George Foreman , overrated ?

Being the man who beat the man doesnt make you the best espeially when you havent earned a title shot and havent faced the divisions best. What did Moorer do to deserve a title shot? He didnt beat anyone ranked in the top 10 prior to fighting Holyfield.

 

At age 46 Holyfield fought Valuev and in the eyes of most people deserved the decision. This is similar to the Moorer situation but if Holyfield had officially won I wouldnt see it as hugely affecting his legacy.

 

Dude, NONE of this nitpicking nonsense you bring up matters. If moore fought ymca level guys and then beat holyfield to win the belt, all that matters is that he won the belt over the legitimate champion.

You discredit literally every foreman opponent and expect us to take u seriously. You said Frazier...FRAZIER...wasnt an atg in your eyes.

As for other champions who had more title defenses, how many of those guys had ti defend their belt againdt a fighter as good as Muhammad Ali?

Bowe? Again, like jimmy young and shavers, Bowe had a good win over an atg and then the rest of his resume is mediocre. Actually, outside of two wins over holyfield bowes resume is arguably worse. Herbie hide and tony tubbs arent even comparable to young beating lyle, foreman, etc. And young fought everybody, bowe cherry picked.

 

Just ignore him he is around 15

 

Bowe does have a thin resume but the same is true for Foreman with only five wins over ranked opponents. Frazier is the only one I could see a reasonable argument for being an ATG. As far as saying that Foreman should get a pass for only two title defenses because he had to beat Ali I could make the same argument for other guys. Without Louis Schmelling could have regained the title, without Jeffries Fitzsimmons could have reigned longer, without Holyfield Bowe could have reigned longer, without Lewis Tua could have been champion etc.

 

If someone was ranking Foreman behind Willard and Burns that would be underrating him but I dont see anyone doing that. Rating him around 14 seems fair.

 

Those are terrible examples.

Schmeling got his ass kicked by baer and was already on the decline before louis showed up.

Bowe never bothered to fight any credible opponents, he was aftet the money. If holyfield wasnt there ged have to deal with lewis, mercer, tyson, rahman, etc.

Tua was never champ and was owned by ike and byrd.

Foreman beat 2/3 of the best fighters of his era. None of these fighters have that kind of record against their best competition and none had to defend against a guy as good as ali.

 

You´d recognize you migt put anybody exept Ali, Louis and maybe Holmes outside the top ten for one good reason, finding 7 better boxers than number 11?

Not worth talking the topic, because this isn´t underrating/overrating anybody.

 

He beat the typical trialhorses, gatekeepers that many of them fought. Alex Stewart, Bert Cooper. You keep bringing up Alex Schulz well Moorer came back after Foreman and beat him for the IBF belt and even defended it successfully a couple of times. Moorer was not a great heavyweight but he was a legit champion who was pretty far from the talentless bum you describe.

 

Foreman out of a top 10 hw is totally unreasonable

 

Michael moorer did beat evander holyfield and hurt him, tyson for example never could do the same thing even with an older worse version of evander

 

Evander was horrible in that fight with Moorer. The Holyfield from the Tyson fights would have destroyed the Holyfield from Moorer 1.

 

He pretty much proved that in the Moorer rematch.