Foreman vs Walcott

There were guys in the 50s with those kind of physiques like Nino Valdez and Bob Baker but they all got their a55 handed to them by Archie Moore.

 

The most comparable fighters to Foreman are Louis and Simon and to a lesser extent Marciano (not that much but similarities with their workrate, taking shots to land, power) and he lost to them all. Louis was way past his prime by the time he faced Walcott and still when focused ripped through Jersey. Interesting pre-Ali Foreman was compared with Louis allot

Theres a reason Hoff isnt mentioned in the same breath as Foreman, its because Hoff was a journeyman Foreman is an ATG. Foreman used his height and would hit and target

Foreman doesn't have the boxing skills of Walcott, but he doesn't have the boxing skills of Sugar Ray Robinson and he decapitates him too

Workrate, power, strength, height and reach are massively favouring Foreman. Foreman would throw 90-100shots a round at times and any 1 of those could KO Walcott. I also think Foreman's accuracy, athleticism, punch speed are a little underrated.

 

Here is the problem.

The only people who beat Walcott anwhere close to his prime either:

Stopped him late eg Louis Marciano (not a good scenario for Foreman)

or

Outpointed him eg Louis Layne (not a good scenario for Foreman)

The only ray of hope for Foreman is the second Marciano fight where it is hard to say whether Walcott was close to his prime or exactly what went on.

So a lot of problems for Foreman there.

 

How can you argue this? Norton never beat a puncher and was basically out from the first leaping hook that Foreman landed. In contrast to that, Walcott has beaten many big hitters.

 

Umm no. the most comparable are Louis and Lee Q Murray(ray arcel called the best puncher of the era besides louis). Simon fought a last minute sub starving walcott and still got badly outboxed for 6 rounds.

he beat murray, and should have got the decision against louis in the worst decision of all time since lewis-holyfield I.

But on the flipside, the most comparable fighter foreman fought to walcott was Young and Ali. Foreman got badly outboxed in one fight to lose unanimous decision, and got knocked out in the other fight.

I wouldnt say way past his prime. though he was past his prime, I thought Louis still had alot of handspeed, his combinations were still great, he had alot of power, and he filled in nicely to a 213lb frame. Besides, didnt foreman lose to a past his prime 33 year old muhammad Ali? I would also argue the combination in which louis knocked out walcott with was a combination foreman was incapable of throwing.


you say when focused...so your telling me louis spent 23 rounds of getting his ass kicked vs walcott, only to finally decide " i am now going to focuse" and knock him out?

Hoff was undefeated European champ, hardly a journeyman. Like I said, no one is mentioning him in the same breath, all I am saying is this fight showed walcott can be very capable vs a man of foremans height and reach.

Disagree. I also feel your underating walcotts power. I feel one of walcotts sneaky counterpunches landing flush on a defensless foreman can put him right on the seat of his pants.

 

It's one thing to knock Joe Louis down or Rocky Marciano off his feet or starch Ezzard Charles. It's another thing all together to try to knock Foreman off his feet - and Foreman didn't have the best balance in the world! There's no way Walcott is hurting Foreman.

Walcott's power is overrated. Ali was a lot bigger and owned a much higher KO percentage and it was an accumulation of punches and really more tireness that got to George. Holyfield caught Foreman flush with titanic shots. Frazier caught Foreman a few times, too. If shots like that don't affect a man, Walcott's well-below 50 percent KO percentage aren't going to do anything.

 

Jimmy Young knocked down Foreman. What was his knockout percentage?

 

Without hesitation, I would rank Foreman above Walcott on an all-time heavyweight list. However, in this particular head-to-head match-up, prime against prime, I think Jersey Joe would win on points. Walcott had a style, and skills, that would not be good for Big George...in my opinion.

 

Joe Walcott was 6 ft same as Earnie Shavers (who Ko'd a prime Norton in 1...Marciano and Charles would hit too hard for Norton....James Toney is 5"9 and stopped Holyfield...I really dont see size being so big a factor and I met Walcott..he was a beast, big hands, neck ,shoulders, head...scary like Joe Frazier

 

This is Foreman vs Boone Kirkman (on the night he fought 5 opponents)...Kirkman was a trial horse as you can see but George did not look good...I think George was a great puncher but I see a lot of oppenings for a master like Walcott and JJ could hit a lot harder than Ali or Young...I am a fan of Foremans power but a fight vs Walcott would be the wrong match up IMO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqFsks6cbSI

 

so the argument is to take george's worst performance against walcott's best. yeah that makes a lot of sense. as soon as 1973 foreman lands that right uppercut walcott will be seeing stars. he won't last longer than frazier or norton. ali was in another class to walcott as his record proves!