Bonavena vs Foreman 1970

The year is 1970..George hadn't arrived yet. Stopping Chuvalo was one thing...Bonavena was "smarter" than Chuvalo, more awkward and definitely a better puncher. Ringo drops a gassed Foreman in the 8th and mauls his way to a decision. Oscar was as awkward in his own way as his fellow Argentine Peralta, and would have hurt the still green Foreman "whilst" offering up that brand of awkwardness.

 

Maybe he meant a carbon copy of Folley-Bonavena .
Anyway , Foreman was vastly superior 2 Folley which is y he is going 2 win easily by stoppage , and vastly superior 2 Patterson as well , on a h2h basis . Also , Bonavena was h2h inferior 2 Chuvalo , shorter , less durable and not a harder hitter .

 

Finally a voice of reason.

I was beginning to think that it was only a matter of time until someone would start a thread giving the 1968 Olympian George Foreman a KO victory over the 1970 Joe Frazier.

 

Having a decision win on paper is rarely a sign of a beating .
I based my claim on mutual opponents and more telling outcomes .
Like Ali really stopping Bonavena but actually losing 2 Chuvalo .
And Joe Frazier can not b used here because he thumbed Chuvalo and actually lost 2 Bonavena in their 1st fight .
Boxrec doesn't tell u all d truth .

Ali is there 2 supposrt this claim , and I don't care what he said or didn't say . Ali peed blood and got hospitalized after Chuvalo , in comparison 2 him KOing Bonavena .
Patterson , Folley , Lyle and Frazier also fought them both , but about d Lyle & Patterson fights very few really know as these fights r hard 2 get , Folley beat Bonavena and I doubt his outcome vs Chuvalo , Frazier is irrelevant because by thumbing Chuvalo he avoided a fair fight in which Chuvalo might have very well at least hurt him (something very conceivable as both Bonavena & Quarry hurt him , who didn't ?) .

 

Stopping Chuvalo in 1969 is exactly d thing that shows that a yet more matured and stronger Foreman would have beaten a less durable and less rangy Bonavena easier in 1970 which means a quicker stoppage . Even Chuvalo retreated vs Foreman . And Bonavena had less tools than Chuvalo 2 keep George away .

 

Surf-Bat and Red Cobra nailed it. Now, watch Ringo skipping around laterally before sending Chuvalo to the floor. (Whether Bonavena legitimately knocked the Canadian down or not is one thing, but he was certainly outmaneuvering his man.) Check him retreating behind his jab as his rematch with Frazier was drawing to a close. Speed, skill and surprise were the way to bring him down, not brute force.

What are the chances Foreman can take him out quickly at any time in their respective primes, let alone in 1970? And if Big George can't produce a quick halt, he could be in very, very serious trouble. Even Frazier was tiring at the end of his rematch with Oscar, and Ellis may have been extremely fortunate their encounter wasn't scheduled for the championship distance.

Ringo was no Frazier. He was absolutely capable of sticking and skipping side to side quickly when he chose, not any kind of bleeder, and strong enough not to be physically manhandled by Foreman the way guys like Frazier and Kirkman were. Lyle, at altitude in his Denver home, had to settle for a 12 round decision. If Ringo had pulled that one off the week before Foreman dispatched Norton in Caracas, Big George would have had yet another miserable ******* besides JQ to duck en route to Kinshasa. (And if Oscar had lived, Ali-Bonavena II in 1977 would have been no picnic for the GOAT, especially if Ali took the title to Buenos Aires.)

 

This is what Chuvalo did vs Foreman @ 1969 & failed , don't expect d shorter , less durable Bonavena 2 succeed with it vs a stronger Foreman of 1970 , not to mention that Foreman was no Frazier , not in punching power , not in punching range .

Brute force , especially when accompanied with d range 2 land and d workrate 2 land often enouh bring down just about any1 .

Quicker than he did Chuvalo a year earlier .
4 d reasons I already stated and repeated .

A huge if .
And then if he somehow fails 2 stop Bonavena @ his favorite way , he uses his (own) jab and stops Bonavena d Ali / Klitschko way .
If an older Foreman had enough 2 last against a much more menacing and capable Holyfield , don't expect d real beast 2 get exhausted by some1 like Bonavena who wouldn't have been able 2 land anything on Foreman without getting hit harder himself b4 and after trying and failing .
Especially not under normal weather and with legit ropes .

So Bonavena was substantially stronger than Frazier now ? maybe a bit stronger , being d most generous that I can , but he will get pushed around d ring and if Folley , Ali and others knocked him down , expect Foreman 2 knock him down sooner , harder , more often (if he got/kept getting up) .
No1 was picnic 4 Ali , but he would have beaten Bonavena come 1977 , just because both were of d same age , he did it b4 and Folley did it 2 .
I won't bother on it now , but Ali & Folley weren't d only 1s 2 knock Bonavena down if I remember correctly .
If Chuvalo wasn't thumbed by Frazier , expect another tough war 4 Frazier in which he just might have been beaten . Just because Bonavena actually did it and as I explained Chuvalo > Bonavena , Quarry , Ellis , Patterson .

 

Looks like we've finally crossed over that line I referred to in post #18.

Beam me up, Scotty.....

 

I think a raw Foreman still has the stylistical and physical advantages that allow him to pull of a win here. He was not a man who beat opponents with experience or skill during the first part of his career. Aside from the fight with Ali, Bonavena generally wasn't too impressive after the rematch with Frazier. Years earlier he had beaten Peralta, but by 1969 he could only manage a draw.

 

I don't have access 2 this fight . Not on youtube and I didn't try my other sources which fail most (but not all) of d time that youtube fails .
Also , I rarely count on highlights 2 come 2 such conclusions 2 allow myself 2 use d word : beat .

D films clearly showed Chuvalo giving Ali better fights (both times) than Bonavena did , and I rarely care about what fighters say , because they r stupid and most of times corrupt and biased as well , especially some1 like Ali .

At least in d first fight , d films & d physicians would have told u so .

Joe lost 2 Bonavena but forgot that he feared Chuvalo so much that he cheated in order 2b considered d winner 4 d likes of yourself and hence no rematch also .

U quoted me so your answer is already there

My mistake , it was @ 1970 , d same year this thread is about , so it won't b a stronger and more matured Foreman that stopped Chuvalo , just that same Foreman , d rest still stands .

Chuvalo was rangier than Bonavena which means : had more effective punching range .
He was taller and his arms were longer , it was still not enough 2 keep Foreman @ bay or even reach him despite retreating & jabbing .

 

Man , I just noticed it now after u stated : "post # 18"
We really r starting 2 cross d line of absurdity here ..

This was already dealt with in 1 of my previous replies .

So Bonavena would have most definitely KO Quarry ..
And did Ali pee Blood after their almost 15 rounds ?
did Ali go down ?

D facts r that Chuvalo did better vs Folley & Ali and maybe others as well .
Bonavena got KOd by Ali . If he had enough power 2 keep him at bay don't u think it would have been enough for him 2 convince d safety 1st Ali 2 stay @ long range and get satisfied with d decided which was decided already in d pre fight negotiations between Dundee & d judges /& referee ?

 

Don't know what is unclear about my replies and y there was a need in them @ 1st place .
But after seeing replies like : " 1970 Foreman was not superior 2 Bonavena " and "Foreman ducked Quarry and would have ducked Bonavena " it seems 2 me as if my replies won't make any sense because 4 them 2 make sense needs d reader 2 have a sense .