Whatever it is, I know it will be flavourful and have your “spice” to it, if that makes sense your videos really have a homey feel to them. You make wonderful content that’s honestly enjoyable for all levels of fans I mostly started out watching your channel and highlights (Reznicks vids no joke) as a teenager and that Evolved into actually boxing. Weird seeing you and Rez here lol.
Great Video, great recap of all aspects. I actually see all the points as you do, including the conclusions. But... I think the 72/73 version of Foreman is the most dangerous one for Larry. After pulverizing Frazier and Norton, he relied too much on his power and neglected the fundamentals more and more. Early George had a great jab, good openings, was great at cutting off the ring. By then he also had a rather decent stamina and handspeed. I think he could have caught Prime Larry early and maybe would have finished him eventually. But it still remains almost a 50-50 thing.
That's such a cool video, congrats! I agree with your prediction, except I think George would be exhausted and ready to go after 10 rounds, if not a bit earlier. TKO in the 11th.
Dangerous fight for Holmes but i still favor him. It's just the simple styles. Foreman struggled with slick boxers and movers and gasses when he couldn't get them out of there. thats why he lost to Ali and Young. It's no coincidence. Foreman was good at cutting down the ring but he'd catch jabs and blitzing combinations like the ones Cooney got caught with. Holmes was also relatively strong. Holmes takes it 8/10 times
I understand what you're saying here, and think that's an interesting point. While I still might be inclined to believe he lost something mentally after the Ali fight, I can roll with the case you're making.
While I did pick Holmes and would favor him, I don't know that I agree he'd win 8 or 9 out of 10. (And if Foreman did win by stoppage, I don't imagine I'd be inclined to say it was because of a "lucky punch".)
Great job Rummy! Only suggestion is...Why not have done some of the analyses as to the stylistic advantages head to head? These tend to be big factors-& boxer vs. slugger it favors Holmes. Maybe the same result, but it solidifies the case. For example against Holyfield they were about exactly the same age. Holmes id marginally better. But when you consider styles, maybe Foreman did relatively better. But if you compared a great awarmer vs. each...Well anyone think that prime Frazier would not fare better against Holmes than Foreman for obvious stylistic reasons? Also you noted an advantage in athleticism for Holmes-the opposite is true. And you cited Foreman as having greater strength in the 70's-no, if anything he was stronger in his comeback, hit almost as hard-but he was much slower, could not cut the ring, so while world class he was no longer as good.
I remember against Holyfield, Larry looked like he was winning after the first six or seven rounds, but he seemed to kind of fade after that. Foreman really hurt Holy a few times and at one point looked one punch away from knocking him out. Larry didn't achieve that, but he did unquestionable fool and outsmooth him in the early rounds imo.
I'd suggest having another look at that one. Holmes was definitely not looking like he was ahead after 6 or 7. Most cards would have him winning about 2 of the first 6 or 7.
