What's weird about this theoretical matchup is it "could" of been possible if Smith had started earlier and been rated high. He was 21-22 when the Rumble in the jungle took place. Also Foreman smashes Smith
Yeah, but some of the guys he hit say he hit hard. I don't really care what his nickname is - he's a big guy who fighters say hit hard.
No, Weaver said Bernardo Mercado was the hardest puncher who ever hit him. Ruddock didn't even list Smith among the hardest punchers he ever faced, he said Smith was among the strongest but Ruddock said Morrison, Weaver, Tyson and Lennox were the hardest punchers he faced. Bruno said Jumbo Cummings hit as hard as Smith. Smith was strong, that's why he was so good at holding on and clinching so much. It's not like guys could easily break free from his grasp. He was big and strong enough to grab a guy and lock him up and not let go, because Smith was terrified of trading shots. When he felt a guy's power, he grabbed and wouldn't let go. Again, Smith hit about as hard as your average contender, maybe less, as he only stopped half. Regardless, Smith isn't beating Foreman.
Honestly, he reminds me a bit of Samuel Peter, but with less record padding. Big, strong guy; not particularly skilled, but a puncher. Gets by because he's strong and hits hard, even if he doesn't have the skill to get other contenders consistently. I'm sure on record alone, somebody could rave about how Samuel "Too Sweet" Peter outboxed James Toney with his superlative boxing skill. But it wouldn't be accurate.
I didn't say Weaver said Smith hit him hardest; just that he said he was a very hard puncher. And he did say that. I didn't say he did "list" Smith as "among the hardest punchers he ever faced." I provided the following quote: "He was terrifying and embodied what it meant to be a slugger. Bonecrusher would punch through you" Which makes him sound like quite a hard puncher. Bruno also said that Smith was one of the hardest punchers he ever faced. The guy wasn't a light puncher based on the testimony I've read. I think you probably know it's a little more complicated than that. There are lots of hard punchers that didn't stop a lot of contenders. You need to be good enough to hit a guy, which he sometimes wasn't, you need to be able to do it consistently sometimes, which he clearly couldn't, and you needed the right mentality, which you've already said he doesn't have. Smith wasn't very good, but he could hit a bit. I believe Bruno, Weaver and Ruddock who all thought he could hit a bit. I don't believe you that he was a light hitting heavyweight and the evidence you've presented in no way proves it. I agree with you there; so does almost everyone I'd say. Only John Galt, Pat M and White Bomber voted for Bonecrusher. White Bomber votes purely based upon time - so he will always vote for the fighter further forwards in time, to give you some idea.
I think it's a reasonable comparison in that Smith struggled to "master" guys and if you can't do that it's hard to knock them out unless you are a huge puncher. Peter had similar problems but it was very binary with him.
"Too Sweet" started his pro debut at age 28 and lost to Mike Tyson at age 33 with 25 fights. He stopped fighting at 62 bouts and age 46. So much for looking at his record and "prime" 70s Foreman vs Smith.
I watched James "The Latin Snake" Smith from his pro debut against James Broad on ESPN to the end of his career. When was James "The Mouse" Smith going to beat a prime George Foreman?
You seriously watch him and see "monster talent"? You watch Tubbs fight and see a quicker boxer with better boxing skills than Foreman? Aren't you supposed to be a boxing coach?
Not exactly, no. I can see why you'd think that, though. Smith was specially selected because, out of all the contenders out there, he was one of those mentioned by a couple people as a contender who matches up well against Foreman. Mediocre fighter otherwise.
Am I watching different fights? Smith isn't fast, nor skilled, nor has outlier durability or power. Smith is big and has cool name, but I don't see anyone giving Buddy Baer any chances against Foreman... and Buddy was bigger, more powerful and likely more durable than Smith.
I know you´re an expert for 80s/90s HW insights. You really don´t have to pull out such nonsensical points. Nobody cares how almost age 40 Smith did vs. Moorer, Billups or Weaver. We´re not caring about the Foreman of Alex Steward either. I´m rather interested in the argument that Smith wasn´t willing to brawl, and you might be right about that. Significant point for a fantasy fight looking like a shootout. Checked some of his reactions with Tyson. Maybe worth looking at Ruddock too. @70sFan865 Make no mistake. This guy could wreck an opponent in milliseconds, but be unable to control the attempt and follow up. This content is protected He pushes Ribalta down rather than felling him with punches Foreman should land more and finish the job before this will rumble into the later rounds.
