Jeffries, Foreman 1 .... similar ...

Sarcasm.

 

H E is a fine poster, but seems a bit grumpy on this thread ,Ive only just returned after a self -imposed exile so I'm not getting into a row with him on this.

 

Yea, fully understand your position no prob, my post to him ( if you have not yet seen ) I feel, was not aggressive, or obnoxious to any degree, only asked him to back up his assertion on a certain debate, for what its worth, in my short time on here, I have seen lots worse, any way as always I ended my post with the words " keep well " as always, and as for as I am concerned, its all good. keep well.

 

You are free to disagree, but I think there are more differences than similarities.

Jeff retired in his prime after clearing out the (white) division, then made a poor Come back and got stopped by Johnson. Foreman missed some fighters in the 70's, but he did beat 2/3 of the best guys then lost in a huge upset. He then came back at 40 to win tbe title over a prime champion.

So technically their careers were polar opposites. As I said, the only superficial similarities are that they were strong durable guys who were good at body punching. Their styles were completely different and so were their careers.

 

Not really and it's hard to make such a comparison, with barely any film of Jeffries available. I think from what I have read and the very little to see of Jeffries, he gives the impression of having been a sheer, come-forward, square-on slugger. Foreman gets the 'slugger' tag, but he was methodical in his approach, with a definable armory, despite looking graceless at times.

And, just how much of an advantage did Foreman carry, anyway? How much strength and power would George need to lose, before he was on a par with Lyle, I wonder? It wouldn't be a "huge" amount, I'd wager. Indeed, just to look at Norton, Ali and Lyle, compared with Foreman, there'd be no immediate jumping to conclude Foreman should have such a massive gap in advantages, in the first place.

That wasn't the view of Foreman against Frazier, either, despite the latter being clearly smaller. Frazier was proven and odds on to win their first encounter, nonetheless.

Yes, Foreman had a good-sized frame and was naturally strong, but he also developed the means to harness and maximize these assets in the ring, with devastating effect. Jeffries never struck me as being seen as such a wrecking machine - more a strong, tough, heavy-handed brawler (with above average power for the times), who was effective in wearing his opponents down.

That said, we perhaps can't know if Jeffries ever managed to realize the full potential of physical gifts, in the same way that Foreman did.

 

Mac, I am delighted you are back, auld friend

 

It was my best Ant impression and you fell for it.

 

Cheers C!

 

Well you don't get much in the way of kudos for fooling me.

 

Mm.

 

So Jeffries gets underrated like in every other thread on this board...?

 

Welcome back, you old codger.

Your posts are top quality. Hope you are well (considering the state of things)