George Foreman vs John C Heenan

“Football players know how to grapple. That's literally their job. Your post doesn't make any sense. They have to outmaneuver, out muscle, frame, shove, and pin each other. The technique is different from pure Orthodox wrestling, but it's heavily grapple oriented.”

Fair, it is technically grappling, but it is a very limited and primitive form of grappling compared to almost any grappling martial art in history, similar to how some boxing clinches can technically be considered grappling exchanges. Knowing how to frame, shove and use your strength is the bare minimum of grappling knowledge in any martial art, and if you grappled with someone experienced while only using this limited style of grappling you will get cooked by a white belt. Just becausr you're effective at this very limited form of grappling doesn't mean you can use it against someone who actually knows how to grapple. A football player can't hang with any grappler while relying solely on that style of grappling.

‘Tell me which big men Foreman's size Heenan "destroyed"...? Heenan's record is ass. Bringing up a video of some smaller wrestler beating a larger man is irrelevant unless you can show me some evidence of him doing the same? What evidence do you have that he was a great wrestler? What's his wrestling record? Word of mouth statements and hearsay are not enough for me to favor a boxer whose record was 0-2-1 over an ATG.'

Heenan's record is incomplete like all fighters from that era. Multiple first hand testimonies from Heenan's fight with top 2 fighter at the time Tom King are not hearsay, and they show how highly regarded Heenan’s wrestling was, in a sport that was known to have wrestlers who were unskilled hand-to-hand fighters abuse their wrestling skills to win. While King was not very close to Foreman in weight, he is still almost certainly above him in terms of grappling class considering he was able to thrive against fighters like that.

Sure, we don't have examples of Heenan outgrappling fighters of Foreman's weight, but with his highly regarded (albeit pretty unproven) strength and obviously superior grappling ability I think we have enough proof to make an educated guess on how the fight plays out. The only way I can see your case is if Heenan never learned how to lift and throw someone as big as George, but seeing how easily he ragdolled 180 pound King in their fight while out of shape it's not hard to think his grappling can hold up to someone the size of Foreman. Pretty much any decently skilled grappler can outgrapple a novice with 20-30 pounds on them, and that's coming from experience. I'm a pretty trash grappler and it's pretty easy to control some of bigger, unexperienced dudes that I come in contact with.

'And I repeat, unless he can get past the jab and uppercuts he is getting brutally knocked out attempting to just shoot in and go for takedowns.'

I don't understand why you're implying Heenan has to get past Foreman's jab when nothing in the rules really stop him from not engaging at all and waiting for George to overextend and find himself in a clinch. It's also important to mention that Heenan's boxing ability was regarded highly by the public at the time. As we both know it's hard to gauge how much that matters, however it implies that he must've had some knowledge on how to close distance when his opponent makes a mistake. And Foreman is eventually going to make that mistake, whether that takes minutes or hours. This always happens in grappler v boxer matchups.

'Foreman never let anyone get in the inside and out grapple him in 40+ fights and is widely regarded as possibly the strongest boxer who ever lived.'

Foreman has also never fought someone of grappling class even remotely close to any bare knuckle fighter from 1860s and even any decent grappler prior. The fact that he displays his strength effectively in limited boxing clinches and knew how to frame and shove in Football won't change that.

 

Have you played football at all? I'm not saying it's as technically sound as grecco Roman wrestling or anything, but it's extremely difficult to take down big athletic guys covered in mud when they're running away from or slamming into you. Just relying on sheer brute strength is going to guarantee you'll fail unless you're tackling someone way smaller and weaker. It absolutely requires finesse and some technique to get good at the art of football grappling.

Foreman's usual bag of tricks worked on basically everyone except for Ali, so to dismiss that is extremely short sighted. I repeat, nobody ever managed to out grapple Foreman whether he was young or old. Hell, Holyfield (whose a pretty strong guy himself and good at clinching) admitted a fat old Foreman was the strongest guy he ever fought and conceded he gave up trying to work him in the clinches. That's pretty remarkable considering Holyfield fought in an era of skilled big men on PEDS weighing 230+.

