Chris Byrd's IBF title reign, after decisioning a decrepit Holyfield, and before losing to title to Wladimir in 2006, consisted of : W12 Fres Oquendo* D12 Andrew Golota * W12 Jameel McCline ** W12 DeVaryl Williamson * Disputed decisions ** Close, split-decision, suffered knockdown. Oquendo, OLD Golota, McCline and Williamson were not the cream of the division even in the very weak era of 2002 - 2006. Outside of that, Byrd has a good win over David Tua, and a fortunate win over quitter Vitali. And he was thoroughly schooled by Wladimir in 2000, and knocked out by Ibeaubuchi in 1999.
Morrison would likely knock Byrd out as well. The jab uppercut hook combination. Whan bam thank you mam. Byrd was lucky Holy was injured and didn't have the power to pop a grape because he was taking flush shots to the liver off him. If Holyfield on a zimerframe could body shot Byrd , than Morrison would definitely body bag him. Ike proved in a very short time just how overrated Byrd was. That fight was a clear indicator what would have happened to him had he existed during the 90's. He has question marks over every single top victory in he worst HW era known to man. Tua was his only good win , but that was because Tua shed too much weight having been obese in his previous bout against Lewis. To think Byrd could stand in Foremans wheel house and out box him all night is nothing but a laughing matter.
Byrd would likely outbox Morrison too. Maybe Holy didn't take his, uh, vitamins before that one? Alas, Byrd was too much for Holyfield that night and showed who The Real Deal actually was Tell us, DinoCrazy, did Holy have surgery for his "left shoulder injury" after that one? Is that why Byrd paddled him like a red-headed stepchild or is it simply that Byrd was too good for him? Actually, what Ike proved was just how goddamn dangerous The President could be when he was on song. Lucky for the rest of the HW division that Ike was a headcase, or bandages would have been in short supply. So what you are saying is that Tua, in a great condition, was unable to outbox Byrd and was in fact comprehensively defeated? Yes. That is correct. Foreman wouldn't be laughing when he calculated the cost of the icepacks he'd need after his spanking.
I've been mulling over this fight and while I edge towards Byrd, George has a shot. I think Byrd was all too aware of his shortcomings and played well to his strengths. George never liked slicksters and despite having a great jab, I think that his hands are a bit too slow and his workrate not good enough to get the job done against the elusive and cautious Byrd. Chris on points with George having some moments here and there.
This isn't far from the truth. Apart from Tua, his wins over "contenders" (mostly fringe contenders) were not very convincing. The same is being said here about old Foreman, not without substantial justification, but they are failing to recognize Byrd for what he was. At least Foreman was hurting his opponents. I'm not sure how Byrd got so overrated. If people were equally critical of Byrd as they are of old Foreman then he'd be seen as a slapping spoiler who picked up a paper title, then successfully defended against second-raters by means of poor decisions.
Byrd was pretty good, skilled fighter. But he lacked some 'must have' qualities for HW division. He was small, and had zero punching power. If someone compares him to Jimmy Young, Young was taller and definitely hit harder. That's why Byrd had so many close fights vs fighters that were far less skilled than him. They weren't bothered by his power at all. Foreman's 2nd career is underrated by many. He faced prime undefeated Holyfield who went scored 13 consecutive KO's prior to that fight. He lost, but never was even knocked down. He faced and got hit by Bert Cooper, Gerry C*ney, Alex Stewart, Tommy Morrison, Michael Moorer, Lou Savarese, Shannon Briggs - all except C*ney were in their primes. Beat some of them, and no one came close to knock him down, let alone stop him. As for their fight. Byrd can outbox Big George, but Foreman can catch him (early or late) and it's over. It depends which George we'll take. 42 y.o. Foreman from Holyfield fight I'd favor over Byrd. Byrd however beats that nearly 50 y.o. Foreman that beat (but was robbed) Shannon Briggs.
Exactly how does he out box him when he is at a massive disadvantage in every department? Wlad destroyed him twice. Mashed up his face brutally with the jab. Wlad having blew his tank against Purrity fought measured and at a low pace. He didn't stalk him , he didn't pressure him. He just just busted him up from the outside because Byrd is hittable. If he couldn't handle Wlads jabs , he isn't handling Foremans better more powerful jab. He was far from the elusive mover people are falsely claiming him to be. You think he can do what he did to Vitali against Foreman ? Lay on the ropes and play second rate rope a dope? Thats exactly where Foreman would want him. Byrd brings literally nothing into this fight.
Look at Tua fight. I'm not saying that Tua=old Foreman, but Byrd comfortably outboxed him and Tua had Foreman-like power and chin. Then again, I can take your point of view. Foreman surely had great powerful jab which Tua never had. And size, too.
Tua had a shorter reach at just a 70' and was 5'10. Plus he didn't have any jab and was poor at cutting off the ring Foreman had a longer reach than both guys and was a master at ring cutting. I believe he would beat Tua as well.
Early 90's Foreman from around the time he fought Holyfield would stop Byrd in the mid rounds. By the time Foreman fought Savarese he would either win a boring decision or lose a boring decision.
I agree. It surprises me that people think of "old Foreman" as consistently the same fighter, when in fact at 47 years old he was not the same as he'd been at 41 or 42. No one would doubt the likely difference between 37 and 32, so not sure why a man in his 40s is supposed to retain a relative career peak any better. I think his best in his 'second career' was around 1990-'91.