Tough one. The fighter who was great down to his bones, vs the inconsistent douche bag, who had an enormous stylistic/physical advantage.
Foreman was a much more complete fighter than baer. Baer could hurt and drop joe but max would not keep him down. Baer did not have the upper of george neither. I pick frazier by late tko
Last time this came up it was a match up of Baer at his best against the Frazier of the first Foreman fight. I would strongly favor Baer in that situation. If this is a contrast of both men at their absolute best, I would slightly favor Baer. But if they fought a series, Frazier would take 2 out of 3. Baer was just too inconsistent, despite having the ability and stylistic advantage.
Easy. Frazier eats him alive and batters him unmercifully. Joe never lets him set long enough for that telegraphed, wind-up, County Fair, haymaker to get loaded. Again, people. Frazier holds the single greatest victory in the division's history... and it was over the best, most durable, heavyweight who ever lived. Don't ever forget that.
Max Baer couldn't beat Lou Nova (no not the pizza place) in 2 tries. Do you know who Lou Nova is/was? Do you know anybody who does?
Lou Nova was arguably one of the best contenders never to win the heavyweight title, and Max Baer was pretty much shot when the fights happened. It pays to know these things!
If that was the case, then he would have at least given Foreman, a more competitive fight! Look, I pick Frazier here, but it is a reluctant pick. We are picking resume/quality over stylistic advantage, when the guy with the stylistic advantage, is actually fairly strong on resume/quality.