George Foreman vs. a prime Michael Dokes

[KOTF]

70's Foreman or 90's. Would Dokes be too fast here or would Foreman mow over him like a mac truck?

[red cobra]

Originally Posted by KOTF

70's Foreman or 90's. Would Dokes be too fast here or would Foreman mow over him like a mac truck?

Option #2.

[heavy_hands]

Originally Posted by KOTF

70's Foreman or 90's. Would Dokes be too fast here or would Foreman mow over him like a mac truck?

after of the great thread foreman vs "A PEAK" tonny tubbs... this crap... jack jonhson vs "A PEAK TREVOR BERBICK"

[red cobra]

Originally Posted by heavy_hands

after of the great thread foreman vs "A PEAK" tonny tubbs... this crap... jack jonhson vs "A PEAK TREVOR BERBICK"

..Foreman would brutalize Dokes.

[ThinBlack]

Dokes has good skill, mad speed, and great heart, but Foreman is on another Level. I could see Michael lasting the distance, and possibly beating, an old Foreman.But the way he comes out blazing would be his downfall against the prime Foreman, with him lasting no more than three rounds.

[Saintpat]

I'm not sure Dokes had a peak -- not a sustained one that wasn't between a couple of valleys -- but he was probably at his best in late 1981 through the end of 1982. Around the time leading up to and coming out of his controversial stoppage win over Mike Weaver (and yes it was premature but Dokes did put him down and teed off on him) he was probably at his best.

And George Foreman of the 1970s destroys that Dokes. The Foreman of the '90s probably also gets him out of there but it's debatable whether Dokes' speed might give him a chance at a decision if he was smart enough to peck and move.

[mr. magoo]

Dokes had very fast hands, but was also a close range sort of guy.. Not too much going on in the footwork department, and that's the KIND of speed that you need to stay out of harm's way against Foreman.. His chin wasn't too bad, but not exactly spectacular either... I think 70's Foreman makes pretty short work of Dynamite.

[John Galt]

From what I remember about the 70s Foreman, he threw wide punches, he wasn't particularly quick, and his stamina wasn't good. Dokes seems like the kind of fighter who would give him problems. Dokes was big, quick, durable, and had a good amateur background. I can't think of any fighter Foreman beat who was similar to Dokes. The closest two fighters to Dokes that Foreman fought would be Ali and Young and he lost to both of them.

[mr. magoo]

Originally Posted by John Galt

From what I remember about the 70s Foreman, he threw wide punches, he wasn't particularly quick, and his stamina wasn't good. Dokes seems like the kind of fighter who would give him problems. Dokes was big, quick, durable, and had a good amateur background. I can't think of any fighter Foreman beat who was similar to Dokes. The closest two fighters to Dokes that Foreman fought would be Ali and Young and he lost to both of them.

Ali and Young were certainly more elusive than Michael Dokes and definitely more durable.. Both men had to take some big shots from Foreman to finally come out on top.. The Young fight requires a closer look given that George was ill prepared, unfocussed and had some less than qualified people calling the shots in his corner.. Dokes might win the first two rounds on points, as he'd do a better job at staying out of the way than Norton and Frazier did... But after a few rounds of taking heavy shots to the body and head, I doubt he'd have the staying power to carry on for much longer... Can't see this as ending well for Dokes.

[heavy_hands]

Originally Posted by John Galt

From what I remember about the 70s Foreman, he threw wide punches, he wasn't particularly quick, and his stamina wasn't good. Dokes seems like the kind of fighter who would give him problems. Dokes was big, quick, durable, and had a good amateur background. I can't think of any fighter Foreman beat who was similar to Dokes. The closest two fighters to Dokes that Foreman fought would be Ali and Young and he lost to both of them.

every thread needs the predictable stupid comment " foreman lost against ali and jimmy young so he would lose against james tillis, green,tucker, douglas, corbett, tuney and his grandmother if she was stylist ... please if that´s all the crap that you can say , just shut the fuck up

[John Galt]

heavy hands wrote, "every thread needs the predictable stupid comment " foreman lost against ali and jimmy young so he would lose against james tillis, green,tucker, douglas, corbett, tuney and his grandmother if she was stylist ... please if that´s all the crap that you can say , just shut the fuck up"

heavy hands, thanks for supplying the "predictable stupid comment." Why don't you tell us who the 70s Foreman beat who was similar to Dokes?

[heavy_hands]

Originally Posted by John Galt

heavy hands wrote, "every thread needs the predictable stupid comment " foreman lost against ali and jimmy young so he would lose against james tillis, green,tucker, douglas, corbett, tuney and his grandmother if she was stylist ... please if that´s all the crap that you can say , just shut the fuck up"

heavy hands, thanks for supplying the "predictable stupid comment." Why don't you tell us who the 70s Foreman beat who was similar to Dokes?

first of all, dokes was nothing like ali or jimmy young, ali and young had a great chin they were by far more durable, ali was the greatest hw of all time, and you can argue that jimmy young was robbed against ali,norton and the rematch with shavers, so yes, ali and young have by far more credentials than dokes(who got stopped by any decent name). novices like you think that because a fighter has fast hands and he likes to move around the ring he is automaticly like ali, jimmy young or larry holmes.. no my friend you need a good chin, tough mind.... it is not like 1+1 if he is a stylist he beats foreman.... pure crap.

and foreman does not need TO PROVE ANYTHING against dokes, IS DOKES THE ONE who needs to PROVE against foreman ,because in this one, foreman is an all time great and dokes not, so shut the fuck up, SO TELL ME NOW WHAT FUCKING FIGHTER DOKES DID BEAT WHO WAS REMOTELY SIMILAR TO GEORGE FOREMAN OR WITH HIS POWER? RUDDOCK DID NOT HAVE THE POWER OF FOREMAN AND HE DEMOLISHED DOKES

[John Galt]

HH, are all of these things facts or just your opinion? Aren't you also the guy who in another thread said that the 6-3, 217 pound Foreman was as big as VK?

[salsanchezfan]

Dokes doesn't have the legs to beat Foreman.

[heavy_hands]

Originally Posted by John Galt

HH, are all of these things facts or just your opinion? Aren't you also the guy who in another thread said that the 6-3, 217 pound Foreman was as big as VK?

foreman wa s not 6´3, ali was 6´3, and foreman was clearly taller than him, foreman was nearly 6´4 and he had much thicker and robust frame than ali , foreman was drained at 217 pounds, he was more a natural 230 pounder , vitali was a natural 240 pounder in his prime vitali was taller, but he was not built like foreman and he was not as strong,you are a terrible poster, retarded comments,