The great limit of George Foreman

He didn't have that slow feet to be fair.

 

His limitation was probably head movement. He didn't have much. So if a guy found the key to avoiding his punches or took them and fired back he would be hit. Most guys were backing up so they had a hard time getting anything off before he got them.

 

Nah. Give him the stamina and workrate of Marciano and well. I'll let you do the imagining

 

No but the defeat to Ali and Young were.

 

Handspeed

 

The competition.

 

First off, which career ?

The first it was mental. He was mentally weak. His ego was immense compensating for all sorts of unresolved issues and he did stupid things like refuse to shift gears, pace himself, etc .. he should and could have won in Zaire and certainly against Young ..

The second career was is age .. mentally he was there but at 38 and up even though he did terrific it was still a hell of a leap.

 

Correct. He came along in a great Era, then made his comeback in another great Era.
If he'd come along in the 30 s or 50 s he'd have probably reigned for years!

 

Mentality, he was a seek and destroy fighter with no other approach to adapt to.....physically he had had more advantages than just about anyone

 

To specifically answer the original question.
In no specific order of priority or preference
1 lack of overall boxing skill
2 A small gas tank
3 A crude ' arm swinging ' style
4 moves like a mummy ( quote Ali )
5 Has only a Plan ' A'
6 If Plan ' A' dont work we continue with it until we lose ( see Ali , Young , Lyle ( almost)
7.Lack of head movement
8 Overrated punching power ( couldnt put Young or Lyle away ...lighter punching Ali stoped Lyle )
9 Over inflated ego based on blowing out ,washed up Frazier , a small guy who'd been partying for 2 years.
10. A none existent defence ( everytime Ali Lyle or Young threw a punch they never missed .)
11 Totally exposed , not once or twice but THREE times during his peak.
12. Outclassed by then cruiserweight Holyfield.
13 Outboxed by Crude brawler Morrison.
14 Fought nobody of any note after landing punch on lazy statuesque light heavyweight Moorer
15 Thought it was a good idea to walk round the Congo with an Alsatian dog and wondered why he wasnt popular ( it was a symbol of white oppression against the natives ).
Dumb , in and out of the ring.

 

Perhaps his biggest limitation is that he simply didn't have the style for it.

A pure slugger like Foreman, is always eventually going to run into a pure boxer, or a boxer puncher, who can take their measure.

If you look at the fighters who have achieved sustained dominance, they are usually either pure boxers, or boxer punchers.

Those are the fighters who are most versatile against a wide range of styles, and best suited to longevity generally.

 

It's not complex at all.
I've given you many reasons as to why he wasnt the greatest.
He was an outstanding offensive fighter given the right circumstances.
Objective study of his fights pre Frazier showed a crudeness and a suspicion of lack of stamina to anyone observant.
He landed lucky in that he got that version of Frazier in '73.
The Norton fight proved nothing other than he could punch.
Ali knew .
He called him ' The mummy ' months before Zaire and basically told anyone who would listen that Foreman wasnt all that...
Foreman learned nothing.
His fights v Lyle and more tellingly, Young , showed that.
Who else did he beat ?
A relic of the man who used to be Frazier and Dino Dennis !
His resume is paper thin.
His second career deserves huge credit due to his age. He worked his way up from freak show to someone treated seriously, clever matchmaking and even cleverer marketing got him top billing , all that crap that he trained on cheeseburgers and the money was all for his church.... like hell, he ducked people like Holmes and was very lucky to get the Moorer fight.
He achieved what he did despite serious flaws in his style and ability and for that he deserves credit. For me and through no fault of his own, he's ridiculously overrated .