Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


View Poll Results: Who would you see as most "beatable" if you were a manager in the 1970s?
George Foreman 2 5.26%
Ron Lyle 6 15.79%
Earnie Shavers 30 78.95%
Voters: 38. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-25-2008, 02:48 PM   #1
Marciano Frazier
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,469
vCash: 1000
Default Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

I am now told that Joe Frazier's management, in spite of being scared to death of powerful punchers (according to this standpoint), opted to match their man up with George Foreman because they "thought he was beatable," and that they subsequently OPTED ONCE AGAIN to face Big George because "Frazier was declining and so was Foreman, so they decided to take a rematch" (?). However, according to this same position, this exact same management team in this exact same time period was unwilling to face contemporaries Ron Lyle or Earnie Shavers out of fear of those fighters' punching power. I am curious, then; if Foreman was an acceptable opponent because he was "thought beatable," why would Earnie Shavers or Ron Lyle be unacceptable opponents? Were they thought to be unbeatable? Is there some reason why defending your championship or risking your contention against George Foreman would actually be preferable to doing so against Lyle or Shavers?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
If you were a manager in 1973, who would look like the most "beatable" opponent to you?

Ron Lyle, 19-0 with 17 knockouts, whose best win is over Larry Middleton,

Earnie Shavers, 41-2 with 40 knockouts, who has been toasted by Frazier victim Ron Stander and has never beaten a top 50 heavyweight,

OR

George Foreman, 37-0 with 34 knockouts, an Olympic Gold Medalist who has knocked out his last 21 opponents and is the only man aside from Frazier himself to have stopped George Chuvalo?
----------------------------------------------------------------

If you were a manager in 1976, who would look the most beatable to you?

Ron Lyle, 31-4-1 with 22 knockouts, who has now beaten Shavers, but been smeared by Frazier victim Jerry Quarry and has lost three of his last four fights,

Earnie Shavers, 49-5-1 with 47 knockouts, who has now been iced by another Frazier victim in one round and is winless in his last three outings against top 20 heavyweights,

OR

George Foreman, 41-1 with 38 knockouts, former world heavyweight champion who already wiped Frazier himself out, who lost to Ali in his only professional defeat and just defeated Lyle in his last fight?
---------------------------------------------------------------

If you were a manager willing to match his man up with punchers on the condition that they looked "beatable," which of these men would you be willing to match your man against, and which would you NOT?

Last edited by Marciano Frazier; 08-25-2008 at 05:12 PM.
Marciano Frazier is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 08-25-2008, 03:03 PM   #2
la-califa
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: City of Angels
Posts: 3,147
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

Depends on what kind of boxer I had. If I was managing a Puncher. Then it would have to be Lyle first. he was vulnerable to the Counterpunch himself & my fighters chances were pretty good that, we might land the homerun punch first. The later match would have to be Shavers, who by that time was slower and had a leaky defense.
If I had a boxer, then Shavers first because he was alot slower & could have been outboxed. Later Lyle, because he himself was slower & his homerun shot was wide & predictable. But in both instances, I wouls steer wide of Big George Foreman.
la-califa is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 03:06 PM   #3
Muchmoore
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

Definently not Foreman. Probably Shavers, he was very beatable if you had a solid chin/skills but at the same time the danger factor was always there.

With Lyle, he had good skills so he wouldn't be outboxed easily or outgunned which was proved against Shavers, he's someone I'd try to steer my fighter away from if I could. Although I'd do the same with Shavers and Foreman too.
 Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 03:17 PM   #4
Vantage_West
ヒップホッププロデューサー
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 黒人文化の恋人のサンプリ
Posts: 10,027
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

if i had a decent boxer puncher in my stable i would of managed him to fight lyle.
lyle was big puncher but could be outboxed and hurt.
shavers was too big a puncher and as much as i am confident in my fighters jaw i know any man can be koed.

foreman wasnt just a slugger he just enveloped you and busted you up. maybe you could wina few rounds but im sure my figther woudl of lost due to a beat down.
Vantage_West is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 03:28 PM   #5
tylerrcurtis
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Da 412
Posts: 767
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

shavers is the clear choice here
tylerrcurtis is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 03:28 PM   #6
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,738
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

I personally voted for Shavers as being the most beatable at that time ( though I don't think anyone looked forward to getting tagged by him. )

Shavers was simply not as proven at the world class level as the other two, and had suffered some bad losses by that point. I assume that this thread was started to gain support for why Joe Frazier chose the opposition that he fought.

There is no reason for me to believe that Frazier was deliberatley avoiding Shavers, Lyle or Foreman.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 04:03 PM   #7
zadfrak
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,350
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

Agree w/ Earnie selection.

Sure don't see him ever absorbing those Frazier left hooks for very long. When he gets hit clean with them, he's in trouble & all he can do is try to wing away and hope for the best. And when Earnie missed his big shots, was he ever open.
zadfrak is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 05:08 PM   #8
Marciano Frazier
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,469
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

Ah! I forgot to make the poll public. Would the individual who voted for Foreman mind explaining his/her reasoning?
Marciano Frazier is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 05:28 PM   #9
ironchamp
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 2,825
vCash: 1230
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tylerrcurtis
shavers is the clear choice here
Not quite....I think Lyle seems to be the easier choice.

