George Foreman , overrated ?

I don't see how foreman can get overrated. The man did it all. Won the Olympic gold. Captured the crown from a top ten hall of famer who was still in his twenties which in and of itself is rare. Regained the crown from another undefeated lineal champion in his twenties but this time when George was mid forties and on a comeback. He beat loads of good contenders in Norton, Lyle, Chuvalo, kirkman, Stewart, Rodriguez, Savarese, and was arguably robbed against a top prime contender when he was 14 months shy of 50 years old. I don't know. Maybe he occasionally gets picked in a head to head fantasy fight where he shouldn't but the same could be said for many of great champions. George Foreman changed the entire dynamic of not only boxing but all sports when he proved that an aged athlete could still be competitive.

 

If this train of thought occurred when he retired it sure dimished by the early 80's or even prior. Foreman had one helluva reputation well before he decided to fight again. His reputation was secure, he just added to it.

 

Not wrong there, Jebus.

 

it definitely occurred. George had not recovered from Ali bursting the Foreman bubble.

I have books written by Gilbert Odd, Peter Wilson and Henry Cooper from this early 1980s period. That train of thought of George being eliminated from ATG status definitely continued during that period going by what they wrote about the retired George Foreman.

his reputation as an incredible puncher was secure. But his reputation as an ATG was not yet established. Foreman looked like he could have been a good champion until he was surprisingly defeated by a former champion (and never got over it) having retired whilst still quite young after a further loss. There was no redemption.

If his ATG status was already as secure as you say there would have been zero ridicule toward his comeback. Manny Stewart, Ferdie Pacheco and Gil Clancy all ridiculed his comeback being taken seriously prior to the Holyfield fight.

 

Choklab i obviously cant change your mind. If you honestly think floyd losing 6x to several guys frazier beat is better than frazier actually beating them and ony losing to two ATGs...this is a hopeless conversation.

As for the johanson comparison, you bring up some good points. However, the main reason i see young foreman at least two notches above him in terms of p4p legacy is the fact frazier and norton would absolutely wreck the vast majority of the names on floyds record (in fact, they did beat the common opponents between them).

I dont see floyd or ingo

-going 15 with a prime holmes and losing a very narrow decision like norton did
-winning a 10 round decision over cobb like norton did
-beating jimmy young at his best like norton did
-beating joe bugner like frazier did
-beating mathis like frazier did

And as i sais, frazier and norton beat the common opponents between themselves and floyd/machen (chuvalo, bonavena, Ali, quarry, ellis). He only thing that stands out when comparing floyd/machen to ken/joe is that they fought each other and floyd won the belt twice. That is further diminished by the fact norton and frazier would easily beat a past it light heavy moore for a vacant belt.

Then theres the elephant in the room that frazier and norton at their besr would most certainly beat floyd, machen, and ingo too.

Amongst foremans opponents, i certainly dont see ingo beating wepner, chuvalo, a prime ron lyle or ledoux. and of course foreman crushes ingo h2h

 

no I don't think that. Floyd losing to six guys Frazier beat was not the comparison I made. The comparison I made was that Floyd managed elite wins after losing his title by blowout. Where as Frazier had declined after the Ali win and never won an elite fight again.

Again seeing Norton better than Machen head to head and Frazier better than Ingo head to head is not the comparison. My comparison was about the "status" of those guys being equal at the time Foreman and Ingo fought them.

Floyd or marchen only have to be the best two heavyweights in the world at the time Ingo flattened them to make my comparison. Was anyone better than Machen and Patterson in 1958? No. Was anybody better than Frazier or Norton when Foreman beat them? No. This is my point.

Patterson easily beat Moore too though. And as a veteran Floyd gave the elite men of the day a run for their money and beat some of them. Frazier didn't. Again, I might also pick a prime Frazier over a prime Patterson but it's not a mismatch and nor, importantly is it the point. My point was the two of them (floyd and Joe) were in their own time both justifiably the best heavyweight in the world when they were both blown away by ingo and George respectively. You don't like the sound of that because George fought in the colour TV era and you prefer the logic that older guys were not as good generally or maybe because you don't think it possible that something similar happened before.

prime floyd v prime Frazier would most likely result in Joe winning. Floyd the night ingo blew him away v the Frazier on the night Foreman blew Frazier away is a closer fight. And as for the Machen on the night he lost to Ingo versus ken on the night he lost to Foreman is 50-50 anyway you look at it. What did Ken offer that night he froze! Machen got caught early but he didn't look nearly as wary as norton did.

you don't see the unbeaten johansson beating Wepner? Everybody beat Wepner! Ledoux, everybody beat Ledoux! Ingo must surely beat the worst guys that beat Ledoux and Wepner. Those guys lost to Roy Wallace, Duane Bobbick, Scott Frank and Ron Lyle himself was knocked out by Lynn Ball lost to Quarry and went to a split decision with Bugner and Scott leduox. Chuvalo was actually part of ingos generation anyway. Ingo beat guys who beat Chuvalo. He also knocked out guys who beat the guys that beat chuvalo. Pete Radmacher beat Chuvalo for goodness sake! Are you going to explain how the unbeaten ingo loses to Radmacher?

