George Foreman s Greatness,, With out His Comeback?

His point as I understood it, is that 70s Foreman was about equal to Max Baer in terms of achievements. I disagree. Foreman’s win over Frazier is better than anything Baer achieved in his career.

 

Baer has more wins over ranked opponents though and his top wins were also quite strong (especially Schmeling one).

 

Patterson also has more wins over Foreman. Wins over ranked opponents aren't the be all end alls you seem to think it is.

 

Fighters aren’t judged by one win though otherwise Frazier would be ranked a lot higher then he is. Max has wins over
Max Schmeling
Earnie Schaaf
Tony Galento
King Levinsky
Primo Carnera
Johnny Risko
Tommy Farr
And more. I’d say that’s roughly equal to Frazier Norton and Chuvalo. Just my opinion. Frazier is the biggest name their for sure but George was a little light on the names otherwise

 

I mean that one win put Frazier in most top tens

I don't think those guys were that good imo except Schmeling. Certainly not on the level of Frazier's conquests. I'll take wins over Frazier 2X, Norton, Chuvalo, Lyle, Peralta over Baer's any day.

Also Baer has at least three losses against those fighters as well off the top of my head, and he also had many more losses, than 70s Foreman to subpar fighters as well.

 

Agree to disagree. Foreman over takes Baer with ease in his second career for sure. I have Frazier in the top ten but more towards the bottom. Think guys like Earnie Schaaf and Kind Levinsky are grossly underrated. Primo gets shitted on but he was a top notch win.
Baer had a lot of DQs and was a known slacker…he really only had a short stretch of focused training and fighting 1932-34. Otherwise he was to focused on women and party”s to bother.

 

I don't think it would be a given that 1970s Foreman would have better resume than Patterson either. I mean, Patterson has much deeper resume than Foreman without 1990s career.

 

Do you have Max Schmeling in the top 10? If not, do you think a win over Frazier matters more than a win over Louis?

I mean, Frazier and Norton are great. Lyle is decent, but Peralta and past prime Chuvalo are certianly worse than any of these names, with the exception of King Levinsky.
Names like Schaff or Farr are around Lyle's level. Schmeling is lower than Frazier, but higher than Norton. Gazelle didn't mention some other wins as well, while Foreman doesn't have much else.

 

He's probably be rated a lot like Sonny Lison. A ferocious puncher with a fearsome persona who tore through the division and then lost in a huge upset to Muhammad Ali, continued for a few more years and then retired without ever getting to the world title level again.

Instead he came back and clinched (imo) the title of the greatest hw puncher of the modern era. And while I do think Foreman's comeback involved some very shrewd matchmaking and luck, it's still just an amazing achievement.

 

No I don't have Schmeling in my top 10 because Schmeling also had many losses, and his one big win was reversed more than emphatically.

I disagree. I think Peralta and Chuvalo would do well against that list of fighters. I also think the Frazier Foreman dominated sweeps those fighters.

I disagree. Even so, Baer was 2-2 against those fighters so I wouldn't say he was overly successful against them.

Foreman's wins in the 70s,blow Baer's out of the water any day. What's more is he doesn't have any of Baer's many losses either.

 

Without his comeback, he definitely ranks lower. And he showed much improved stamina and better durability as an older fighter , which is unheard of. —Mark

 

No way he is under Patterson even without the comeback. There is no way Patterson, while certainly a good fighter , would last long against Foreman. His chin was too soft. On top of being KOed in the first round twice by Liston, he went down often in other bouts. As champion he even went down against a man making his pro debut, Olympic gold medalist Pete Rademacher. Also, Foreman defeated a great heavyweight, Joe Frazier, twice.

 

By your own admission, Baer was only consistently at his best for 2 years. His career was sprinkled with losses at the beginning, in his prime, and at the end, and many of the fighters who beat him were less than stellar to say the least.

I see no reason whatsoever, apart from having an agenda to rate Baer up there with 70s Foreman, either as an ATG or H2H.

 

My most recent list:

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Lennox Lewis
4. George Foreman
5. Rocky Marciano
6. Larry Holmes
7. Joe Frazier
8. Mike Tyson
9. Sonny Liston
10. Wladimir Klitschko
11. Jack Dempsey
12. Jack Johnson
13. Evander Holyfield
14. Ezzard Charles
15. Harry Wills


Without the comeback he would have been just inside, or just outside my top 15.

 

Schmeling doesn't have many losses. His first 3 losses were at LHW (which shouldn't be counted in HW discussion) and his last 2 losess were after WWII, when he was 43. You've been very vocal about robberies in Cleveland threads, so you should be aware that the second fight was a robbery. Is that a lot?

Who did Peralta beat to favor him over someone like Schaff? Peralta wouldn't beat Carnera either.
Chuvalo was a journeyman, who was past his prime against Foreman. He wouldn't do better than Uzcudun against Carnera. He wouldn't beat Schaff or Farr.

We don't know how good Frazier was after FOTC. I may favor Schmeling over that verison of Joe.

Well, Foreman is 1-0 and almost lost against Lyle. He never gave him rematch. Why should we downgrade Baer for being more active and fighting more fights against top contenders?

Losses is a different debate, but I don't see him blowing Baer's wins out of water. Foreman was far more consistent, but his loss against Young doesn't give the best look.

You should realize that Baer faced much more ranked opponents than Foreman. George's resume is incredibly thin for a fighter of his caliber.