When was George Foreman at his best as a fighter?

I'd say his Comeback career, because he regained the title 20 years after losing it, and people forget that when he started his comeback in 87, he was viewed as a joke and sideshowe attraction.

 

Opponent to opponent there are probably guys he’d do better against as an Old man and vice versa but overall 70s George.

 

I personally like 70's George. He was a destroyer of men. Carried that aura of an executioner

 

He's obviously far better in the 70's. His pinnacle was around Frazier or just before up until the other side of Ali. He was one of these guys that struggled once their 0 was taken. Donald Curry is another shining example.

 

^ This!

 

Foreman was a questionable character. He was an admitted criminal and thug. and he participated in the most questionable and likely fixed fight in the history of sport…. The Rumble in the Jungle. Foreman’s best fight undoubtedly was his victory over Moore. It’s the only bout other than the Lyle fight that you knew he was giving 100%.

 

???

 

For me, big G at the very top, the night he made mincemeat of Joe Frazier.

 

70s version was probably a little better overall. 90s version would do better against some types of opponents. I don't think there was a huge gap between them best-for-best.

I would enjoy watching 90s Foreman go through Ron Lyle. It would be like the scene in some movies where the hero returns after years adventuring abroad, and easily defeats the bullies of his youth.

 

I love old man Foreman, chipping away at men twenty years younger than him.
Nothing like that will ever happen again in the heavyweight division.

 

Never say never! Vitali came close, and there have been some others since. Although since older heavies are more normal now, some of their opponents are also older.

I'd agree that nobody will take a 10 year holiday from pro boxing paydays, though. Took a religious vision to do that even to Foreman.

 

Fair few HW's today are as old as 80s Foreman was when he was being told not to bother!

 

in the first version George easily crushes 2 ATG, in the second version he defeats a recognized but not outstanding champion losing the entire fight. This is impressive due to age but not the overall sporting value. George from the 70s is clearly better than from the 90s. What is more valuable: outclassing Frazier and Norton or a lucky punch with Moorer?