Foreman said this about Frazier

He always tries to be somewhat overly respectful though, it must be said. He also said that after he knocked him down, Frazier got up and threw his left hook, it whizzed past his face and he got scared and thought he better ko him(Frazier) asap so he doesn't lose. Now watch the fight and see if you see that or if you just see Foreman wanting to pummel Frazier relentlessly.

Also, Forman said about Norton that he was worried to fight him because Norton was a physical specimen, didn't look scared to me.

He's just being nice.

 

Yes, I think it would have been a different fight. Frazier was overconfident and not in his best shape.

Foreman probably still wins by TKO though. The difference would be Frazier's conditioning would allow him to last longer and avoid taking as much punishment in as little time, and he'd probably get going and hurt Foreman making it far less one-sided. But I think George was tough and had the energy to keep swinging for a good 7 or 8 rounds, and he'd probably prevail due to the way their strengths match up against each others styles.

 

I would pick Foreman.

 

I think Frazier would do more and last longer but still see him being broken down.

 

Same here. The fight is too one sided. We're not talking about Whitaker losing a debatable one to De La Hoya when past his prime, therefore showing us grounds for us to believe he'd whip him in his prime. We're talking about Frazier being very very close to his prime and getting annihilated.

Anyway, i've got a lecture now. Everyone feel free to call me a Joe Frazier hater or whatever while i'm gone.

 

Foreman would always land first frequently enough to bash Frazier up, a Frazier with more spring in his step may manage to actually get that left hook off an do some damage with it, but it would still be largely the same result.

 

I'd pick Foreman to beat Frazier by TKO, prime for prime, albeit in a far more competitive fight than we saw in 1973.

But I'd rate Frazier as the greater heavyweight.

 

I'm with the school of thought that says Frazier would always fing Foreman a nightmare. The best that we ever saw Foreman was circa 1973/74. From Kingston to Zaire via Tokyo and Caracas. Regardless of what some people think,the George of Zaire was the same guy who battered Frazier,Norton and Roman. Forget all this Foreman was doped bull****,it's just that Muhammad Ali gave him problems that he'd never encountered before in his worst nightmare.. Now,take that version,and put him in the ring with the Frazier who beat Quarry,Ellis,Foster and Ali. Foreman would still crush Joe. It would take him a few rounds longer,and Frazier would offer stiffer resistance.

 

Foreman was all wrong for Joe Frazier, even if Joe hadn't taken his foot off the gas wuth regards to his attitude to the sport I would still fancy Big George to KO him at some point, although the fight would obviously be more competative.

 

i agree, shows big Georges true character. even though i have heard that off camera he is a ***** ill leave that to speculation and ill base my judgement on what i DO know.

 

..... but that's one of the things that marks the difference between a good fighter and a great fighter. A great fighter might be scared but the fear manifests itself in a way so he just seems like a monster and a fighting machine. I believe Foreman when he says that the left hook whizzed past his head and he felt fear and wanted to just get it over with. Of course you cant see his fear, you just see his focus and aggression. That's because he's a great fighter.
This is what Cus D'amato used to talk about all the time.

Again, it's the same thing. Foreman's a great enough fighter to ADMIT his fear, but not be at all handicapped by it. He uses it to fuel his aggression and execute his fight plan. Freezing out of fear will only make what you fear happening become a reality, something that happened to Norton that fight, not Foreman.

 

My money would still go on Big George.