Regarding Heenan's supposed grappling mastery, I cannot stress enough that it's sheer lunacy to favor a guy over an ATG without some sort of noteworthy win against other skilled fighters whether they're boxers or wrestlers. Anyone can be a beast in the gym sparring or hitting the heavy bag. Unless Heenan has beaten some noteworthy wrestlers in no holds barred matches, I really could care less how much people praised his wrestling skills. Especially because these amazing skills apparently didn't translate to actual wins in the boxing/wrestling ring.

Foreman won't be overextending himself. Go watch round 1 of his fights with Frazier, Norton, or Lyle. He takes ring center and then slowly stalks and inches his towards them. He doesn't waste energy or throw shots when out of range. His footwork, balance, and sense of range are all world class. He wasn't throwing haphazard jabs without some sort of plan or making sure he was close enough for them to land. If Heenan is going to have the audacity to just stand there letting Foreman come to him, Foreman will cut the ring off and then hammer him with body shots.

So hopefully you can answer these questions. Otherwise, I see no reason whatsoever to give Heenan a chance:

-Is there anything written on Heenan's defense? Wrestling or no wrestling, if you try to just shoot in on an elite striker with zero defense, you run a big risk of getting caught by a brutal KO punch.

-Is there any information on any notable wrestlers Heenan defeated in a wrestling match? Sparring partners at least? It's not my problem if his record is incomplete. Big claims require big evidence.

-Are there any notable wrestling coaches or historians who can vouch for his wrestling skills?

-Did he ever defeat a man larger than himself, preferably one who wasn't a bum with no credible wins?

 

Again, these limited football grappling techniques that are affective against other football players become obsolete when you meet someone that actually knows what they're doing. That's why football players who think they can grapple because of those limited abilities get cooked when they play tough guy and challenge small wrestlers. The same thing would happen here.

All due respect, I think it's short sighted of you to think it's relevant to this matchup that Foreman was able to outgrapple every boxer he's ever faced, considering both he and his opponent were limited by those rules. It's not really relevant as to how Foreman deals with a grappler under the much looser LPR rules either. Foreman's best bet in this match, as the vastly inferior and less experienced grappler, is to avoid grappling altogether.
In fact, I think you nailed what Foreman best potential weapon is in this fight; the jab. Use it to set Heenan with up power shots early on before he can even start wrestling and throwing, which will drain Foreman eventually seeing as grappling is a much different time of endurance than boxing.

Foreman isn't an ATG here, he's a London Prize Ring novice that only has hands, strength and a very limited style of grappling. Knowing the history of pure boxers challenging people with multiple martial arts, nothing about this suggests it would go any differently. Even pure wrestlers usually beat the tar out of pure boxers. Many boxers picture landing that punch while a wrestler before being taken down, but in the vast majority of cases the wrestler is just too smart and too quick.
Heenan had impressive performances before losing againsJohn Morrissey and Tom King, both elite bare knuckle fighters at the time who were around 180 lbs each, while Heenan was out of shape for both matches. In the Morrissey fight, he's described as being a clever boxer and was the master of the fight from long range until his conditioning got to him. In the King fight, his wrestling was what got him ahead early on.

Round 3: Heenan again plunged in, King meeting him heavily as he came, but he grappled Tom, and again brought Mm down with shattering force across the lower rope, which was pressed to the ground. Luckily the ground was not hard.

Round 8: Heenan looked vexed as he came up; he had plainly made up his mind to recover his wrestling superiority, and tried for an opening. King was with him, and met him left and right; then, getting away again, planted on him with tremendous effect as he came in, catching his man well in the middle of the head; and now and then, in each of the rounds, giving a home hit on the body. Heenan at last got in, squeezed his man savagely, and again threw him a shattering fall.

Round 14: Heenan feinted with his left, and threw in a smasher on the head with his right. King stuck to him, but after some stinging exchanges, in which he had the best, he was thrown, one of the most tremendous cross-buttocks ever seen, and so stunned and shaken was King, that but for the tact and presence of mind of Jerry Noon, it is doubtful if he could have come to time.


