Would Prime Foreman Ever Beat Jimmy Young?

Prime Foreman vs prime Young, Jimmy Young wins every time via one sided decision.

 

Young didn’t even win a one-sided decision against the Foreman he actually faced.

 

If OLD FOREMAN could conquer youth, then why come he can't conquer Young? Old Foreman = Prime Foreman.

 

It is simple math.

If Foreman vs. Young was competitive despite the self-defeating stylistic adjustments that hampered his power-not the best way to conserve energy-& was severely dehydrated & seeing God after the fight-Saddler must have had him come in dry again, incredibly foolish...

Then with a better strategy & more water & electrolytes in his system, the Young who said the compromised Foreman still could have tipped him over with a finger...ikely wins the vast majority of times.

Even if it is after Ali, although due to psychological issues he was less confident.
Prime vs. prime, the boxer vs. slugger advantage Young had would not be enough.

 

i audibly gasped at this revelation

 

Ever is too strong a word. Fight enough times and George would win at some point. On any given night? I'm sticking with Young.

George was still wearing down while boxing more conservatively. Being more aggressive earlier empties the tank faster...He'd better hope he gets Young out of there early because he'd be mortgaging the fight pursuing that strategy and the odds of Young finishing him shoot up

 

Just some points that don’t appear to have been raised in more recent discussions on this thread.

Foreman had a point deducted in round 3 for being “too rough”. Without that deduction, Young would’ve won the fight by MD.

The fight was in fact competitive and while Young clearly won it was not by a wide margin.

Young played the classic spoiler. However, though displaying excellent skills, Young employed quite a few dirty tactics to effectively “spoil” Foreman’s own efforts.

Young held tight a lot. He did same after throwing a few punches and also every time Foreman went on the offensive and began catching him.

Young also did a lot of holding and hitting as well as pushing his own open gloves in Foreman’s face and pushing down on George’s neck.

It seems, as at the time, Foreman was the preordained villain and, as such, a blind eye was turned to whatever infractions his opponent blatantly committed.

See Holyfield vs Tyson (“bad guy”) for what I feel is the perfect example of this same inequitable treatment.

While Foreman might’ve been rough pushing Young away it was due in no small way to Jimmy often sticking to him like glue in the first instance.

FWIW, I have read that the Puerto Rican spectators were far more partial to Young and in fact held feelings of hostility toward Foreman and part of the reasoning for their hostilities was them holding a grudge for when Foreman blatantly fouled Jose “King” Roman. Given certain similarities, Foreman might’ve felt that he was back in Zaire. Lol.

Anyway, on the all too few occasions George pumped it out there, when he landed it, Foreman’s jab caused Young to wince and set him back on his heels and there were other periods when a duly on the offensive Foreman appeared to be dominating Young.

Foreman dealt with a boxer type very early in his career. He won clearly the first time and in fact stopped that same opponent the second time around about 1 year later I think - still carrying more than sufficient power to do same in round 10.

Yes, a green Young was stopped by Shavers. Even so, with a further 10 fights or so under his belt, Young was again brutally dropped in round 4 of their rematch (by a body shot I believe). Young of course survived that and went on to receive what most descriptions suggest was controversial and unjust draw.

Suffice to say, as at that time, Shavers displayed an even worse tank than Foreman and wasn’t the finisher that prime Foreman was.

Ultimately, I think that while Young posted his best performance among several others during that period, Foreman himself fought clearly below his own prior best performances.

Personally, I don’t view Young’s win as proving itself to be a rubber stamped, forever more stylistic advantage. Not at all.

Rather, I view it as a finely balanced fight with just the right unique ingredients for Jimmy to get over he line.

As such, the more relevant,
accented question for me would be: Could Young ever repeat that and defeat Foreman again?

Just imo, the answer is that it would be far less likely for Young’ successes to repeat themselves and result in a win.

 

@Andre2000 Had to quote you like this too many characters.

A few things to point out here.

I thought it was a very clear win for Young i scored it 116-111 for Young. And all the scorecards i've seen posted from members on here all have Young winning very clearly.

The fight only would've been MD because 1 judge somehow conjured up a scorecard that Foreman was ahead on points after 11 rounds which is totally bogus.

The 2 other judges had it quite wide with the 116-112 scorecard being more in line with what most people saw although 118-111 is a bit too wide.

Overall i thought after a nip and tuck first 6 rounds Young separated himself from Foreman quite clearly in the 2nd half of the fight.

I'm not really seeing your complaint here honestly.

Foreman himself was known to disrupt an opponents offence by pushing his opponents something he did very well against Frazier.

Yet it seems like you're penalizing Young for outsmarting a bigger/stronger Foreman on the inside with clever tactics ?

I don't see that Young did anything really illegal and if Foreman couldn't use his size and strength to his advantage on the inside that's on him.

Not really.

The first 6 rounds were nip/tuck with not much in the them.

Foreman of course had the big 7th round but he seemed to run out of gas and ideas after that and Young started to take over after that.

So when did Foreman ever have extended periods of dominating Young ? certainly not in the fight i saw.

Peralta was a former Light Heavyweight and he was under 200 pounds.

I thought the 1st fight was competitive and whilst Foreman certainly won on points without controversy. Foreman was noticeably gassed and frustrated in the last round.

Yes Foreman won the rematch more convincingly but Peralta did also have alot of miles on the clock he was 36 years old with almost a 100 fights.

To be fair Foreman was a bit green in their 1st fight and did improve in the rematch.

But it also has to be said Peralta had alot of miles on the clock also and was under 200 pounds.

I also think Young is a level above Peralta at Heavyweight atleast both at their best.

Green is an understatement more like Young was thrown to the wolves against Shavers in their 1st meeting.

From the reports i've seen they suggest Young definitely deserved the nod against Shavers in the rematch.

I'm also not quite sure what you're getting at ? Yes Shavers hurt Young early but then Young took over in the 2nd half of the fight and deserved to win the decision from what i gather ?

Isn't that kind of what happened in the Foreman fight ? Foreman hurt Young once badly in the middle rounds and then Young took over in the 2nd half of the fight ?

Of course Foreman has a chance of stopping Young. But the problem is that historically it's not an easy thing to do Young was only stopped twice in his career.

Once by Shavers very early in his career when he was inexperienced and thrown to the wolves.

And one other time on cuts past his prime against Cooney.

Young also fought alot of notable 80s Heavyweights in their prime whilst he was past his best and never came close to being stopped.

Foreman's issue is that he's fighting against a troubling stylistic match up who's historically not the easiest fighter to stop. Not to mention a young Foreman didn't pace himself as well as old Foreman did.

So more than likely if Foreman fought Young more aggressively he'd have to finish him in the 1st half of the fight, otherwise his gas tank will be running on empty down the stretch which is a problem.

See this is where people go wrong with their analysis.

They can't believe Foreman would lose to Young based on the highlight reel KO's vs Norton/Frazier. But they don't realize these match ups have no relevance to the Young fight.

Frazier is a short come forward swarming/aggressive fighter who cannot fight on the backfoot he attempted it in the rematch and failed.

Norton is also a come forward fighter who drags his right foot hence with his awkward style he cannot fight on the backfoot.

The issue with these fighters they cannot fight on the backfoot so whilst these are great wins for Foreman. Stylistically they are very good match ups for Foreman that play into his strengths.

A very durable defensive boxer who can fight on the backfoot and frustrate Foreman doesn't play into Foreman's strengths hence it's more of a issue.

So why would it less likely that Young could win again ? Foreman lost quite convincingly on points. And it would be up to Foreman to try and make the adjustments against a style that is stylistically a problem for him.

As for Foreman being below par coming into the Young fight he was on a 5 KO streak.

Yes he looked a bit rusty vs Lyle coming off a lay off for his first fight back. But i didn't see any evidence of Foreman looking lackluster in his other fights.

I rewatched his fights vs LeDoux, Frazier 2, not long ago and i thought Foreman looked good in these fights. A bit more measured and not as aggressive but still sharp, and he probably wanted to conserve his energy more after the Ali loss so he changed his style a bit.

 

Unfortunately, I have yet to see those scorecards. At any rate, though Young won clearly, as I said, I still see a close fight.

Suggesting that one judge “conjured” up a close scorecard is a matter of subjective opinion. The fact is, had Foreman not been penalised, the official verdict would’ve been a MD.

Young did hold a lot, hit and hold, use the heel of his gloves, hold the back of the neck etc. I think that can be clearly seen and much less than clever, they were simply substantive and not so legal tactics for which Young was not pulled up on.

Suffice to say, notwithstanding his own not so legal tactics, Jimmy was very good at playing the far more aggrieved victim of what he perceived to be foul tactics.

I would say Foreman was more than a bit green for Peralta 1, particularly in the face of a tricky, boxer type opponent that he hadn’t faced up until that point in time.

Sure, we can speculate, key word speculate, that Peralta was a bit worse off for fight 2 but a still developing Foreman still did what he did, yielding an improved outcome.

My point re Young vs Shavers 2 is that even with more experience under his belt, Young could still be hurt badly early by a Shavers type puncher and prime Foreman was so much more than that - a true finisher.

The bearing of the Frazier and Norton fights is that Foreman clearly looked better in his own right - far more singularly and efficiently purposed and certainly far more confident in himself.

I don’t think anyone’s analyses are so wayward as to not account for obvious stylistic differences.

