George Foreman , overrated ?

Outlandish. This is definitely incorrect.

 

Yes, George's routes to his two titles were the complete opposite of how modern fighters operate. Most of them fight twice a year, constantly angling for the biggest paydays they can get. George went barnstorming and it worked. But yes, I'll admit, there were few big wins to cement the resume along the way.

But one more thing I'll say in George's favor. After the Ali fight, he took that strange year off. When he came back, he fought three dangerous top contenders in slightly over a year: Frazier, Young, and Lyle. This is an extremely tough line-up in such a short time span. During this time he also defeated two Top 20 prospects in LeDoux and Dino Dennis (undefeated). George was taking on all comers and really wanted Ali again...but Ali didn't want him.

 

Incorrect in your opinion. There is nothing factual about either of our assumptions.

 

Foreman's story:

His amateur record was one of the most precocious in history, and suggests that as a professional, he should have been matched like a young Joe Louis!

His professional handlers basically wasted his potential, by matching him against stiffs.

They failed to develop him as a professional fighter.

Despite this, he scores arguably the most impressive title win, in heavyweight history!

He loses to Ali, and the holes in his development then become pitifully apparent, when he loses to Young, then retires in a mental collapse.

He comes back a decade later, in a presumably doomed comeback.

He defies a century of boxing history, by doing the impossible, and becoming the lineal champion 20 years after he lost the title!

He could have been anything!

 

Absolutely on the money as always.

 

he had power, but I agree if he is rated very high he is overrated because he did lose half the times he fought somebody good in either career. He had good power, but some limitations

 

I always thought it. He had limitations, but if he had the right style his power really was great. Beating Michael Moorer did not impress me, Moorer had a weak chin and didn't move much. And Morrison beat him..

 

It's factual alright. There are loads of guys who may have just touched the fringe in a weak era who would not have got there in a stronger one. There are guys that were cast into the top 10 prematurely (should never have been there) before being exposed etc etc etc.

You are harping on about Roman for instance (part of the Foreman agenda of course). Would he have been top 10 in the strongest heavyweight era ever? He's just one of dozens.

Divisions have their ups and downs and many of those sneaking into the 10 during the downs would not make it during the ups.

It can also come down to dumb luck.

This is just pure common sense and not at all difficult to comprehend.