman by trading with him...You beat him with a lot of movement and holding on for dear life when he gets close...

thats what im saying

I think if Foreman gets thumped a few times in an exchange
which he seldom experienced in his prime, then he reverts back
to his stalking style.

Foreman at a young age had a damned fine power boxing style
when he needed it...he just liked to thump away.

I think Holyfield has a good enough chin to absorb and skirt
away from Foreman's blasting attacks and comes in strong
later in the fight when Foreman tires.

Foreman destroys Holyfield in his prime. I don't even think it would be competitive.