Frazier and Norton were different enough and Norton actually did relatively well for the first round or so - but Foreman, whilst still throwing actual punches (which he didn’t do so much of vs Young), coolly and calmly caught up with Ken before too long.

With a puncher like Foreman, there was always a measure of gamble concentrating his attacks in the earlier rounds, opponent notwithstanding.

The gamble was, of course, failing to secure the KO only to see him run out of gas himself.

As Foreman came to know, whilst going for an up to a mid round KO, the probabilities were very much in his favour to see his man off before undue time.

Even Zaire Foreman, though overly expensive in his output against Ali. would’ve brought Young much closer to the brink of a KO and likely would’ve achieved same before he was too gassed.

Conversely, Foreman began inappropriately passive against Young. In my view, that was painfully obvious. He was simply posturing and barely throwing. Seriously trying to over pace himself and attempt, uncharacteristically, to outbox a boxer.

Yes, the downturn for Foreman came at around the 7th round mark - because George began to gas by that stage at any rate. Even so, he still hurt Young badly with a left hook at that point in the fight.

Had Foreman gone harder and sooner it is very reasonable to believe that he could’ve hurt Young similarly earlier in the fight with more than enough gas in the tank to finish the job.

Again, as I said, I believe it would be less likely for Young to win again due to the finely balanced ingredients to a fight that I view as close.

While it’s not an excuse for losing in the first instance, but just for one example of the more unique factors to the fight, a more accomodating climate would see Foreman as the greater benefactor of same.

And referencing some already oft covered points - Foreman was clearly ill strategised for the opponent at hand and far from his best head space. As to his less than ideal mentality, I believe this was clearly identified as at the time - and the circus in Toronto was not the least or only evidence of same.

 

Well i'll show you them from some of our most knowledgeable posters and most frequent scorers firstly i'll show you my scorecard aswell.

My scorecard.

Jimmy Young vs George Foreman

1 Even
2 Young
3 Young 10-8 point deduction
4 Foreman
5 Foreman
6 Young
7 Foreman
8 Young
9 Young
10 Foreman
11 Young
12 Young 10-8 knockdown

116-111 Young


Philly161 scorecard.


Jimmy Young vs George Foreman

Round 1: 10-9 Young
Round 2: 10-9 Young
Round 3: 10-8 Young. Foreman lost a point for rough tactics.
Round 4: 10-9 Young. Foreman is so disinterested. Not surprising this is his last fight of his first career.
Round 5: 10-9 Foreman. George landed some good body shots and jabs that fight and Young ran too much.
Round 6: 10-9 Young
Round 7: 10-9 Foreman. Big round for Foreman. Almost a 10-8 round but then Young came on at the end. Great round.
Round 8: 10-9 Young
Round 9: 10-9 Young
Round 10: 10-9 Young. Foreman is gassed
Round 11: 10-9 Young
Round 12: 10-8 Young.

My Card: 118-108 Young

McGrain's scorecard


FOREMAN: 4,5,7,10,
YOUNG: 1,2,3*,6,8,9,11,12*


116-110 YOUNG

Scartissue's scorecard

George Foreman v Jimmy Young

Round 1: 10-10 Even
Round 2: 10-9 Young
Round 3: 10-8 Young (The ref penalized Foreman a point for rough-housing)
Round 4: 10-9 Foreman
Round 5: 10-10 Even
Round 6: 10-9 Young
Round 7: 10-9 Foreman
Round 8: 10-9 Young
Round 9: 10-9 Young
Round 10: 10-9 Foreman
Round 11: 10-9 Young
Round 12: 10-8 Young (scores a knockdown)

Total: 117-111 Young (actual scores: 118-111, 116-112 and 115-114 all for Young)

It would be the vast majority opinion though.

I've already gave you examples of scorecards which shows that.

2 judges had it quite wide which is more in line with what most people saw.

1 judge simply had a bad scorecard there isn't any possible way Foreman was ahead on points after 11 rounds to conjure up a 114-113 with Young needing a knockdown to win.

Not in the fight i saw anyway.

That's not the way i see it i didn't see all these constant illegal tactics that your claiming. Spoiling tactics halting Foreman's momentum and offence maybe but nothing that warrants a point deduction.

Wasn't Foreman's shoving tactics technically against the rules aswell ? Foreman could also be rough and sometimes dirty aswell he clearly hit Roman when he was on the floor for 2 seconds.

So it's not like Foreman hasn't used rough tactics in the past himself.

He simply got outfought by Young on the night no excuses.

The 1st fight was very competitive though and i thought it was closer than Young vs Foreman.

I think it scored it 6-4 for Foreman with Foreman looking noticeably gassed and frustrated in the last round and had it been 12 rounds the fight could've got very interesting.