He was green at this point, less than 20 fights under his belt. He had alot of potential but he hadnt blossmed.

From a mangement standpoint Foreman was the obvious choice. The risk reward ratio was a little bit better.

In 1973 Foreman was the right guy. He was undefeated, he was a gold medalist- he seemed to lack proper form and technique and he had just the right credentials to make a Frazier win look good. There is a reason why George came in the underdog.

Shavers - His record is intimidating and his KO ratio is very high and his
right hand was something to fear. The risk reward ratio isnt very high.

I would have avoided this fight until it was necessary.
ironchamp is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 07:32 PM   #10
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,272
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

It depends on the style of my fighter, and the time when the match happened in the 1970's. Here me out.

Foreman was at his best from 1970-1973

Lyle was likely at his best from say 1974-1978

Shavers was likely at his best from 1973-1979.

Post Ali, Foreman was a mess, and really had issues with Lyle and Young, though he had an easy time with Frazier again.

All three are tough matches for a smaller forward moving fighter who does not take the best punch in the world, but I would say Foreman would be the hardest of the three.

Lyle, for my money is a better boxer with far more stamina than Foreman, and Shavers to me hit a trifle harder than Foreman, and was a bit faster with his punches.

I would say Foreman was the hardest match up, then Lyle, then Shavers.

However if your using Frazier as an example here, he wasn't always a fast starter, and Shavers was. So maybe Shavers is more dangerous than we think.

IMO, Frazier could easily lose to Shavers or Lyle when they were in their prime years, and Frazier was not. ( 1973-1978 ) This is a reason why Frazier never fought them, and picked lower ranked, non-power punching fighters or fighters that had already beaten that were outside of their primes.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 07:50 PM   #11
SuzieQ49
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Boston
Posts: 13,490
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

Quote:
However if your using Frazier as an example here, he wasn't always a fast starter, and Shavers was.
he sure didnt look like he started fast vs jerry quarry!
SuzieQ49 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 08:17 PM   #12
Marciano Frazier
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,469
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ironchamp
Not quite....I think Lyle seems to be the easier choice.

He was green at this point, less than 20 fights under his belt. He had alot of potential but he hadnt blossmed.

From a mangement standpoint Foreman was the obvious choice. The risk reward ratio was a little bit better.

In 1973 Foreman was the right guy. He was undefeated, he was a gold medalist- he seemed to lack proper form and technique and he had just the right credentials to make a Frazier win look good. There is a reason why George came in the underdog.
Yes, it is a reasonable viewpoint that, as of '73 (though not so much in '76, which you may note I also included), Foreman was a better risk/reward choice than Lyle or Shavers; however, this is specifically BECAUSE he was better than them and thus had a superior record and far superior credentials, meaning that a win over him (which was believed quite doable) would be worth more. Notice, the poll question is "Which would look most beatable to you?" not "Which would be the best choice of opponent, all factors taken into account?" and thus your vote should not follow this reasoning.

Quote:
Shavers - His record is intimidating and his KO ratio is very high and his
right hand was something to fear. The risk reward ratio isnt very high.

I would have avoided this fight until it was necessary.
Note that Foreman had an even more intimidating record and an even more fearsome offense.
Marciano Frazier is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 09:04 PM   #13
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,738
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

Although Shavers seems to be leading in the pole, I think a fair case can be made for Lyle as well, but I don't think it really matters. The point illustrated here, is that neither of those two appeared to be as formidable as George Foreman anytime between 1973-1976. Frazier taking the fight with Foreman in 1973, and again in 1976, explodes any myths about him ducking Shavers and Lyle because they were dangerous punchers, and certainly any misconceptions about them being better fighters.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 09:17 PM   #14
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,272
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Forem

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. magoo
Although Shavers seems to be leading in the pole, I think a fair case can be made for Lyle as well, but I don't think it really matters. The point illustrated here, is that neither of those two appeared to be as formidable as George Foreman anytime between 1973-1976. Frazier taking the fight with Foreman in 1973, and again in 1976, explodes any myths about him ducking Shavers and Lyle because they were dangerous punchers, and certainly any misconceptions about them being better fighters.
Foreman was on a huge slide post Ali. He looked very beatable. Foreman was but one of many matches for Frazier. I think Lyle did better vs Foreman than Frazier by a mile. I also believe Patterson, Lyle, Norton and Shavers could have meet Frazier.

Bunger, a washed up Ellis, Stander, Daniels, Quarry, and others simply did not pose the same danger level for Frazier as Lyle, Shavers, Norton Or Patterson, which is a reason why I beleive they were not selected despite being ranked higher from 1972-1977.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 09:32 PM   #15
lfsdan
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Fairbanks, AK
Posts: 264
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who Looks Most "Beatable" in the 1970s: Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, or George Foreman?

Lyle would be my choice. Shavers might *look*the most beatable but one punch from that human sledgehammer and your lucky to ever be the same.
lfsdan is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013