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


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-26-2012, 10:03 AM   #1
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,900
vCash: 1000
Default Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

I personaly suspect so.

I don't think that he had fully developed when he defeated Joe Frazier, or when he retired for the first time.

I don't think that he was served well by his handlers, or brought along properly.

He arguably has the two best wins in the history of the heavyweight division 20 years appart, but that means that there were a lot of chapters that should have been written between them.

Going back to the start of his profesional career, perhaps he could have potentialy been the GOAT?

Thoughts?
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 11-26-2012, 10:06 AM   #2
Unforgiven
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,242
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

No, he did okay.
Unforgiven is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 10:18 AM   #3
MadcapMaxie
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,406
vCash: 500
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

He had the bad luck of running into the greatest, if Ali wasn't around I don't know who would've beat him until Holmes came around but then again I doubt Foreman would've stuck around that long so his record could've potentially been unblemished.

He's a top 10 Heavyweight in any case so certainly not an underachiever.
MadcapMaxie is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 10:27 AM   #4
Webbiano
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England
Posts: 2,858
vCash: 500
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post
I personaly suspect so.

I don't think that he had fully developed when he defeated Joe Frazier, or when he retired for the first time.

I don't think that he was served well by his handlers, or brought along properly.

He arguably has the two best wins in the history of the heavyweight division 20 years appart, but that means that there were a lot of chapters that should have been written between them.

Going back to the start of his profesional career, perhaps he could have potentialy been the GOAT?

Thoughts?
I'm glad to see you feel the same as me in regards to his victory over Frazier, and Moorer for that matter. I also feel the same and feel it gets underrated compared to the likes of Schmelling over Louis, Ali over Foreman, Frazier over Ali.

We saw in his second career that Big George had a very good jab, as well as an exceptional chin. Mixed in with his awesome power I believe if he had a truly great trainer after his triumph in Mexico he may have been better off staying an amateur for a few more years to improve his boxing skills.

There's always a counter argument, that being an aggressive brawler with extremely limited boxing skills, he overachieved beating an ATG undefeated heavyweight champion and winning the title back 20 years later.

I think hypothetically the idea of someone with Foreman's physical prowess and good boxing skills would suggest he'd be a much better fighter and would have achieved more in the sport, but looking at the highest rated heavyweight with comparable boxing skills to Foreman, they would probably struggle to make it into anyone's top 30.

He truly was one of a kind and had he of gone away from what he did best in a boxing ring, throwing bombs and meeting his opponent head on, he would have achieved a lot less.
Webbiano is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 10:31 AM   #5
Webbiano
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England
Posts: 2,858
vCash: 500
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

The again, my suggestion of him staying out of the pro game for a few years after his gold medal, could have seen him run the same sort of opposition, but slightly worse versions. It certainly wouldn't have been out of the question for Foreman to have been the top heavyweight of the 70s and still been champ when Holmes came about, probably leading to at the very least 2 fights and a potential rubber years later
Webbiano is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 10:46 AM   #6
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,900
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadcapMaxie View Post
He had the bad luck of running into the greatest, if Ali wasn't around I don't know who would've beat him until Holmes came around but then again I doubt Foreman would've stuck around that long so his record could've potentially been unblemished.

He's a top 10 Heavyweight in any case so certainly not an underachiever.
Being an underachiever does not imply that you are no good, it implies that you have not done as much as you could/should have.

Personally I donít think the problem was so much that he shared an era with Ali as that he wasnít brought along properly. Even if Ali would always have beaten him in Zaire, he wasnít getting any younger.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 10:58 AM   #7
Unforgiven
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,242
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

His comeback was massive over-achievement, if anything.
Unforgiven is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 11:00 AM   #8
duranimal
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of England
Posts: 4,348
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unforgiven View Post
His comeback was massive over-achievement, if anything.
Of all TIME
duranimal is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 11:01 AM   #9
CrossedLine
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 596
vCash: 425
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

I believe he underachieved but not massively. I lean more toward the counter-arguement of overachieving on skillset, but record/legacy wise he was about even, maybe a little less than he should've. I wouldnt've minded him staying in the game, but instead he gave us one of the greatest comebacks of all time, as well as one of the greatest grills of all time.
CrossedLine is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 11:16 AM   #10
Shake
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,649
vCash: 75
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

He's proven in his old age that he was capable of massive improvement. If you couple that amount of relaxation, self-belief and determination with the youth and physical capabilities of the younger George, you've got better than both.

And he could even be greater than the sum of their parts. He stopped developing technically for twenty years -- another five years fighting top-boxers could have seen him improving technically as well.

He could have been a much more consistent knockout artist, leaning heavily to the puncher side of boxer-ppuncher, even. Anyone that could convince young George to pursue that route instead of hunter/destroyer is due a medal, though.
Shake is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 11:23 AM   #11
dyna
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,363
vCash: 1551
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

If only you removed the weight draining he got he would have been better especially his stamina.
dyna is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 12:19 PM   #12
DrBanzai
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 550
vCash: 75
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

Foreman never had a prime, he retired before it began and when he came back he was past it. He is easily the most under rated heavyweight of all time.
DrBanzai is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 12:24 PM   #13
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 38,029
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

Over-achiever.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 04:37 PM   #14
fists of fury
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: March for Revenge
Posts: 6,517
vCash: 137
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

George had many formidable weapons...he was such a beautifully destructive fighter. But as Larry Merchant once said: "He was a tremendous destructive machine...but with flaws."

George struggled with movement and speed, and even had he continued post Young, there was a young Larry Holmes waiting to become the heir apparent. I'd have bet every last dime on Holmes beating George, formidable as George was.
fists of fury is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 04:46 PM   #15
the cobra
Awesomeizationism!
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,005
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?

I rate his achievements more than his actual ability, so no.
the cobra 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 09:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2015