Could a prime "big" george foreman be effective today?

Not really. Vitali is much taller than Wlad. Wlad's official height is 195cm, which is just under 6'5", but would make him a solid 6'5" in shoes. While Vitali is 200cm, which is just under 6'7".

http://u.kahvipaketti.com/u/25076999329.jpg

Wlad 195cm standing next to 190cm Larry Holmes
http://m.zimbio.com/photos/Wladimir+Klitschko/Larry+Holmes

Larry doesn't look dwarfed next to Wlad and George is a little taller than Larry, but not by much.

Shannon isn't really 6'4", but closer to 6'3", so it makes sense that Vitali at almost 6'7" would make him look small.

 

Some of this debate is tiresome, but here is some housekeeping on facts I doubt anyone can contest.

1) What is "bigger" is subjective, depends if you mean muscle, fat, height or bone structure.
But if you mean larger frame, meaning the skeleton, then bone thickness & width matters.

2) I agree some such as the Polynesians cited are larger than at first glance because lower body mass-bone & muscle-must be considered. Though it is less notable, & having a tapered look accentuates the upper body-as does a low body fat %.

60% of the bodies muscle mass is in the lower body if you are proportionately developed.
This includes the hips & butt.

3) A difference of at least 3" is required for someone to be "much" taller than someone else.

4) Average footwear adds just about 1 1/2" to height.

5) Of course Foreman shrank-if he escaped it due to age, he would not when having various surgeries on his legs & back.

6) Size tends to be an advantage even in an unlimited division.
But much of this is related to the rules-glove size, less rounds, clinching (cheating) enabled.

 

I think it depends on your style. Guys with wide shoulders and lean waists tend to have longer limbs in general, which allows them to whip shots in at long range with great power (Foreman, Wilder, Wlad), while guys with blocky torsos tend to have shorter arms and are better at punching in combination at short range (Parker, Marciano). Parker seems to have already developed the style best for his body type, and has the speed and explosiveness to really make it work. His problems are mainly due to his somewhat predictable rhythms of attack and the fact that guys can tie him up too easily once he closes range. His raw athleticism is top notch, possibly the best in the division.

As for Foreman, Foreman was definitely a big guy who (if it can be believed) actually boiled down a little to fight at heavyweight, but he also had a touch of the whippet hound mixed in with the bulldog, and that allowed him to maintain a certain "size" while remaining lean and light that tends to paint the impression of a more gigantic stature than he actually possessed.

 

Foreman definitely boiled down during his prime years. Looking at him in the pic below at 247lbs for his 2nd comeback fight he looks a little soft, lacking the ripped physique of his prime but hardly overweight.

http://www.georgeforeman.com/images/scrapbook/SCAN0010.jpg

In comparison 241lbs Luis Ortiz at the weigh in vs Wilder looked far worse and seemed to be carrying less muscle and more fat than 247lbs Foreman. Foreman based off these pics is clearly naturally larger than Ortiz.

https://www.ringtv.com/wp-content/u...igh-inphoto-by-Amanda-Westcott-Showtime05.jpg

 

Ortiz at 241lb looks fatter than 247lb Parker and also looks like he's been juicing/weightlifting to get yuge, much more so than Parker does.

Of course this shouldn't surprise anyone since to the best of my knowledge Parker has fought since age 17 in the unlimited weight classes whereas 27 (at least) year old Ortiz was still winning titles at the 91kg limit in 2006.

But people here will seriously try to tell you that Ortiz is "the naturally bigger guy". Joseph Parker isn't even 27 yet and he will never see south of 230 for the rest of his career.

 

He obviously wouldn’t have such a strength and size advantage against several current fighters


Hard to say how well he’d do without his advantages


Size and strength aside, George was a tough guy with decent skills , though.

 

right it's obvious he wouldnt do good in his 70s form

 

facts way to sloopy and wasting of punches

 

Prime Foreman born in 1990 would likely be 6'6, on steroids, and have access to vastly superior training methods. Would unquestionably be the consensus #1 Heavyweight.

 

thats not right they said the way he was thats a diffrent man your talking on so you must know in his real form he wouldnt do good

 

Prime Fury born in 2090 would likely be 7 feet tall, and have access to vastly superior training methods. Would unquestionably be the consensus #1 Heavyweight of all time.

 

George Foreman would have a strength advantage against every fighter since Sonny Liston. Before that Carnera would be the only man to match him in strength. His ability to cut the ring off coupled with a thunderous jab would take out anyone in todays heavyweight division. Joshua would get cornered ,wobbled and he's gone before 4 . Fury and George would be a mauling affair, lots of wrestling and holding with Foreman's superior jab and strength wearing Fury out. One thing's certain, Fury hits the canvas he won't survive like he did with Wilder.

 

That is an amateurish understanding of what Foreman was capable of.

 

In 2021 he would be small George Foreman.
Usyk is also small and look what he did to AJ.