1972 Gold Medalist Teofilo Stevenson vs 1968 Gold Medalist George Foreman

I'd favour Stevenson in the amateurs. points win.

 

I favour Teofilo Stevenson in an amateur fight.
I think, he was a more complete boxer than a young Foreman.
He was tall, like Foreman a devastating puncher, but faster and more difficult to calculate. Stevenson had a great defense and an excellent technique (won the Val Barker Trophy 1972).

It is a pity that Stevenson never became a professional boxer.
As Foreman said himself (roughly): Teofilo Stevenson would beat us all as a professional boxer.
However, he would have to live in a foreign country (probably USA), far away from home, his family and friends. He would probably have many fake, mercenary friends and had problems with language, foreign structures etc.
I think, for him it was arguably the best way to remain in Cuba as a legendary amateur boxer and national hero.

 

A conversation between George Foreman and Howard Cosell about Teofilo Stevenson.

This content is protected

 

Foreman won the gold medal on his 25th amateur fight in an Olympics Cuba wasn't in.

Stevenson was a skilled professional with a fight ending right hand, and set it up nicely. Teofilo has all the advantages here.

 

I was going to bring this up.

 

You never know because Stevenson never got hit with the brand of relentless, pulverizing, discombobulating power with which Foreman would have hit him, but assuming he could defend it or take it, based on the eye test, you would have to favor Stevenson to win a decision - he was much more polished than Foreman, and with his speed, footwork, straight powerful punches, sense of range and timing, he would have been sharpshooting fairly well. But again, Foreman had a way of taking much smoother boxers out of their game. It sure would have been an exciting fight.

 

Cuba competed at the 1968 Olympics.

 

Foreman tended to undersell himself at times.

It should also be noted that Cuba almost didn't send Stevenson to the 1976 Olympics. He'd lost to Igor Vysotsky (the USSR heavyweight) twice. And if Vysotsky had gone to the '76 Games, Cuba was going to bring another heavyweight instead of Stevenson. But Vysotsky suffered a bad cut before the Olympics and couldn't go. So Cuba sent Stevenson. Otherwise, Teofilo may have only gone to the 72 Olympics and that would've been it for him.

 

Stevenson was very skilled, a taller mover which Foreman could not catch up to, and was way more polished boxer like you said. Imo by the Olympic standards Stevenson had way more impressive knockouts.

To act like Foreman had a realistic chance at this stage of his amateur career is a reach. Stevenson did get hit plenty, and had a very reliable chin. He did have trouble with one fighter.

Igor Vystrosky. The Russian was a one of a kind, a southpaw, two fisted Joe Fraizer like boxer who could end the fight with either hand and any distance. In his prime, which was short, he was something. Vystrosky's chin was solid, he had problems with cuts. However his game which was very different than Foreman's was able to get to under Stevenson punches, quickly close the distance, and unload. Igor beat Stevenson cleanly once points once again in a stoppage win. IMO that's type of fighter was best equipped to beat Stevenson.

Tua was a heck of a puncher!. Once as an amateur he faced a skilled F Savon. Savon knocked him out early. I think Foreman suffers a similar fate maybe lasting more rounds.

 

Oh right, but Stevenson was not there. Here was the field.

[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxing_at_the_1968_Summer_Olympics_–_Heavyweight#Medalists[/url]

 

I read once, that Angel Milian Rivero was a big competitor of Stevenson in Cuba. Angel Milan also defeated Igor Vysotsky. I am not sure anymore, if he was a rival for Stevenson as a participant for the Olympic Games 1976 or 1980.

 

Igor Vystosky had Stevenson's number. But I'm not so sure how good he really was. Jimmy Clark TKOed Vysotsky. The fact that a very green and young Jimmy Clark gave Stevenson and Vysotsky problems never led me to believe people like Stevenson would've dominated as pros in the 70s. Back then, everyone imagined they would've been incredible pros. But we saw what happened when the guys who followed them did.

NY Times Nov. 15, 1975

The United States, inferior in experience and ability and a decided underdog before the competition, scored a smashing‐ victory over the Soviet Union's best amateur boxers in an allheavyweight card at Madison Square Garden last night. The United States’ won the 10‐bout program, 6 to 4.

And the decisive victory came in the final slugfest when 20‐year‐old Jimmy Clark, a sophomore at West Chester (Pa.) State College, stopped the Soviet squad's best man, Igor Vysotsky of Magadan—which is closer to Alaska than to Moscow.

The United States led, 5 bouts to 4, going into that final contest, and hopes for a victory—individually and for the team—were dim.

Vysotsky had a won‐lost record of 78 and 16 and had recently defeated Teo Stevenson of Cuba, the PanAmerican, Olympic and world amateur titleholder.

But Clark had other ideas. In a bristling battle that saw both men suffer eye cuts in the opening round, Clark turned loose his heavy punches in the third (and final) round.

Vysotsky, who had floored Clark in the first round with a short right to the chin, was battered all over the ring in the last three minutes. The U.S.S.R. fighter's face was a bloody mask, and the referee, Vladimir Yengibaryan, stopped the fight at 1 minute 46 seconds. It was the third technical‐knockout of the night.

 

I am really not a friend of Communism/Socialism and I like a quote by Winston Churchill “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”
I just guess, it was the right decision for him. The mental challenge to live in a foreign country without ever seeing familiy members and friends again, guys like Don King around him... pretty tough, I think. It is also unclear how good he would be as a professional boxer.
Anyway, it is just speculation and maybe I am wrong.