George Foreman 1990 vs Razor Ruddock 1990

I agree with you. It was frustrating being fan of Razor Ruddock, following his career because he had the physical ability and coordination at heavyweight to be a great fighter. He never learned how relax in the ring and set up his shots. He forced it all the time which would play into Foreman's hands.

 

The Bonecrusher fight is what the Foreman fight would look like, except there would probably be zero knockdowns on either side.

There's a lot of irony in your post. At 36, Bonecrusher was in his 8th year as a pro compared to 40 whatever years old for Foreman and thousands of punches to the head. Smith had another 2-3 decent years ahead of him.

Smith's run a couple years before Ruddock of beating Bey, Ferguson, Weaver and Witherspoon, and dropping a decision to Tyson, is better than any run of fights in Foreman's comeback. His only negative between that and the Ruddock fight was dropping a SD in Brazil to Rodriguez, but that was questionable and before Holyifeld pantsed Rodriguez.

Now, if you actually watched Ruddock beat the crap out of Smith, you'd notice jabs, sneaky right uppercuts, and quick, tricky footwork, all of which apparently didn't exist according to posters in this thread.

...posting this reminds me that Ruddock held his own in sparring with Holmes whereas Foreman was scared shitless of going near him.

 

It would look similar to Ruddock vs Smith with no knockdowns?

-Did Smith have as good of a jab as Foreman? No.
-Does Smith have defense comparable to Foreman? No.
-Did Smith go to the body as well as Foreman? No.
-Did Smith throw combinations as well as Foreman? No.
-Did Smith's ring IQ remotely compare to Foreman? No.
-Did Smith have power in both hands like Foreman? No.
-Did Smith have killer instinct to dispatch of opponents once he had them hurt like Foreman? No.
-Would Foreman be coming off 2 losses and a draw like Smith? No.
-Could Smith walk guys into shots, bait them, manipulate their guard, or cut off the ring like Foreman? No.
-Did Smith have deadly accuracy to target vulnerable spots like the liver, the tip of the nose, the temple like Foreman did in his ruthless execution of guys like Cooney, Rodrigues, or Qawi? No.

So why are you making this stupid comparison? The only similarities between Foreman and Smith were that they were both big, bald, heavy hitters. In terms of actual skill and ability they aren't remotely the same. This is some Choklab level of reaching and delusion.

 

Did Smith KO Adilson Rodrigues inside 2 rounds? No.

Rather, Smith chased Rodrigues around the ring without managing to make any kind of sustained impression, over 10 rounds, and deservedly lost by decision.

 

I can’t take you seriously....Smith had an NC in a fight he was kicking ass in over a headbutt, an “SD loss” in BRAZIL against Rodriguez, and a decision loss against a peak Tyson.

Smith was about as close to Old Foreman as you could get, or should I say Old Foreman was close to Smith since Smith is the guy who was posting results.

 

You're still on this comparison? It's funny how people double down and stick to their guns when backed into a corner instead of throwing in the towel.

-Did Smith have as good of a jab as Foreman? No.
-Does Smith have defense comparable to Foreman? No.
-Did Smith go to the body as well as Foreman? No.
-Did Smith throw combinations as well as Foreman? No.
-Did Smith's ring IQ remotely compare to Foreman? No.
-Did Smith have power in both hands like Foreman? No.
-Did Smith have killer instinct to dispatch of opponents once he had them hurt like Foreman? No.
-Would Foreman be coming off 2 losses and a draw like Smith? No.
-Could Smith walk guys into shots, bait them, manipulate their guard, or cut off the ring like Foreman? No.
-Did Smith have deadly accuracy to target vulnerable spots like the liver, the tip of the nose, the temple like Foreman did in his ruthless execution of guys like Cooney, Rodrigues, or Qawi? No.

If the answer is no to all these questions it was a bad comparison.

 

We’ll agree to disagree.

 

lol ruddock will win by ktfo foreman in the first 30 sec of the fight. EZ W for ruddock.

 

You disagree that Foreman had a better jab, better defense, better body punching, better accuracy, better finishing ability, etc than Smith...?

Oookay then.

 

He sure as hell wasn’t finishing Witherspoon and going 12 with Tyson.

 

No, he only knocked out Rodrigues in 2 while Smith lost a decision.

He knocked out an undefeated prime 2 belt champion. Smith knocked out an unmotivated Witherspoon who Smith himself admitted just showed up to get paid and didn't try.

Ruddock never knocked out a prime ranked fighter period, let alone a champion. He never knocked out ranked undefeated fighters. Foreman did both, multiple times.

To this day Foreman is the oldest HW champion. He schooled a prime Shannon Briggs when he was damn near 50. He fought way longer than Smith and didn't retire with double digit losses.

Ruddock never became a champion. He made a name for himself knocking out 3 old ass ex champions (2 of whom were coming off of losses). His record is no better than Cooney's.

He gets tons of mileage out of losing efforts against Tyson going 0-2 and now all of a sudden he's a h2h monster who should be favored over 80% of all heavyweights. This would be like if Maidana was favored over Duran because of his 2 losing efforts against Mayweather. I never understood this logic.

Ruddock USED to have a good jab then neglected it. He had leaky defense and a shaky chin. He lost everytime he stepped up. He couldn't beat Morrison who was just as worn out and 1 dimensional as he was. He was demolished by Lewis in just 2 rounds. He didn't go to the body enough and neglected his right hand. He telegraphed shots and wasn't particularly fast either. He had mediocre stamina.

But somehow he's a h2h monster because a rusty Tyson turned his brain off and brawled with him for entertaining scraps.

I repeat: he's the Cooney/cleveland Williams of the 90's getting tons of mileage out of fights he lost. A 1 dimensional, 1 armed slugger with leaky defense. Tons of heart and power, not much else

You are free to think whatever you wish of how this match up occurs, but these are objective and observable facts about Ruddock as a fighter and his lackluster career.

 

Never high on Briggs either...I do wonder if he could be beaten by Ruddock that easy. Briggs took some incredible shots from Lewis and took awhile to go down. And Lewis was a far better fighter.

I can see Shannon beating Briggs, just not sue on the obliteration.

All respect, Sangria.

 

Cracking up.

Right.

 

Smith was better than Foreman. He was younger, taller, college educated, well spoken, higher credit score, better husband, better father, would have been a helluva lot better HBO analyst, dressed better, a better neighbor,.
Bonecrusher just couldn't fight anywhere near as good.

 

Yea about that, a couple things you should know. #1 Tim threw that fight so he could get free from Don King. #2. Smith went the distance with Tyson holding for dear life out of fear. Think I'm wrong? Why do you think fans referred to him as BoneClutcher after that?