 

I already addressed this. Frazier was only interested in beating the top 2 guys in foreman and ali. Norton wasnt going to fight him as they were friends and he had already beaten most of the top fighters already. So WHO were the "elites" he could beat after losing besides the ones he did beat?

By what criteria do you call a fighter "elite"? You praise floyd for beating bonavena, chuvalo, machen, etc but he LOST to ellis and quarry whom frazier beat easily AFTER losing the title. So do you consider chuvalo and machen "elite" but quarry and ellis arent???

And even on that note id disagree. Frazier beat Ali and several guys who beat floyd. It cant get any simpler than that. Norton beat ali and went on to beat young for a belt, crushed prime prospect bobboick, and had a razor thin loss to holmes AFTER losing to foreman.

And its a valid point, but floyd lost horribly to liston twice and lost the heavyweight tournement and lost to ali twice. Frazier left few stones unturned in his division before winning the title, many of floyds quality wins were after he fueded with cus and tried o fight the top guys.

Foreman went on to have quality wins after losing to ali and became #1 again. He never got a chance to have revenge. Ingo did and was demolished twice. Floyd and machen are his only good wins, foreman did more than just beat norton and frazier.

Where was ingo when terrel, folley, cleveland, and liston were making noise?

You keep throwing the word "elite" around when its convenient while glossing over fraziers win over ali, quarry, and ellis (all of whom beat floyd). Cant get more elite than that.

No floyd wasnt undisputably the best when ingo beat him. Where was he when terrel, folley, williams, etc were making noise? Unlike floyd, frazier beat the contenders before winning the title.

I dont hate older guys, i think joe louis could beat frazier, norton, maybe even foreman himself hed be competitive with all of them.

Pretty convenient picking the worst versions of frazier and norton. Both at their best would demolish them and you know it.

Lol no, lyle demolishes ingo. He could have fought the guys in his era but he didnt. Chuvalo would wear him down and destroy him

 

The comparison I made between Patterson and Frazier was that after Patterson was demolished by Ingo he came back and demolished ingo in revenge. This was unlike Frazier who after he was demolished by Foreman he lost a rematch with Ali the guy he had already beat. It was hardly surprising since beating Ali was his last great fight. This was unlike Patterson. That would be akin to Patterson losing to a guy he already beat. Truth is Floyd actually had great fights left in him before losing to Ingo and after losing to ingo. When it comes to Frazier the record shows there was no more great wins in him before he met Foreman. This is why I said it was unlike Patterson.

elite is a guy regarded as the outstanding contender or champion. it is not Wepner or Ledoux. That is certain.

wait, this is not what I was talking about. We know Frazier cleaned out his division. He burnt himself out cleaning it out in fact. All these comparisons begin with the version of Frazier after he had been through all of that. The comparison includes the status joe had at that moment as the best heavyweight in the world when he met George. Nobody could dispute Patterson was also the best heavyweight in the world by the time he met Ingo.
It's about the status.

so Your talking about Patterson after 1958 and comparing it to Frazier before 1972? This is not what we are debating here. That called moving the goal posts. Foreman beating Frazier and Norton in 1973 and Ingo beating Machen and Patterson in 1958.

Foreman in his first career did not do anything more than Ingo did in his entire career.

no I celebrated Fraziers cleaning up of the division. He did beat all of the elite guys. It finished him off. Frazier beating his era of guys was relevant. Floyd losing to some of the guys Frazier demolished in disputed results outside of his era is better than Frazier drawing with jumbo Cummings outside of his own era.

