George Foreman Versus Alexander Povetkin

AI spits out what it is fed, that is not credible. I doubt D'Amato ever used the word "swarmer." It is not a gym term. It is a message board term that came along long after D'Amato was dead.

 

Its a styles and size thing. Usyk style allows him to make up for his size but fighters like Foreman and Frazier were reliant on their size for their success so it would be harder for them to do well when they don't have a size advantage over their foe

 

Frazier wasn't reliant on his size wtf ? Foreman relied on his high tier power, jab, ring cutting, timing and strength, but he beat every large heavyweight available and beat Savarese as a old ass man

 

In the last week I heard Foreman never had any ability to cut off the ring and the term swarmer was invented on message boards.

 

Frazier struggled with ever larger fighter he fought while he ran through every smaller fighter but I'm sure that's just a coincidence.
Name any good large heavyweight Foreman beat.......

 

Losing to Foreman isn't a good example Foremans an all time great with more power than lennox lewis lol and he used framing tactics. Take it up with Holyfield who actually fought both prime Lewis and an old ass middle aged George

He didn't struggle with Mathis who was a skilled 240 pound contender, and if you disagree explain why Mathis doesn't posses good fundamentals and speed. He beat Bugner clearly while Bugner was always a solid. The Bonavena fight was more competitive than either of them and he was smaller than both of them. There weren't many super heavyweights in Foremans era that i agree with, most of the bigger guys couldn't compete with the top 10 though, so who's fault is that ?

 

Truth hurts doesn't it?

 

It's a false equivalence, anyone with a brain can see Mathis had world class ability on film and versatility on top of his size or will you refute this ? The 70s gets criticized for not having skilled big men but Mathis is one of them and Frazier beat him wide before stopping him.

Modern heavyweights carry much more fat than predecessing generations, but it didn't hinder Mathis's speed now did it ? He had faster hands than most of the guys today lololol. The example goes against your schedule which is why you're posting sardonic comments

 

So you admit Mathis is a good fighter and it's not relevant ? Wtf ? I'm gonna end this here, that is complete dishonesty and i expect better from you. His fat didn't hinder his speed at the end of the day and he had less fat that many modern day heavyweights like Ruiz, Fury and Miller, and Mathis has more ability than any of them bar Fury, you're just looking for an escape.

James Toney: 5'10, 233lb

Buster Mathis: 6'3, 245lb

That's a good mention though, Toney started at middleweight, was shorter than Joe Frazier, and all he had to do was put on a truckload of fat to compete at heavyweight and get a top 5 ranking, ergo these modern day heavyweights are overrated as ****. Have a good day