When I really analyze it, I think the comeback version of Big George was better than the prime version. Not only did he maintain his brute power, but he now looked to set you up with combinations rather than clubbing you to death. He shortened up his punches, and some say that his chin improved. He also developed a heavy Sonny Liston jab. The prime Foreman had more weaknesses. Those wild looping punches he often threw could be countered, he had stamina issues, and he was dropped by three men. I can't say the same about the old George Foreman. I know it's subjective, but I think the old George Foreman was more dangerous. Which one would you guys rather share the ring with?
id rather get in the ring with old fatty and use my lt. hvy speed to run away from him than get buttraped by prime afroman foreman and so would everyone with a brain.
Real cute. Old Foreman might be easier to beat, but he's still more dangerous, in my opinion. He went 31-3-0 with 26 KOs in his comeback, mind you.
Aw, ok. What do you think of the fights with Holyfield, Morrison and Briggs? Even though Big George lost, he gave each of them something to think about often. I think the old George was the better fighter. Young George was the better brawler, but an intelligent fighter could always exploit his weaknesses back then.
Smarter boxer, but not better fighter. Prime Foreman never loses to Tommy Morrison and I think he'd even beat Evander. He also wouldn't get bashed up round after round by Moorer. He'd steamroll him early.
I think Young George would have dismantled them all and much earlier, especially Briggs and Morrison. Holyfield may have gotten more counter opportunities against a wider swinging, more active george, but i figure that same george would have been successfully bullying Holy a lot better. Young george gets classified completely as a wild swinging slugger, but he was better than that(see my baer foreman thread). Don't get it twisted; george may have had his holes, but certainly he was not exposed before ali, and before that he was like an angry god.
not that i'm disagreeing with your choice but there was a lot of fodder in his first career, also. he had one of the softest upbringings a prospect could have.
True, but considering his overall lack of experience(absurdly winning a gold medal aside) it's not too surprising or inexcusable given his short boxing upbringing at the time. You could say the same about his comeback, but man those were some stiff stiffs.....
he was a straight-up thug. houston fifth ward. he road that as far as it would take him, which was far. and if you think he really changed in his second incarnation, i have a bridge to sell you.
Prime Foreman was better h2h then Old Foreman - BUT cos of Angee Dundee, Old Foreman was much smarter for ring IQ.
You mean easy fodder like Frazier, Norton, Lyle, Ali and Chuvalo? I dont see it to be honest. I will admit there are lots of "soft' fights in there, but that will always happen when you are starting off, particularly when the activity rate is so high. Chuck Wepner in about his 4th fight is a pretty decent opponent in anyone's book, i would have thought. As for anyone who is suggesting that Old Foreman might actually be a better fighter than Young Foreman, i really do have to wonder whether you have actually watched the two. Young Foreman might not have been fast, but he hits Old formeman 4 times before Old George lands one.