Terrell was not rated until after Ingo was champion. Ingo was justifiably ahead of Machen, Folley and at that point even Sonny Liston in the rankings. Williams was never rated until 1961. I have made it very clear all along the version of Patterson is 1958 when he had estamblisged himself as he best heavyweight in the world. It is glaringly obvious you are not familiar with the chronological events and names of that time.

well could that be because you might know a bit more about the Joe Louis era than the Floyd Patterson era? You seem to not know who Jackson Baker, Valdez, Summerlin and Machen were or how Harris and London got rated or who chuvalo lost to. This is all key to know before writing off a whole era.

on what basis does Lyle demolish an unbeaten Johansson? Did Lyle ever demolish an unbeaten world champion? Did Lyle demolish a number one contender? Quarry certainly gave Lyle what for. Ali the champion gave Ron what for. I don't know what elevates Any fair contender to beating an undisputed champion from another era by knockout. Chuvalo lost to Radmacher and Joe Erskine.

 

Fraziers career overall was still better than floyds. Failing to beat "the greatest" when he was past his peak isnt much to be ashamed of--especially when him and foreman (atgs) were his ONLY losses as a professional fighter. I cannot emphasize this enough.

Those were two of the biggest mountains to climb in heavyweight history. Frazier manages at least one win. Ingo was not an atg. Floyd had his chanc at greatness in atg liston and failed twice. He failed twice against ali. He failed in the heavyweight tournament. This is pretty straightforward honestly.

But you, sir, claimed that after losing the tile floyd "still had elite wins" over machen, chuvalo, etc and that in comparison after losing to foreman frazier had "no elite wins, just rematches" even though he beat some of the same guys you called elite when floyd fought them. Youre also ignoring him beatin quarry and ellis who beat floyd. Either you arent paying attention or you have an agenda.

Dude, you cant acknowledge frazier cleaned out his division then criticize him for "having no elite wins" (which isnt true) after losing the title.

But as far as ingo and george beating the best guy available at the time, i agree. Similarities begin and end there. Foreman had more scalps than ingo: chuvalo, wepner, lyle, frazier 2x, peralta 2x, ledoux, etc. Ingo ONLY has floyd and machen. Foreman did more AFTER losing the title while still in his prime and became #1. Ingo lost to the guy he won the title from.

Drawing with jumbo cummings when youre fat, old, and blind in your last fight is worse than losing 6x to the best fighters available and youre still fit, punching well, and able to go 15 rounds? Dont make me laugh. You make a dozen excuses for floyd and say he was robbed anytime he stepped up in class. There was nothing controversial in his clear cut losses to ali--other than the fact ali toyed with and humiliates him. Nothing controversial about liston flattening him twice. You can dispute the ellis and quarry decisions but itll just be my opinion and the official ruling vs yours. Youre biased.

Floyd was an ACTIVE FIGHTER before, during, and after all those guys climbed the rankings. The had no problems fighting each other. Sonny had no problems facing those guys. Clay managed to fight them and he started his career AFTER floyd. He and cus damato ducked many of them and thats why i give floyd credit for leaving and attempting to redeem himself.

I know who machen and london were. I studied chuvalo too, i love him. And im not writinf off the whole era just because i have legitimate reasons for not rating floyd very high.

I have eyes and intuition, i dont just look at records. I rate louis high h2h because he was punching perfection. One of the best boxer/punchers with a crisp left, sledgehammer right, could pressure fight, counter punch, uppercut, you name it. He was never sloppy and could throw blinding combinations.

I rate liston very high. I think if he was in his prime in the 80's hed demolish everyone until he gets to tyson and has an epic clash. I rate ezzars charles high. Without als and modern nutrition to buff up to say, 205-210 lbs hed give the 70's figters a run for their money with his razor sharp punches and defensive awareness. I rate dempsey high, i rate tunney even higher. So no im not just picking on little old floyd.

Because lyle is much bigger for one. Ingo spent most of his career at 190 lbs and only on a few occasions was a few lbs over 200. He was 6'0 to lyles 6'3. Lyle had longer arms and consistently weighed 216-225ish. Only 3 of ingos opponents ever weighed much more than 201 lbs.

Lyle had a better chin. If you can get off the floor against shavers and foreman you better bring some serious dynamite if you want to hurt him. He ate bombs from bonavena too.

Lyle could actually box, he wasnt just a slugger and bothered ali with and young with his jabs at times. He had more than enough cardio to go 12 rounds.

Ingo and machen would need to be at their absolute best and stay on their toes all night. One mistake and it could quickly shift in lyles favor.

 

I've got tons of literature that renders most of this BS for me. Ali's eventual status put Foreman's loss to him well in perspective and was extremely kind to George and his reputation.

His comeback wasn't ridiculed because of his ATG status, it was ridiculed because of size, age, early opponents and length of hiatus.

I glaze over almost everything you put forth per Foreman and Liston because you are at the extreme end of the balance bar.

Comparing the Foreman/Frazier/Norton situation to Ingo/Patterson/Machen is so absurd it befies belief almost.

