Harold Johnson vs Bob Foster

I dont think their heavyweight adventures should play to much of a roll in splitting them in a fight at 175...Sure Foster didnt do aswell but he certainly faced the better heavyweights.

Their lightheavy reigns are a different story..Johnson had an excellent record at lightheavy, against the more proven fighters. I think the problem with Bob is that he didnt just beat fighters in his light heavy reign he destroyed them, brutalized them, ruined them. Which certainly assists in making his resume look comparatively somewhat weaker.



I havent seen a ton of Johnson on film I must admit but from what Ive seen from both I just rate Foster that little bit better in a H2H sense.

Foster is one of my top guys H2H at the weight..I would argue Charles and Moore over him but pretty much no one else.

I think his ability to hold his power sees him knock out Johnson late in a tense fight.

 

Johnson pretty easily outboxes Foster over 15.

 

I think Foster is a level above regardless of the Johnson hype. Bob by decision of latter stoppage.

 

Yeah, Johnson's got a long ways to go before he can justify all that overhyping....

 

Good post. I rate Johnson higher than Foster as well based on his accomplishments and consistency above LHW (he beat much better fighters overall), though I do think Foster may have been able to beat him at LHW.

 

This was a joke, by the way.

 

A good one by the way.

Great thread. Harold Johnson was a master boxer, Foster a hell of a puncher at LHW

Toss up

 

Foster would likely win this, probably by kayo too imo. Harold`s defense was great and he was a hard man to tag with a clean punch, but my gut tells me that Bob will get thru that defensive guard of his at some point and lay him out for the count with one of his patented left hooks. I won`t count Harold out completely as he was a legitimate ATG, but stylewise I think Bob takes this more often than not.

 

Johnson is clearly the greater light heavyweight and overall has a better record. I rank him higher alltime.

I just think Foster is a shade better H2H at 175..I agree with Raging that Bob's style gives him an advantage in this one.

 

Well IMHO picking him over the likes of Foster is hype. He's a fantastic fighter but noway am i picking him over Foster.

 

Why is it hype? He beat much larger fighters consistently, faring far better at Heavyweight, and beat much better Light Heavyweights than Foster ever did, including both Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore (though he beat both men at Heavyweight if I recall).

 

Because i think Foster is the better 175'er head to head. His long snaking jab, speed, power, it all makes him very very hard to outpoint and i really don't think Johnson is stopping him.

Johnson lost 4-1 to Moore and the one he won was very very tight. Good to win one obviously and a great series. Charles was coming off a heavy loss to Valdes when they fought and it would have been a much tougher propostion at 175 with Ezzard peak. Still, a good win. Johnson was a fantastic fighter, but i ain't picking him here. He'd win his obvious share over ATG's for sure, but i think stylistically Foster gets the job done.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl