This has briefly been discussed recently. The 1973/74 Foreman would have a battle on his hands for the first three or four rounds,but he'd ko Jack before the sixth. George would have too much raw power.
I would think as the fight goes on things actually start looking better for Jack. If its even the first 4 then I doubt the tide turns for Foreman. If Foreman wins he dominates from the start.
If you think Foreman "destroys" Tyson, then why do you think Dempsey would give him a battle for 4 rounds? :huh
As much as I like Dempsey, this is the worst possible matchup for him in heavyweight history. I see him doing a little better than frazier simply because he was a quicker starter and he recovered amazingly from damage, and because he also has the power to trouble Foreman even drop him.... but sadly Foreman KO inside 6 is probably what we're lookin' at here.
I may have come out with a misleading comment about Tyson. George would have a fight on his hands with both Tyson AND Dempsey early on,but would knock them both out by the fifth,tops.
maybe i was just fishing for bites when i mentioned foster beating dempsey but i'm serious about big george knocking **** out of caveman jack.
Jack Dempsey would win due to the speed his svelt, fabulous ballerina legs allowed him to move in and out at. People who saw JACK DEMPSEY in his PRIME held him as the greatest EVER. Who ARE we to disAgree????????? He beat the GIGANTIC and subtly skilled Jess Willard who outweighed him by 60 pounDs!!!!! George Black Guy Foreman would be a piece of cake in comparison!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'd give Dempsey a chance here. You saw what he did to Willard. He waited for the perfect opening to attack. He didn't just plant himself in front of Willard the way that Tyson, Frazier or Marciano would have. Dempsey circled Willard, waiting for the perfect opening to attack. Based on the Willard fight, I think Jack would have dived in on Foreman at the right moment, rather than trying to steamroll him at the opening bell. I think Jack would have fought a smarter fight against Foreman than any of the other swarmers.
Not really a good comparison though, Willard was trying to box more with Jack. Foreman wouldn't fight like that.
I don't think that a 37 year old Jess Willard who hadn't fought in years, can be compared to a 26 year old Foreman who was coming off a fresh destruction over Joe Frazier. Furthermore, while Willard was a giant, he couldn't punch nearly as hard as Foreman. He was crude and unpolished after years of inactivity, yet on film, Jack is still getting cought by good shots on the inside... If that were Foreman, trading in close, Jack would have been hit by a force that he never even came close to tasting in his career, and at 185 lbs, I doubt his chin would hold up.. In addition, George could tie a man up on the inside, neutralizing his attack, and did so against several punchers throughout both his careers.. he also gave a nasty little gut check on the clinches that often took its toll. Lastly, his chin is very underrated.. He was stopped only once in 81 fights, and that had more to do with exhaustion than the ability to take a shot.. Dempsey was KO'd by Fred Fulton in one round, decked by the very crude Firpo and tagged a few times by Willard. None of these men were in Foreman's category... Jack is out of his league here, and it has nothing to do with **** like "legacy" or "testimonies" from men like Nat Fleischer.
