Who Is The Best Fighter That "Comeback Foreman '', Could Have Possibly Beat?

This^ is a bit unfair, given Foreman was past his "past prime" self, by then.

1990 Foreman has a good chance against a good few from those prior eras. He'd have been a superstar in the post Dempsey/Tunney to Louis period.

 

That I am far from convinced about.

Old Foreman seems to have generally lost when he stepped up, and he was not always stepping up against the best of the era.

He probably needs the right breaks to be champion in the 30s too.

 

Who would he be stepping up against during the period I mentioned?

 

88-92 Foreman beats

Anthony Joshua
Povekin
W Klitschko
Vaporizes Sam Peter
Chris Byrd
Marciano
Witherspoon
Tua
Norton
Frazier

 

Schmeling was obviously very good.

If he got his title shot against him, or drew him in a title eliminator, that is going to be a tough ask.

Jack Sharkey was also very good at his beat, but in my opinion, Carnera was lucky to draw him when he did.

Carnera was not one of the best champions of the era, but he was never a simple title shot, because he was consistent.

You have guys like Loughran blocking the path as well.

Baer was an accident waiting to happen as champion, but he was murder in an eliminator, no pun intended.

Braddock is just going to sit on teh title until he gets the biggest possible pay day, forcing him to take on more dangerous men.

 

I think 90s Foreman would have done ok against all of them.

By "done ok" I mean I'd expect him to beat all of them.

 

Then your expectations of him are probably too high.

He would have needed the cards to fall right, in order to beat the champion.

Before that he might have needed the cards to fall right, to get past the final eliminator, which might have been a bigger ask at some points.

 

Schmeling and Baer are the only guys I'd see having the slimmest of chances against Foreman.

That's not high expectations. It's a period of relatively low quality Heavyweight talent with an experienced, powerful operator hungry for the title amongst them.

There isn't anyone Carnera beat who Foreman wouldn't, and what Foreman would do to the version of Sharkey from whom Carnera took the title, would be, shall I say, more definitive.

 

We are talking about the older version of George Foreman right?

 

Marciano fits the bill.

 

Yes - the '90 to '91 version.

 

Old Foreman from the Holyfield match, 3 1/2 years before he beat Moorer, is a notably better fighter than the one who KO'd Moorer. Holyfield shipped a few great punches that night, punches other may not have. Foreman did ask him some reasonable questions and came out the other side as "no joke". Foreman had the durability and pacing to stay in there until he asked those questions too, at this point of his career. Schmeling, Baer and the like would definitely have had to answer such questions, and probably more.

 

He's the same guy who deserved a draw against Alex Stewart.

Holyfield made Bert Cooper look like Joe Frazier, Dokes look like an ATG, Vaughn Bean look formidable, Holmes look 36, and Moorer look like a tier 1 90s heavyweight instead of a Frank Bruno tier heavyweight. It's who Holyfield was.

Some of these guys would simply show a little lateral movement and move when Foreman lobbed slow motion punches, and Foreman magically wouldn't be "91" Foreman anymore.

 

The solid majority score that fight for Stewart as did the official judges. You also somehow find a way to score for Briggs. One things certain, whenever you're watching Foreman one eye shuts and the other squints.

Your sweeping negative appraisal of Holyfield just goes to show the blind bias you have against Foreman. Hell, when news of possible cases against Foreman came up you threw them up and had him guilty for those too. Whenever his name comes up, no matter in what fashion, you go all crosseyed and brittle and out flies the excrement.

 

A draw is more than fair, even if the majority have it for Stewart.

I didn’t negatively appraise Holyfield. He knew how to get W’s even if made opponents look good by opting to eat flush punches.

Yes, I believe Foreman is guilty of **** and it’s because he has three women accusing him of the exact same set of behaviors, with the third not even connected to the first two. He also settled out of court with a woman for something similar 40ish years ago and it got swept under the carpet. Guilt is the logical assumption there.

But let’s keep this on track. He’d have a good chance against Marciano and I say this as a nonbeliever of mythical, one night “91 Foreman.”