There is nothing to suggest Rodrigues was the 10th best heavyweight in the world. I thnk that ranking can be dismissed as a severe misjudgement on the part of people ranking heavyweights. Ruddock has very little in the way of impressive wins but aside from Moorer comeback Foreman accomplished very little himself.
I would argue that ranking was wildly off then. I don't think we have to blindly accept rankings if the evidence points to them being off. Derrick Jefferson was ranked in the top 10 by Ring Magazine, I don't buy that either
He was ranked because the Latin based org.had to have at least one of its own. Think of affirmative action. George picked the easiest ranked guy. No way he was going to fight someone as dangerous as Ruddock in 1990.
Foreman fought Rodrigues in 1990 at that time I would rank all the following guys over him Holyfield Tyson Witherspoon Tubbs Ruddock Williams Foreman Tucker Douglas Norris to name a few. There are probably others
No he ****ing wasn’t. Rodrigues was knocked out of the Ring rankings by Holyfield a year earlier. Or was he shoved back in the rankings because of how fantastically Ruddock knocked out Dokes?
Why? I can't see it being that clear-cut. At that point in time, Rodrigues had as much of a case (if not more so) for a place in the Top-10, as Witherspoon, Tubbs, Tucker, Williams and Norris. None of these guys was exactly setting the world alight in '89/'90. Spoon was actually was ranked higher than Rodrigues (Top-5), as was Williams, during that timeframe. But it's arguable as to whether either of them deserved to be. Tubbs and Tucker have little to no argument for being ranked higher than Rodrigues, in the first half of 1990. Nor does Norris. Like who?
Rodrigues got starched by one punch to Holyfield a year earlier and got his "ranking" by winning a disputed split decision against Bonecrusher Smith in his home town buffet of Brasil. Rodrigues absolutely sucked. Arum was known for getting canon fodder ranked (just like Don King was known to do) to get his house fighters placed in the rankings. That's his job as a promoter. This is one of those times as well as getting Axel Schulz ranked by the IBF. Ruddock took out Dokes in brutal fashion, a Dokes who went to war with Holyfield a year earlier and was considered the 3rd best heavyweight in the world at the time. Foreman fought no one even remotely close to that version of Michael Dokes!! The only reason Foreman fought Stewart was because Stewie already lost to Holyfield, Tyson and Moorer. Similar to his conquering of Pierre Coetzer, who got KO'd by Bowe and Bruno immediately before Foreman faced him. Again, there was no way George Foreman would face someone as dangerous as Razor Ruddock unless he was forced to, and even then he might drop a belt to avoid Ruddock if he were champion.
It's on boxrec. This content is protected So that's 2 ranked opponents Foreman KO'd. You were wrong and aren't man enough to admit it, but why should I be surprised? I repeat: Ruddock never KO'd any prime ranked fighters. His 3 best wins were all men over 30 (2 were 35) and 2 were coming off some bad losses. Even if you want to dispute Rodrigues' ranking, he still beat Moore. You can whine and kick and scream all you want, but Moore being an undefeated unified champion is a better individual win than anything Ruddock did in his whole career and that is not even debatable. If you do include Rodrigues as a ranked opponent then the idea Ruddock had a way better resume than Foreman is an incredibly stupid hill to die on. I notice you still haven't addressed the actual break down of how the fight would go stylistically. Why?
Was Shannon Briggs in the top ten? At 47 Foreman easily beat him despite the decision going to Shannon.
Very simple two hands better than one. Two strong powerful boxers. One had a great jab and knew how to set up his power. The other was Razor Ruddock. He would find a way to let Foreman nail him. Its inevitable.
Not sure about Briggs since he had already been exposed by Darroll Wilson a year and a half earlier. If he was ranked it was low because Briggs had beaten absolutely no one to get his shot at Foreman. I was never high on Briggs. All he really had was power. Ruddock absolutely obliterates a Shannon Briggs.
I know you're gonna just ignore my reply like the coward you are, but I'll address this anyway for the record. Rodrigues beat Smith in 1987. The Holyfield fight was 2 years later in 1989 and there were 9 fights in between these 2 bouts. Rodrigues was undefeated in all 9 of those fights including ok wins over Tillis and Evangelista. So your timeline makes no sense. Rodrigues was ranked #2 in the world by the WBC and #3 by the WBA when Holyfield beat him. He had exactly 1 fight after this (which he won), and then fought Foreman. So it isn't at all absurd for him to still be in the top 10 after just 1 loss less than 1 year after the Holyfield fight. Foreman fought Holyfield (who beat Dokes) in 1991 just 1 year after Ruddock had KO'd Dokes so the statement that Foreman didn't fight anyone remotely close to that version of Dokes is hilariously incorrect.
