Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who could beat a prime George Foreman?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Willow The Wisp View Post

    So true. Anybody old enough remembers. Still, it is a thing of amazement how George essentially leap frogged over the entire 1.0 - 1.5 decades of the Larry Holmes footprint with so little real overlap. That both guys were still among the best big men on earth deep into the 1990s and into their own middle age, every bit competitive with the contemporary best, right up the line. Their feat certainly lays to waste all of that no-nothing boxing evolution stuff we historians love to take a **** on.
    It is peculiar but explainable looking at the timeline of events.

    When Larry got his footing in the 70's George was retiring. When George started his comeback Larry had dominated for years and was considered on the downside of his career. After losing to Tyson Larry was inactive for more than two years while George was once again gaining traction. By that time George got his shot at Evander and lost. Holmes started gaining ingredients his own traction and a year later also lost in a title bid to Evander. They both push on for a few more years and George gets his historical win over Moorer. A year after Holmes gives a valiant but losing effort to gain a title vs MCall. After that they pick and choose fights to stay in the public eye, but not lose their appeal.

    Fighting one another would have been a financial windfall, and was discussed, but i think both really wanted that championship. There is of course more to this, and i know you already know all about it. I was just compelled to write this.

    At the end of the day I think their dominance and longevity is a big reason the 70's are seen as the heavyweight divisions golden era.
    Willie Pep 229 Willie Pep 229 likes this.

    Comment


      Originally posted by BKM- View Post
      Foreman is overrated. You can't possibly pick anyone to beat him, you'll get eaten alive around here.

      On a serious note, i have some people in mind that could.

      Boxers:
      Ali
      Holmes
      Young
      Lewis
      Louis

      Sluggers/Swarmers:
      Liston
      Ibeabuchi
      Tua
      Tyson
      Vitali(i aint kidding)
      Lyle

      Some others have a shot aswell. Remember, Foreman is human, he could be outslugged or outboxed. And the topic is: who could beat a prime George Foreman.
      Liston wasn't a slugger.. Liston was a boxer puncher who worked around his jab (as most boxer punchers do)
      mrbig1 mrbig1 Ivich Ivich like this.

      Comment


        Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post



        At the end of the day I think their dominance and longevity is a big reason the 70's are seen as the heavyweight divisions golden era.
        The 60s was way stronger. Every single opponent Clay fought was dangerous. There were no bums.

        70s had a lot of drugs and journey men weren't as good.

        Comment


          Originally posted by Pugilist89 View Post

          The 60s was way stronger. Every single opponent Clay fought was dangerous. There were no bums.

          70s had a lot of drugs and journey men weren't as good.
          Interesting opinion. I'm going to start a thread on this. Should make for Interesting debate.

          Comment


            Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post

            Interesting opinion. I'm going to start a thread on this. Should make for Interesting debate.
            The 19__!

            No angles; not advanced; slow; film shows; destroy him; beat him easy; ****** outdated quotes; I can see; outdated eras. You crazy idiot.

            I want to be the first to reply to your new thread, cut and paste the above as your first reply.

            This way the other guy won't have to chime in I think I got it all covered.

            P.S. Oh, be sure to post my reply twice, once for each era, just in case.
            JAB5239 JAB5239 likes this.

            Comment


              Originally posted by Pugilist89 View Post

              The 60s was way stronger. Every single opponent Clay fought was dangerous. There were no bums.

              70s had a lot of drugs and journey men weren't as good.
              No bums and all dangerous its mutiple people who he fought who were trash you liar all those people he fought never would make pro 80s-90s you crazy person
              Last edited by Ascended; 09-21-2022, 02:25 PM.

              Comment


                Originally posted by QueensburyRules View Post

                - - George was retired in 77 when the ****** Ring 76 issue came out, ie inactive, the criteria.

                By 94 Ring after decades of ******ity published their rating the year of the ratings where George KOed Moorer. He won all his next fights until Briggs years later, but Lar whooped by McCall in his first fight of 95 dropped from the ratings after a nanoblip appearance.

                Good effort, but U stoopid still.
                I'm ****** but twice as smart as you!
                JAB5239 JAB5239 likes this.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by moneytheman View Post

                  No bums and all dangerous its mutiple people who he fought who were trash you liar all those people he fought never would make pro 80s-90s you crazy person
                  Thank you admins!!!

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X
                  TOP