Better resume: Joe Frazier or George Foreman

They go over into the next February, Peralta's previous fight was a draw with Bonavena.

 

Foreman also had the Alex Stewart win which was prob better than a few names on each list. Think Moorer is a bit underrated of a win because of how his career went after. They’re about as even as it gets. I like Foreman better all time by a hair. But Frazier’s resume may be better by a hair.

 

Why was he dropped out,he hadn't lost? The ratings only went down to ten ,so I'm confused here.

 

Okay Mac,it's really not that crucial anyway, I was just a bit puzzled.Cheers.

 

Foreman had a few other decent wins over Qawi, Cooper, Stewart, Schulz, and was robbed against Briggs in his final fight at age 48. I like Foreman's resume a tad better considering the longevity of his career and quality of opponents to the end.

 

I'd edge Foreman because of his 1990s career, which wasn't just the Moorer win. You also have:

Gerry Cooney
Qawi
Bert Cooper
Everett Martin
Alex Stewart
Pierre Coetzer
Lou Savarese
Shannon Briggs

 

I agree.

Instead of trying to nitpick and figure out which month someone was ranked by which ratings body and trying to count who fought more ranked fighters according to this group or that one ... which is maddening ... or eliminating better fighters because they weren't ranked at that moment and then including boxers who clearly sucked, but happened to be rated at that moment, defeats the whole purpose and isn't an accurate representation.

A #5 contender one year may not be a top #10 guy 20 years later.

Pierre Coetzer would've beaten the living hell out of Manuel Ramos. Including Ramos on one list and leaving out Coetzer on another makes no sense.

Just look at the boxers.

Both fighters' records are loaded. Frazier fought Ali three times, Foreman twice, Ellis twice, Quarry twice, Bonavena twice, Chuvalo, Bugner, Mathis, Machen, Jones, Foster,

Foreman fought Frazier twice, Ali, Norton, Holyfield, Lyle, Moorer, Chuvalo, Morrison, Cooney, Stewart, Briggs, Shulz, Rodriques, Coetzer, Young, Savarese, Cooper, Qawi, Peralta twice ...

Frazier fought better fighters in a shorter window. Foreman fought more quality fighters over a much longer period.

Flip a coin. Both were great. Arguing rankings of fringe guys doesn't really matter.

 

I agree completely, rankings are overrated and often corrupted by sanctioning bodies and promoters. I've made this argument several times and proven it with referenced articles, but we still have people who cling to rankings only when it supports their argument. Look at the four sanctioning bodies rankings on any given day, they have almost completely different fighters ranked for each of the alphabet belts. Absurd. I've seen some real bummy fighters being ranked in the top ten for the last 100 years.

 

Thank you for the insight. Though, I must admit that is surprising to me that his first career wasn't enough to qualify for HOF. He was an undisputed heavyweight champion and demolished the first two men to have defeated arguably the GOAT heavyweight.

 

Frazier really did a number on the heavyweight division in the late 60s and early 70s. If you just take their resumes from the 70s I give Frazier the edge. If you consider what Foreman did in his 2nd career he then surpasses Joe.

 

Fair, his pre-Frazier resume was relatively lacking to an extent.