George Foreman 1990 vs Razor Ruddock 1990

That covers everything nicely. The Moorer-Foreman fight has indeed been picked apart, and through such Foreman's plan becomes clearly delineated. Foreman didn't just get lucky, he knew he had to do what he rarely did and vary the velocity of his punches, to lure Moorer into a false sense of security and convince him to trade. Foreman's plan borrowed a bit from prime Holmes and Ali but hey...what works, works.

 

Stewart going close with Foreman has nothing to do with how Foreman and Ruddock would fare. This is boxing 101. Ruddock was a one trick pony and fought completely differently. Ruddock was limited
and extremely one dimensional and had next to nothing beside big power.

Razor doesn't have the wins on the board to be "far better" than that many people at all. Again, he's rated off two impressive brawls with Tyson much more so than any wins.

 

I can somewhat sympathize, because RR showed a level of heart and ability he never showed before or since. That Ruddock would have lasted longer with George...but let's not get crazy here. RR couldn't have taken many flush shots from George, and in 1990 GF was on the way up. Can't see George getting moved much, or even having to chase him much. Pow, lights out.

 

• 
  
  

  ---

  
  

  Click here to register a FREE forum account and REMOVE ADS

  
  
  

Many heavyweights from that era are rated on very little simply because the top fighters generally didn't fight each other.

Without the Holyfield trilogy Riddick Bowe might not crack the top 50, maybe not even the top 100.
Without the first Holyfield fight Moorer is probably not in the top 100 given how little else he has to brag about.

This isn't just an issue with Ruddock

Maybe Bowe was just a bad stylistic matchup for Holyfield and the Golota beatdowns are a better indication of his real abilities (or lack thereof). We can play that game with many guys from that era.

 

Totally agree George would get him.

 

Moore can be seen on camera, angry & denying that Foreman had a plan, that it was just a lucky shot.
That is absurd. It is said above Foreman announced his plan before the fight, & Atlas told him to stay away.
In fact, you can hear Atlas screaming at his fighter within about 10 seconds before he was iced " "Don't stand in front of him".

This kind of approach is why Ruddock would likely lose to Foreman too.

 

Ouch, JT, very ouch!

 

I was hoping you wouldn't take it personally mate. I try to be fair. Sometimes i'm right, sometimes i'm wrong lol

 

Well I do agree with half of your post. Ruddock is propped up by some Tyson fans but I think it's warranted. I thought he had some good speed for a big heavyweight who wound up his shots. He missed Tyson with the "smash" by inches in that first 5 seconds in their first bout that woke Mike up immediately. He also had great determination. I agree he lost some ring smarts and opted for the powerpuncher label. But he was extremely dangerous and a threat to anyone at that time.

Old Foreman mastered pacing himself and would probably catch Ruddock with big shots from time to time. I just can't see Foreman shaking off too many of Ruddock's bombs. Sandman's about to get me but I'd love to continue this tomorrow.

 

To each their own mate, it's all opinions.

 

Oops, sorry man, my post was all over the place. But you understood anyways. Thanks for the reply.

How do you think Ruddock in this time frame (1990-1991) does against the other 90's heavyweight hopefuls like Ray Mercer, Michael Moorer, Alex Stewart and even Frank Bruno?

 

I disagree that Ruddock was a "one trick pony", he was actually quite a formidable boxer before he fell in love with his power.

 

This is how I feel about Old Foreman compared to similar contemporaries (Rahman, McCall, and Smith)

Best win:
1. Rahman--4 points (Lewis, undisputed)
2. McCall--3 points (Lewis, young)
3. Foreman--2 points (Moorer, lineal)
4. Smith--1 point (Witherspoon)

Supporting top 3 wins:
1. Smith--4 points (Bruno, Weaver, Bey)
2. McCall--3 points (Holmes, Akinwande, Damiani)
3. Rahman--2 points (Sanders, Barret, Meehan or draw with Toney)
4. Foreman--1 point (Stewart, Savarese, Rodrigues of disputed win over Schultz)

Relevant loses:
1. Rahman--Subtract 4 (Maskaev x2, Tua, Holyfield, Lewis, Ruiz)
2. Smith--Subtract 3 (Holmes, Tubbs, Spoon, Frazier, Tyson, Rodrigues SD, Ruddock)
3. McCall--Subtract 2 (Douglas, Norris SD, Lewis, Tucker SD, Bruno)
4. Foreman--Subtract 1 (Holyfield, Briggs disputed, Morrison)

Totals:
McCall--4 points
Smith--2 points
Rahman--2 points
Foreman--2 points

 

I think Ruddock might actually have done pretty well against Moorer. If he caught him right, the fight might be over. He could have knocked Stewart silly imo. Foreman just made a big boo boo fighting Stewart because he blew his load early on.

Not sure on Bruno, but I think Mercer would knock the crap out of him.

 

The old Foreman couldn't knock out a glass-chinned alex Stewart I(It was a very close fight.) Ruddock was far better than
Stewart (A worse version Tyson destroyed Stewart in the first round.)