1974 George Foreman vs 2017 Anthony Joshua: Does Foreman make it to the finish line

Wondering if AJ could have beaten Foreman is a very valid question because it isn't like AJ is just some random contender that happens to be a big guy. He's one of the best of the time with quite a few physical and technical advantages over him. I don't see it as an insult at all.

Would say, Mercer vs Foreman be an insult? Mercer is no ones ATG, but there is reason to believe that just maybe he could have beaten Foreman, even if you didn't favor him.

In the mid 60s, would it be disrespectful to Louis, Marciano, Dempsey or Jefferies to speculate that Ali could have beaten or even had a chance against them?

Or in 1973, if someone said that perhaps George Foreman might have beaten Jack Dempsey, would that have been disrespectful to Dempsey? No, because there are plausible reasons why Foreman beats Dempsey, regardless of whether one favored Foreman or not.

And I still say that the version of Wlad that AJ beat was still better, technically, movement wise and size wise than Ron Lyle and a lot bigger and harder punching than Ken Norton and Joe Fraizer, but especially harder hitting than Norton. You'd have to say that he was at least equal to Fraizer in punching power.

I'm not saying AJ would just annihilate Foreman in 1 round or anything crazy like that, but we all have to be honest with ourselves, legend status aside, if the boxing fairy visited me and could magically set up a fight between AJ and a prime George Foreman for tomorrow night, you may favor Foreman, but you'd also be prepared for a Foreman loss. And if Foreman did lose, it wouldn't be a Douglas/Tyson level upset.

 

Yeah but the opponents for the most part that Foreman beat on the way up to Fraizer were for the most part no better than the opponents AJ beat up to Wlad. Plus AJ fought the physically larger men.

And there's nothing saying that AJ couldn't have defeated the version of Fraizer that Foreman did just as convincingly, that AJ couldn't have demolished Jose Roman or starched Norton.

You're just looking at stats and numbers, but in the real world of the boxing ring, there's every reason to believe that AJ wouldn't be a no hoper against a smaller man that he has handspeed, technical ability and size over to the tune of 20 to 30 pounds of muscle. With a proven win over a fighter many consider to be an ATG. Yeah, Wlad wasn't in the heart of his prime, but neither was Joe Fraizer in 1973. Vintage Joe Fraizer is forever stuck in a time warp in 1971 at Madison Square Garden.

Whether you favor AJ or not, it isn't far fetched to think that he could win vs Foreman.

And how is me in 2017 saying AJ could beat Foreman different than you saying Foreman could beat a prime Jack Dempsey or a prime Jack Johnson in 1973?

It just seems different in retrospect, but in 73, by your own criteria, Foreman was just as "unproven" despite his win over Fraizer. Dempsey and Johnson were already proven ATG's in 1973.

Or in 1965, Ali wasn't a proven ATG at that point, even with his win over Sonny Liston, but he even said himself at that time that he would have beaten a proven ATG in Joe Louis. Even when he himself was unproven. Billy Conn witnessed Ali saying that to Louis when Ali was still a contender barely skating by Henry Cooper and Doug Jones.

I respect Foreman greatly, but me favoring AJ over him is no more disrespectful than Ali favoring himself over Joe Louis when Ali himself was still a contender.

 

This is just pure nostalgia. Joshua stopping Wlad Klitchsko is more indicative of AJ beating George Foreman than anyone Foreman beat in the 70s is indicative of him beating AJ in 3 rounds.

People are going more on name rather than physical and stylistic attributes. And it's not just size either. Buddy Baer was the same size as Anthony Joshua, yet I wouldn't expect Baer to beat Foreman.

But AJ would be 20 to 30 pounds larger than Foreman, faster hands, better technical skills, straighter punching and more adept at throwing combinations. That has to be factored in and Foreman never beat such an opponent with that combo of size and skill and punching power to make it seem like he's virtually guaranteed a win.

 

Before George Foreman massacred Fraizer, what had he done and who had he beaten to merit picking him over Joe Fraizer? Fraizer had battered, floored and beaten Muhammad Ali while walking through the best Ali could offer. George Foreman had beaten Boone Kirkman and struggled with Peralta. So, on paper, Foreman should have lost to Fraizer. But real life turned out differently.

If this were 1965 and I said that Ali would beat Jim Jefferies, would you say "Ali has done nothing to show that he could beat an ATG in Jim Jefferies"? Today, in 2017, it almost goes without saying that a 1965 Ali likely would beat Jefferies, but in the actual year 1965, you could make the same argument that Ali had done nothing to show he could beat an ATG in Jefferies, after all, just two short years prior, he'd been leveled and almost lost by KO to Henry Cooper, which was still fresh in peoples minds in 65.

But you'd have been guilty of picking Jefferies over Ali at that time simply because Jefferies was a "name" and back then, Ali was the new kid on the block. Today, as of August 2, 2017, with Jefferies and Ali both long gone, many will easily pick a 1965 Ali to beat a prime Jim Jefferies.