Better Version Of George Foreman

you are the clown who banned me always without motive, the last time i had no problem with anyone, i was insulted by this guy but i am banned without motive , it is just a forum but you will be ever the same piece of **** freak and loser in the real life:hi:

 

Pot. Kettle. Black.

 

:rofl

 

That a lot of rolling around on the ground for you.

So 73-74 Foreman with the same chin, same power, but less boxing skills and less mental strength as the older Foreman would hospitalize him? Interesting. Guess he would KO him and send him home in an ambulance the same way a prime Holyfield, Moorer, Morrison and Briggs did.

 

The younger faster
,and stronger Foremen was more dangrous espicilly in the early rounds than the older more experanced Foreman. However his style left him open to counters and could fade as the fight went on. The older version may not have had the same speed but he was smatter and had better defense.
If both versions were to fight. I'd pick either young Foreman within six rounds or old Foremn any point after that.

 

I'd say the younger Foreman based on the fact that he was dangerous and would have beaten Morrison, Schulz, and would not need to go to the cards and get robbed against Briggs. Foreman was such a caveman but he could hit and is great for a reason.

 

oh dear.

prime foreman sparked frazier and norton. comeback foreman lost to morrison and holyfield.

take a guess.

 

really never got how people say young was better
wasted alot of punches was like he didnt know how to save energy

way easier to hurt
low energy couldnt go long matches without being tired
wide punches
bad aim
pushed to much which left him open to counters

no real defense it was like he didnt have sense to block with his hands and instead pawed

 

The results make it oh so obvious.

 

Prime 70's Foreman is the better fighter. Old Foreman was smarter, more patient and knew he needed to adapt to survive. Not better, smarter.

A better question would be which version is more difficult to knock out?

 

Wonder what happened to postErs red cobra and seamus

 

It is overstated by some that young Foreman was without skills or a caveman.
He did have some of the latter tendencies, but whole videos analyze his techniques & show how he could be cagey & have many discrete skills-anyone should know about his ability to cut off the ring, but framing a shot, pushing, countering, drawing fire...

That said, he did have some significant deficits.
But while the older Foreman was more skilled as defined by efficiently using your available physical resources, of course youg George was better & had superior results against better fighters.

The decline in speed mainly makes a large difference.
Still Foreman remained a World Class fighter until he retired near 49.
He (deserved to) beat a prime Briggs with no stylistic advantage at that age.

 

I said uptop the flaws he had when young

you were right legend he was a better fighter when young

but the changes he made when old had he had these changes when he was young his matches would be different

he wouldnt had been dropped by jim I dont think so cause he would have a better defense

he would give a tougher to ali sense he wouldnt be so dumb to waste energy and he would be connecting more cleanly and he had defense that could throw ali off

his match with joe wouldnt just be a repeating loop of dropping him just for him to get up

sense he would have better punch tech he would be causing damage still but he would be landing with better tech which means more effective I can only see joe being stopped after the 2nd drop

these changes he had when older to me I take as him just being a better boxer I like this ver of George not much but I do like his defense and punch tech not being sloopy like when young I never been impressed with the young one but then agian I dont like the slug type really its only a handful that I like

I usually like a slug type with good looking punch tech

people like Dempsey but I never got into his style ether to wild and way to open but he had power and was ruthless when it came to when he had a man hurt

 

There is simply no way that Foreman could have been better in his 40s, than he was in his 20s.

No fighter ever has been, or ever will be.

 

Bernard Hopkins says hello.

Hopkins left his 20's without winning a title and drawing with Mercado. In his early 40's he beat Wright and pumped Tarver and Pavlik.

Tho at a catchweight Wright was P4P#3. Pavlik was numero uno at 160 (fight at 170) and Tarver was numero uno at 175.

I think a very very good case could be made for Hopkins. Better than that actually.

Perhaps a deep delve into some lesser lights throughout history might divulge other results.