Tokyo (Jose Roman) George Foreman Vs. Tokyo James "Buster" Douglas

Yeah, but duly qualified by Foreman, after the Peralta rematch, winning by KO/stoppage otherwise in 4 rounds at most but generally in a few rounds less than that.

Foreman’s rounds under the belt per fight leading into Zaire were less than ideal for a potentially longer fight which Ali clearly intended to and did take him into.

 

You say you're a big Foreman fan, but I swear every time he's put in a hypothetical matchup on here, you pick him to lose to fighters who were objectively nowhere near as good as he was because of some vague "bad style matchup."

And it's always the same vague escape hatch: "bad style matchup." At some point, "styles make fights" stops being analysis and starts becoming a magic phrase used to justify whatever upset pick you already wanted to make.

You even picked Larry Holmes to beat Foreman in a firefight—which is especially bizarre considering Holmes himself regarded trying to trade with Foreman as suicide. Apparently even Larry Holmes who always had a grudge against Foreman, had more respect for his strengths than Foreman's "huge fan" does.

We're talking about a guy who absolutely obliterated Joe Frazier—an undefeated heavyweight champion of the world who had recently handed Muhammad Ali his first loss in what remains the greatest win in heavyweight history to this day. Foreman didn't squeak past him or exploit his way to some narrow stylistic victory; he demolished him, dropping him six times in two rounds. He went 76–5, became heavyweight champion twice, and regained the title at 45. Yet apparently half the heavyweight division was secretly his stylistic kryptonite.

I'm genuinely curious: who exactly do you think prime Foreman beats? Because you may be the only "huge Foreman fan" I've ever encountered who seems to think George Foreman wasn't actually very good.

 

Do you have to think fighters you like win every fight? I'm a huge fan of many fighters who I'd not pick in head to heads. I think young Foreman is overrated. I have always been consistent in that belief. Frazier was made for him, Norton was made for him, and yes, here is the escape hatch again, because styles make fights. I am a huge fan of Foreman, what he achieved and how he conducted himself in his later career. I don't have him in my top ten heavyweight list.

Who do I think he beats? Well, I guess boxing proves one thing, a fighter with George's attributes could potentially beat any heavyweight champion that lived, except Ali in my humble opinion. But when I apply logic and the albeit basic level of knowledge I have in comparison to many of you, I don't see him as a mythical head to head great, just a great fighter, an exciting fighter, and one I love watching.

Great to chat with you as ever man, and great to speak with people who I hold different opinions with, who challenge my views. This makes me think and consider things and sonetimes readjust my opinions.

Wee edit. There was rather a lot of context around the 'firefight' comment along with a lot of analyses and chat. I did not just say 'Holmes beats George in a firefight'. But perhaps you don't remember the various discussions?

Regardless, take care, peace and love, Px

Further edit Swag. You ask who do I think he can beat? Its perhaps easier to put him in comparison context. I think young George could go through Larry Holmes opponents including Spinks...but I think Larry beats him due to the attributes involved. I think young George goes through Wlad's opposition, beats everyone who beat Wlad. I go back and forth with Wlad v Young George but today I feel that although Wlad could stop George, George is more likely to stop Wlad. But I go back and forward with this, a 50/50 fight. Young George goes right through Tyson's oppnents but loses to Holyfield. I have young George v peak Tyson as one of my ultimate 50/50 fights but suspect the best old George stops Mike; and boy do I get stick for that one, but hey, these are my opinions.

Essentially, Foreman is good enough to match the exploits of most any heavyweight but we are always discussing styles, attribites, blends thereof. For what its worth, and here is the romantic fool in me, I think either version of Foreman beats Douglas every time EXCEPT Tokyo Douglas. That version was the one we would imagine as his peak version and he was absolutely on point that night. His jab was fantastic, uppercut absolutely laser guided, his movement, his footwork, everything came together that night and the question was v Tokyo Douglas so I pick Buster..

Further edit. This discussion had made me think I am harsh on Foreman from an ATG perspective. He should be top ten for sure...I'll give my 'list' a think and a rejig....thanks for this...

....still have not changed my H2H picks though!!

 

Buster jabs him to death.

 

It meant substantially taller than Foreman. Which it then contradicts as you say. But a great analysis to be sure.