Holyfield beat a better version of Foreman than Ali did

Quite a few of Alis opponents did better than Foreman did in Zaire and they aren't better than 70s George and neither is 90s George. Foreman won 1 round and went to sleep in round 8. 90s Foreman can do better even if only on the strength of his chin but thats not saying much.

If 90s Foreman has nothing to offer Ali he might get stopped late even if by the doctors. Which wasn't the case against Holyfield, Tommy Morrison or Moorer etc, 90s Foreman might not have won many rounds but he wasn't just surviving to the bell trying to survive he was trying to drown his opponents in deep waters. Against Ali that strategy is less than worthless.

 

This is a mental opinion to have.

 

Fought better opposition in his 2nd career how ?

Outside of Holyfield I fail to see how Frazier x2, Ali, Lyle, Norton, Peralta, Chuvalo, aren't better than Foreman’s 1990s opponents ?

Fought better in the 90s ? He went life and death with Stewart, Savarese. Lost a one sided decision to Morrison and needed a come from behind KO vs Moorer after losing nigh on near enough every round.

You honestly think those opponents have the same success vs a prime Foreman ?

 

The best way to disabuse this fantasy, is simply to imagine that they were two different fighters.

So let's assume that young Foreman is called George Foreman, and old Foreman is a different man called Forge Georeman.

Lets say that they were the same age as well.

Would you even mention them in the same sentence?

 

Does anyone really believe that Zaire Foreman would have looked bad in beating a journeyman like Axel Schulz or losing to Tommy Gunn? This let me tell you why this loss doesn't matter argument reminds me of an argument of why another hw atg lost in his prime. The difference is Big George doesn't need such revisionism. We all saw what he did before and after.

 

If the Foreman who lost to Holyfield was a better boxer than the Foreman who lost to Ali why was he a 3-1 underdog in the former and a 3-1 favorite in the latter?

 

Old Foreman is very vulnerable to speed,if a small dude like Holyfield could toy him with his hand speed and footwork, Ali could, Foreman was heavier but I think Ali could still move him around or move around him,gaining an positional advantage for his combos.

 

He didn't fight better opposition, he didn't fight better.

It's the most insane opinion I've seen posted.

 

....I posted this on another thread....

For me, the question of who was the better fighter is debatable, but I really think Old George beats young George. Style make fights. Young George wouldn't knock his older self out, Old George was much more defensively responsible, threw accurate short and long punches and I really believe he'd walk his younger self down after a slow start and stop him sometime after the eighth...I just think he's all wrong for his younger self. And yes, dammit yes, young George goes through Stewart and Morrison and the likes....but Old George doesn't go life and death with Lyle and still stops Frazier....although he'd likely struggle with Jimmy Young....

 

Why do you even think he beats Lyle? Except for Moorer he never beat anyone on that level in his second career.

 

The threads like these that have been popping up over the last few days doesn't make one feel any better over the posters that come over from General.

 

Of course a better version of Foreman beats an inferior version of Foreman. It shouldn't even be a question in anyone's mind.

You're literally asking if a past prime boxer is better than a prime boxer. And by the very definition we know that cant be the case.

Prime version knocks out Old version. Without doubt in my mind.

 

Been on this site circa 20 years and apparently boxing ability has evolved in that time at the same rate that logic has regressed.

No man born of his mother's vajay-jay is better at 40+ than they were at 25, outside of them being drastically out of shape in their 20s and take up physical activities and 180 their health mid - late 30s and maintain throughout the rest of their life.

No serious athlete in any combat sport sees a net improvement from their physical peak to their middle aged where they see falling testosterone levels, need much more recovery, suffer loss of strength, speed, reflex, coordination. To think anything else is literally insanity.

Perhaps, there is an argument that the man was more composed but as has been said before, this stylistic change was out of necessity.

Old Foreman gets beaten by many, many a solid heavyweight - Young Foreman tears through many, many a fighter and in his prime, not more than several fighters are genuine favourites against him and that's only with the hindsight of what Ali did to him.

If he retires after Norton or doesn't face Ali and remains champ until retirement around 1979 - 1982, nobody really questions him H2H.

If my mum was my dad and my dad was my Shetland Pony and a tree fell down and no one heard it, would a bear still wipe its arse with a fluffy white rabbit?