George Foreman claims he trapped Moorer. Do you believe him?

:good exactly thats what i though he didnt go in there to get the **** beaten out of him.

he didnt trap him he just knew that a right hand was going to finish the fight if he could land it...he by no means planned it he didnt think he could land a right hand in the later rounds.he just foudn an opening and dropped it.

i personally feel george was saying that becuase he was totally outsmarted against ali. he wanted to look the smarter/wisr man that night and said oh i planned it.

 

Yup, I believe George. I've watched that fight several times and it's pretty obvious he made adjustments from previous fights specifically for this match against Moorer. Not just because Moorer was a southpaw, but it was pretty well known he didn't have the best chin.

As a TV commentator Foreman often said that during his comeback he'd mix up lighter shots with heavy both to conserve energy and as a strategy. "Just keep touching 'em, don't load up." You can see him doing that against Moorer, just reaching out and pawing with that jab both as a rangefinder and to fend off Moorer's jab.

A boxing writer (I think it was for SI) said he'd noticed a change in Foreman's disposition before and during the Moorer fight. Foreman ver. 2 had, up 'til then, been seen as a jovial fellow right up to the fight and had given up the evil scowling staredown. He was also a much smarter boxer. Against Moorer, Foreman looked inscrutable, resolute.

I believe he had a plan. It didn't look like it was going well, up 'til the KO. But he didn't seem to be floundering, as he had against Holyfield.

BTW, anybody notice how Moorer's story has changed over the years? On some occasions he's admitted that he was stunned earlier and doesn't remember much after that. During other interviews he's denied that and given no credence to Foreman's "plan," despite his own corner's warnings.

 

I believe it, and it makes perfect sense to me. In the seventies, the younger Foreman would have exterminated Moorer in one or two rounds, but the older version needed to be a bit foxier and be more patient. A friend of mine, who wasn't , in my opinion, too boxing savvy, said he though the fight was a fix, because that 10th round knockout shot didn't look too hard to him. He was used to those overly dramatic, unrealistic type blows usually seen in a Rocky movie, and he didn't realize that in real live boxing, some times a great knockout blow can look unspectacular, and even casual as it lands. Foreman was like a big, strong heavyweight version of Archie Moore that night against Moorer, and after he lulled MM to sleep, and had him convinced that the old man was nothing special, he dropped that knockout drop on him. Beautifully done, and Big George's ko masterpiece by the way.

 

**** yeah. No one who has watched that fight would say it was a simple case of he got beaten up for 9 rounds then got lucky.

Foreman was landing that right like Lionel Richie ALL NIGHT LONG! He had the guard up, he was putting the jab out there, the left hooks to the body. Not only that but Moorer was in front of him, moving into his right hand, trying to take advantage of the old man.

Atlas told him it all in the corner but Moorer would never listen. Stop moving into his right hand Atlas told him, Moorer spent most of the fight going into it. I think there were one, maybe two rounds where Moorer stopped going into the right.

Look at the ko, it isn't one punch. Foreman lands a right hand, adjusts it and then boom. Its not like he just through another right hand and hoped, Moorer had been slowed down and was there to be hit.

The only reason he took ten rounds is because Foreman was old, slow and a shadow of his former self. But Foremans strength and power even at 50% of what it was is still THAT good! Just like Holmes jab. These guys had things that were SO good that even when old and diminished, they are still ringing bells. Yes Foreman and Holmes had to get smarter i.e. pacing themself but they got old.

Foreman isn't going to beat Moorer on youth i.e. scoring, winning rounds with quick fire combos, making him miss etc This isn't the amateurs though, this is the pros and by that stage Foreman was smart enough to know we got 12 rounds in front of us. He said it to Lampley, something like at some point in the fight he'll be in front of me just long enough for me to put him to sleep.

Moorer is lucky legendary nights came out because he got a chance to make some believe the punch was lucky.

I think it might be a little like Serge v Briggs. Briggs is way behind but right hands are landing all night, by the time the ko comes, it isn't luck that put him away, its 11 rounds of work.

 

Yeah, I agree with the general sentiment of this post. Big George definitely set this man up. He got him complacent late in the fight, and just nailed him with the perfect powershot straight down the middle.

However, I do disagree with the comment regarding the seventies incarnation having his way with Moorer more easily. I'm one of the few here that will say that Foreman II was an improvement over the younger, greener version. The George of the nineties at least exhibited a semblance of ring savvy; he was postured more defensively, was more well-paced, and had a sense of strategy.

 

Totally agree. Foreman sparks Moorer inside a round, two when Moorer has a good night.

 

I don't think he planned it myself, I think he dreamed it might turn out that way maybe.







Laughing at the suggestion that Moorer beats peak Foreman.

 

Nah, I don't see it like that at all.

I'd hate to turn up the controversy in a pretty one-sided thread so far, but, to me personally, the younger George Foreman was unimpressive to say the least; far, far from great. He was a monstruous slugger, oh yeah, no doubt. But if you take more than a cursory look at his fights, it's obvious he was pretty much clueless in the ring. His two best performances came when Frazier and Norton basically put their faces into the line of fire.

For a comparative analysis, watch him miss against the likes of Miguel Paez and Faustino Pires, and then later hit his target repeatedly in fights with Gerry Cooney and Bert Cooper. The Paez bout happened not two fights before his annihilation of Smokin' Joe and yet he was missing like an amatuer.

 

What the hell is there to doubt? He planned to knock Moorer, a smaller southpaw, the **** out with a straight right, the best weapon available against a southpaw, especially when you are George Foreman.

The way George planned it, was for it to happen as soon as ****ing possible, the man is not stupid or a masochist, so why on Earth would getting the **** beat out of him for 8 rounds or so be part of any plan or trapping?

He did exactly what he wanted, but he didn't under any circumstances do it as soon as he would have liked to.

 

Uh, yeah. I don't disagree with you.