Yes Foreman was a bit green in their 1st fight and did improve in the rematch.

But i think it is fair to assume a 36 year old with close to 100 fights definitely has alot of miles on the clock.

As i keep mentioning Peralta was a former Light Heavyweight who weighed under 200 pounds. He spent a majority of his career as a Light Heavyweight even though he was a credible Heavyweight.

And even then Foreman never stopped Peralta early he had to go 10 rounds with him again. So if you're using the Peralta fights as evidence of Foreman stopping Young and suggesting it could be early i don't think it's the strongest argument.

Considering a prime Young is a step above Peralta at Heavyweight and doesn't weigh under 200 pounds either.

But isn't that a plus for Young rather than a negative ? i'm not quite understanding why this is a negative for Young ?

A very green young got caught by Shavers and didn't have experience or know how to survive against Shavers at that point in his career.

But with more experience Young weathered the early storm against Shavers and from the all reports i've read deserved to win the decision.

So all it shows is that Young had learnt how to survive rocky moments considerably better with more experience as he also showed vs Foreman aswell.

But again they are opponents who played into Foreman's strengths.

Frazier is short aggressive swarmer who Foreman could push off and bully. And land devastating uppercuts against the best punch for a short swarming bob and weave fighter.

Norton had an achilles heel against punchers and whilst he is a different to Frazier he still plays into Foreman's strengths. Norton cannot fight on the backfoot due to his awkward style and the way he drags his right foot, and as i said he is notably weak against punchers.

For example the Foreman of 1976-1977 would still KO those versions of Norton, Frazier, within a few rounds because the stylistic advantage Foreman has over them is massive.

I'm also not a believer that Foreman had less than a 2 year prime and was suddenly shot after the loss vs Ali either.

Granted he was rusty vs Lyle because he had a bit of a lay off, but after that Foreman was back to stopping opponents early he was on a 5 KO streak coming into the Young fight.

The fights he had vs Frazier 2, LeDoux, were impressive performances that i didn't see any real issues with Foreman in those fights.

Yes he changed his style somewhat to be more measured but that was to pace himself better because he didn't want to make the same mistakes as he did vs Ali.

Plus an old Foreman had good success being more measured.

If Foreman fights more aggressively vs Young and doesn't finish the job then the same problem arises of Foreman gassing even quicker in the 2nd half of the fight.

Is it possible that Foreman could stop Young in the first 6 rounds ? of course.

But historically it's not a very easy thing to do given Young's track record of being very durably and tricky not to mention the stylistic problem that Foreman has against Young.

Lastly this is what i don't like when people bring up the heat. They use the heat example like it's only mutually exclusive to Foreman like the heat has no effect on Young either.

Even more baffling when Foreman comes from a hotter state than Young being from Texas.

 

I had it Young 115-112.

 

I’m not sure there is any prime version of Foreman that isn’t dried out. Deal with it.

 

Neither of us know if he was always dehydrated. If he was, then it is a good point towards the argument that he cannot be assumed to have done better IRL-only if properly prepared.

Why would you put in gratuitously hostile words like "deal with it"?
When even logically it makes no sense to offer that imperative when there is no fact that you can accuse anyone of having troube dealing with-you introduced a new point. So it is more like a minor, gratuitous violation of The Golden Rule-where you seem to wanna make yet another enemy.

Is it motivated by anyone taking Foreman's side in any dispassionate fight analyses?
Because of your notorious, more extreme than anyone I ever met even virtually, many years & presumably for the 22 years you have been on this website...much commented upon, sometimes with folks calling you names like "no brain" (& I do not endorse that Cruelty either...) irrational personal & professional antipathy towards George Foreman?

Many others think he might well lose to Lewis.
YOU are the only one whose hatred & bias against Big George Foreman runs so deep that you may even pick against him to beat...Jerry Lewis.

 

Deal with it=Foreman was prime

He wasn’t a 12 round fighter and it really is that simple.

 

Your post did NOT indicate that you meant Foreman was prime.
It said that Foreman may have always been dehydrated in his prime.
That did not imply that Foreman was prime against Young.

Which almost nobody believes.
It is very basic that "prime" does not refer only to what you could have been due to age & condition: anytime you are not at your best, you are not prime.

How can you not know that not just his shattered confidence against Ali removed him from his prime-& ring rust accumulated such as before the Lyle fight-that the conservative poorly leveraged, unnatural for him & power reducing, tentative STYLE they inculcated in him assured he was out of his prime in performance.

There were other ways to conserve energy, but that was a self-defeating one.

And you addressed nothing about the gratuitously unfriendly way you sometimes behave.
And the extraordinary amount of LOW ranking & personal antipathy/extreme bias you have against Foreman.