Joe Frazier Circa 1971 V George Foreman Circa 1991

Frazier’s power is overrated. And George would be pushing Joe back whether it’s 1912 or 1971 or 1991. He is coming right into danger. I think Holyfield takes a punch better than Joe. Sooner or later George is gonna catch Joe.

 

Foreman`s face would be a mess like it was v Stewart except Frazier was far better than Stewart.

 

Not saying he doesn’t take some punishment and get swelled up. But he would never be in danger of going down and he is gonna catch Joe

 

Foreman had sinus drama in that fight which is why his face ended up so hideous. Do you really think that is going to be replicated?

 

It would look like Foreman v Qawi.

 

Yes by him getting hit tons again.

 

Frazier was a far better heavyweight than Qawi and punched harder.

 

True:

But that version of Foreman was far heavier, more patient, calculating, a better jabber, better keeping range and far better with disorienting and keeping smaller opponents off balance though.

 

Heavier meant he was slower.

 

I don't think he was a better jabber at all. In the first Frazier bout, that was perhaps the best performance of Foreman using his jab, and very key to his victory.

He might have been "more patient" but that would be a detriment against Frazier, and as a matter of fact it was when they fought three years later in '76.

"far better with disorienting and keeping smaller opponents off balance" No offense but this is just ridiculous. Foreman kept Frazier off balance just fine with his tactics in 1973 and it was probably the one factor most important to his victory. He was far slower in '91 and he would very likely leave himself open for left hooks by the best to ever do it.

 

You certainly love the long odds.

 

The flip side is that Foreman was less than 26 rounds into his comeback after being out for 10 years. He was still 12 fights short of the win that made the world start to go hmmmmmmmmm maybe this isn't such a joke. I think George got better post Qawi.

 

Maybe but it's not like even a less rusty Foreman, didn't have his issues vs Morrison, Stewart, etc.

Qawi was also grossly overweight at 222, he'd fought Holyfield at Cruiserweight weighing 190 just 4 months previous. He was also past his prime, and fighting two weight classes above his best weight vs a natural huge Heavyweight.

So I think Qawi does deserve some credit, and I think maybe that fight showed somewhat. That the older Foreman might not of breezed past Frazier.

I also think Foreman being more slower and patient in his 2nd career, might of also worked against Big George aswell.

 

I don't think he would have breezed past him, absolutely. It's a very hard fight to envision because of the sheer differences in Foreman and also because we saw Frazier obliterated so overwhelmingly it's hard to get completely past.

 

Heavier means, Frazier would have even less chance at moving the mountain of the man than he did the younger version. He couldn't manhandle the young, trim Foreman. He definitely won't manhandle the immovable old man version.

Slower is meaningless if Frazier still can't get to him, and he definitely would not be able to. It's widely accepted that old Foreman defensively was better than his younger version, despite being slower. And his jab was arguably better, I'm pretty sure George himself has said this before. What he lost in speed he more than made up for in craft. That crouch, load up hook simply wouldn't work on either version of Foreman.

There is simply no way Frazier would beat Foreman (maybe the Foreman that fought Briggs or Schultz but that's it), even younger, older Foreman was too far a bridge for Frazier, just a bad matchup.

Not sure why this is even being disputed. Nothing I'm saying is outlandish. Qawi was a crouch and explode hooker, Frazier was a crouch and explode hooker. How would one not realistically look immediately at the parallels. Was Frazier better than HW Qawi, absolutely. But Foreman against that style..............