 

I never said Frazier had anything to be ashamed of. I heaped praise on Joe in fact for cleaning out the division. I'm not sure why you think I am putting Joe down by saying Patterson had more left in the tank and beat better fighters as an exchampion than Frazier did as an ex champion because it is true. Ingo was world champion. You can't deny this.

so you are saying Patterson failed as an exchampion just like Frazier did? You forget one thing. Patterson regained the title.

Yes when they were no longer relevant to the world title Frazier rematched other veterans from the 1960s scene like himself as an exchamp in the 1970s. I always acknowledge that part because it's not the same as ex champ Patterson taking on those two in the 1960s when they were very much relevant and part of the World heavyweight scene.

no, when Floyd beat the undefeated world champion to regain the title it was an elite win.beating Chuvalo as an exchampion that was a world title eliminator. Chuvalo had knocked out Doug Jones who had gave the current champion his closest fight up until that point so Chuvalo was riding high at that point. Higher than he was riding when Frazier took on joe Bugner. Bonavena was riding high, Cooper and Machen were riding high and as an old guy, similar in age as Frazier was when he fought Jumbo Cummings Patterson could have got the decision over Ellis when he was champ!

well what was Fraziers post championship elite win? Losing to Ali and Foreman Are brave losses at elite level. Not elite wins. Bugner was not elite. And by then Quarry and Frazier were on the veteran circuit.

Thank you.

Wepner was not anybody ever. Going into his title fight with Frazier the scalps Foreman had was "Chuvalo". That's it.

There were no Terry Sorrells or Joe Murphy Gordwins or Clarance Boone types on Ingos resume when he challenged Floyd.

If you include the full first career of George the scalps are good. Norton, Frazier, Lyle. That's three good wins. Lower down you have LeDoux, Chuvalo, Denis. Peralta at a push. That's it.

that's not quite true. In the 1950s Ingo won major European fights in Soccer Stadiums against guys with world ratings and national titles. The crowds for these fights were like world title fights. Nobody in America gave a rats turd of course but these were big events that gave ingo a rating as early as 1955. European champion Franco cavicchi was world rated with a record of 43-3. Ingo beat Henry Cooper, he beat Joe Erskine, he beat Hein Ten Hoff, he beat Heinz Nuhous, dick Richardson and Brian London who were all world rated. Two fought for the World title. Add them to the elite wins over Machen and Floyd and it is a very overlooked resume.

yes Ali and Sonny soundly beat Floyd Patterson I don't know what makes you think i over look this. It is well documented. But George was soundly beaten by Ali and Jimmy Young too. Frazier was soundly beaten by Ali and Foreman as an ex champion. I don't know where you want to do with this?

history forgets the chronological events regarding Floyd Patterson reign as world champion. When Liston was #1 challenger Floyd fought him. When ingo was #1 challenger Floyd fought him twice. When hurricane Jackson #1 challenger he fought him. When Archie Moore was #1 heavyweight challenger Floyd fought him for the vacant title. Five times Patterson took fights with the world number one challenger. When the world #1 and #2 fought each other to a draw Floyd took the #3. Then when the #1 guy got beat he signed to meetthe new #1 guy. Floyd didn't do much wrong. Twice he took warm ups weeks ahead of a real title fight with the top challenger with lesser guys, but only because the better match was taking place too. This is a practice Joe Louis and other champions all did. (It's probably how Foreman fought Jo king Roman) so if you want to tell me why or when guys like Terrell and big cat Williams (who were not even rated at that time) get their shot I will be glad to hear the reasoning behind it.

have you studied Joe Erskine and Pete Radmacher who both beat Chuvalo?

Lyle was no bigger than Joe Bygraves. Ingo had no problem knocking out big guys in his prime.

but who was the best guy Lyle knocked out who Ron Stander couldn't knock out?

yup, Lyle was capable. I will give you that. He was always one step behind Jerry Quarry and also got bombed out a few times.

one mistake? Machen with one arm was safe the whole night through against Sonny Liston. What has Eddie got to worry about with Lyle?

 

I lived through the era. George was not considered an ATG until his comeback to rewin the championship. He retired in 77 as an unfinished book. A fighter who had poor stamina and who could not beat a good boxer. An hellacious all time puncher yes but not on anyone's ATG list. Those are the facts.

 

Understand he was one of my favorite fighters and I followed his career closely from the Olympics to his retirement in 1977.

 

Imagine a 32 -36 y/o Foreman.

A slightly sped up version of his comeback self. The perfect balance of his young and old style. He would have been unstoppable.