Ron Lyle knocked out Shavers September of 1975. Then in Lyle's very next fight January of 1976, Foreman beat Lyle's ass. What a cowardly duck move.
I was just kidding since Shavers had been in the discussion before. Ali, Frazier, Norton, Young and Lyle were the best of Foreman's era and he faced them all. Can't really fault that.
I agree it is not proven as one of the best of all time .. he fought older Lewis and Sanders ... very good but not enough to put him up there at the very top ..
If you watched him get punched in the head by Sanders in person like I did, you would know that Vitali has a ridiculous chin. I have never seen another puncher like Sanders and I've been to plenty of fights.
I have Holmes at #3 and Foreman at #8. Without his win over Moorer, the miracle, Foreman might not make my Top 10.
Cool list, not too dissimilar to mine in that respect. That Moorer win DOES have a lot to do with George in my top 10, for sure. Without it I wouldn't have ranked him over Frazier and Tyson.
I don't think it had anything to do with the matter. A man undedicated to discipline is chained to failure in any field lest they are lucky, Foreman wanted to win and no doubt still had an honest drive to be champion and lost heart AFTER losing to Young and so his failure is more telling he lost even with real desire. Mike was and always had been an emotional person bound to despair and was always flirting with retirement I think Mike beat Mike and that he could have been more had he wanted to. I believe It was Cus who said "Just keep him busy" with the reaper at his door. These are just my opinions on the matter.
I think the decline was clearly more noticeable in Foreman. In both performances and weight. And you also have Gil Glancy on record about how poorly Foreman prepared for Young. But you "hate" that notion, but not that Tyson declined in prime age...
The issue with Foreman though is that a lot of his opponents seem to owe their reputations simply due to being fortuitous enough to fight in eras that for whatever reason are overrated by many boxing fans. I don't get the Morrison hype at all for example. What impressive wins does he have that make him this monster puncher? He frequently was extended in fights against guys renowned for not being very durable like a shot Williams and Joe Hipp. If he is this massive hitter I would expect him to have easily blown both guys out early. Moreover there doesn't seem to be any sort of consensus on the part of his opponents that he hit really hard. His punches didn't have much discernible impact on Lewis when he did land and Foreman cites Cooney as a big puncher but doesn't mention Morrison. What exactly are Stewart's credentials as a puncher? I find it odd you don't seem to rate Chisora as a big puncher but I would think he would absolutely qualify given the low bar you have set even if he didn't fight in the overrated 1990s a supposedly golden era in which Michael Moorer a 45 year old Foreman and Frank Bruno somehow picked up belts.
