Hot take, Foreman improved after the Muhammad Ali fight

I think Foreman did improve but Jimmy Young was not in this or any known solar system ever at any point in his career a historically elite fighter. If Foreman hadn't had a vision from heaven and fought him in a rematch, I think he would have pulverized him.

 

Based on losing in a one sided fight? Freak occurrences happen, stoppages, but no 9/10 Young whoops him.

 

Clancy could’ve worked some magic if he was given time, give Archie Moore the head trainer role and we’d have gotten a helluva product if they were patient.

 

Coldest take iv ever seen in my entire life.

 

We can agree to disagree. I'm on record here as being flabbergasted by the love for Jimmy Young, I had no use for him in real time and I have no use for him 50 years later, I think the only reason people fawn over him is that "he fought in the greatest decade for heavyweights." I think what happened in San Juan was one of those inexplicable freak occurrances.

 

Nah GF lost in his prime to Jimmy Young - just happens, also don’t talk so much smack about my uncle.

 

The trouble is, improvements don't necessarily equal better.

Gerry Cooney said he only learnt to fight at the very end of his career, or worse. Did this make him a better more effective fighter? Of course it didn't, due to other factors.

Gerry Cooney: One of the best people I worked with who helped me and made me the fighter I was, was my trainer Victor Valle. A great person, he was a great trainer. But because I never had the number of fights I needed, I never actually learnt how to fight properly until after my career was done, or almost done. When I was young, it was like ‘go get ’em, go get ’em.’ Later, at the end, when it was too late for me, I learnt how to play a guy, how to set him up, how to take my time. But when I was young, I never had that chance. And it affected me that the public didn’t understand why I wasn’t fighting enough. That frustrated me.

Source: Gerry Cooney Interview - “I Never Actually Learnt How To Fight Properly Until My Career Was Done” • East Side Boxing • News Archives (https://www.boxing247.com/weblog/archives/133434)

On paper Foreman was "improved" but was he a better more effective fighter? No, for a variety of reasons.

Lewis and Wlad made significant changes (Lewis both technical, tactical and training), were they better more effective fighters? Yes, they were a lot better and more effective. Neither would have made the impact they did without said changes.

 

Nothing personal, just my subjective take on things, I honor and respect anyone who gets in the ring, I just think he's on too high a pedestal in discussions here. I think Ali easily defeated him ... the belief that "he beat Ali" drives a lot of the pedestal height, IMO scoring is about more than punch count ... and I again think San Juan was just one of those inexplicable things.

 

Excellent post. I went into this a lot and can't be bothered to go in depth but off the top of my head, Foreman's legs were WAY to close together, which affected his gait, and natural body mechanics, which imo made him visibly less powerful (even if he was still very powerful). That's imo one of the reasons Frazier lasted longer in their second bout, along with Foreman fighting at a more measured pace.

His jab "looked" good but didn't seem to have much weight on it, he didn't move behind it and put his weight behind it like he did against say Norton, and Frazier.

If you watch his fight with Dinero Denis, Foreman's feet are crossing constantly, and his uppercut looks "crooked" for lack of a better term, due to his altered foot placement.

So yes, he may've been better technically, and did things more "correctly" but did it make him a better fighter? **** no.

 

You're arguing with an idiot and a liar.

He's not the nephew of Jimmy Young like he claims to be, not sure why he continues this disgusting and tasteless joke, disparaging the name of Young.

 

I think he as a bit more methodical and a bit more tactical.

And more measured with his reserves.

 

GF was in the midst of reinvention or at least picking back up from where he left off earlier in his career. No mean turn around.

The further problem was that GF was already elevated to and mixing it up among the upper echelon - not able to revert back to the type of lesser comp. a fighter might ordinarily engage when in early development, honing their style and straightening out any kinks without too much risk.

Had he not been derailed by Young, Foreman perhaps had the potential to eventually develop into a more complete, two speed fighter, prudently electing to either go balls to the wall for a KO or boxing more technically and better paced as and when appropriate during the course of a fight.

I think Young was a guy that Foreman should’ve gone after from the get go rather than begin the fight trying to considerately box him.

He almost had Young via a single left hook in round 7. Had he committed to put Young out early I think he would’ve succeeded in doing so.

Suffice to say if absolutely prime Foreman didn’t put the pedal to the metal to take Norton out when he did, that fight could’ve developed into a more difficult contest than it needed to be.

 

It was definitely his prime between 1976-77. That’s why he achieved a lot more than he did prior to Zaire…..oh wait….

The results of both periods speak for themselves about whether Foreman improved or regressed after Ali. Resoundingly.

 

It’s almost like he was matched against different fighters and that changed things… wild!