While I agree that Foreman is much better technically than many people here seem to believe, let's not act like George isn't prone to overcommitting to punches at times, or getting off balance when he fully commits to going on the offensive as well. Even in the fights you listed he was prone to doing that when he got excited. He can get wild.
And the difference between Heenan and the names you've listed is that Foreman probably wouldn't fight Heenan like he did against them, because it's not a good idea to just keep a grappler at range for a long time because that gives them more time to close that distance. Heenan literally has as much time as he needs. He can go down on a knee if he feels like he's in trouble at any time. The pressure is on George to finish Heenan before he can start wrestling with him, and if Heenan's blocking and striking is as good as the John Morrissey fight descriptions suggests then it won't be easy to just clock him as he comes in for a takedown.

-Is there anything written on Heenan's defense?

Yes, actually there is quite a bit on his blocking against John Morrissey in 1858. Morrissey was more of a wrestler than a boxer though, so I'm not sure just how skilled he'd be in blocking Big George's shots.

-Is there any information on any notable wrestlers Heenan defeated in a wrestling match? Sparring partners at least?

Do we really need any? Heenan doesn't need to be a great wrestler to be able to outgrapple Foreman. He was regarded as having effective wrestling skills by his contemporaries in fights, in a sport that was notorious for wrestlers without boxing skill using their wrestling skills to win. Not to mention his opponents had genuine wrestling backgrounds like Morrissey, and Tom King was also a top 2 fighter in the world at the time. I have also seen a contemporary like Grantley Berkele spar with Heenan at the time and say that he was a "powerful wrestler".

-Are there any notable wrestling coaches or historians who can vouch for his wrestling skills?

Can't think of any in particular, but I do know every eye witness account, and historical account, of his widely publicized bout with Tom King said he was winning primarily due to his wrestling. Odds are he wasn't a wrestler on the level of Sam Hurst or Mike McCoole, but we do know he knew enough about wrestling to employ it effectively against arguably the best fighter in the world at the time, who no doubt knew how to grapple himself and fought experienced grapplers before the Heenan fight.

 

So let me get this straight:

-Heenan never defeated any notable boxers, he had a terrible record of 0-2-1.
-Heenan has no notable wins over any competent wrestlers, either.
-The best example you can cite of him having good defense on record is a fight he lost.
-There are zero wrestling coaches who can vouch for his skills.
-He hasn't beaten anyone Foreman's size.
-There isn't any footage of him for us to judge his timing, reflexes, accuracy, technique, etc.

Why should I favor him to beat Foreman? He is smaller, weaker, less experienced, less durable, and has worse technique than Foreman. His best assets (wrestling and stamina) are only supported through hearsay/limited records and he sorely lacks in credible wins over other wrestlers to prove his wrestling skills. Those are pretty dubious routes to victory over any world class fighter, let alone a guy whose often a consensus top 10 ATG. A boxer who does have plenty of footage, who did beat notable fighters, who does have coaches vouching for him, who does have some grappling ability we can measure and observe, who has an excellent fight record, and who completely surpasses Heenan in nearly every athletic stat (power, speed, size, chin, technique, etc) other than stamina and wrestling skill (and even those claims are dubious at best).

I'm not buying what you're selling.

 

Multiple first hand testimonies from an event is saying the same thing is not hearsay though, it is history. That would be like calling the testimonies of historical events hearsay when in reality those multiple different accounts say the same thing. Heenan was seen as an effective wrestler in the King fight and was described as so by pretty much every account I’ve seen from the fight. It’s not like Tom King couldn’t wrestle, he fought solid grapplers like Mace and was arguably the best fighter in the world at the time. You can’t thrive in a field where wrestlers exploit the rules to win by being a pure striker.
It also important to establish that despite losing, his performances in those fights he lost before his poor shape got to him (which eye witness accounts also suggest) are the main reason he was so highly regarded at the time. That’s primarily how he was able to be apart of the biggest fight of the London Prize Ring era in Heenan-Sayers. Heenan was kicking the **** out of King and Morrissey before he gassed, and other accounts prior to the Sayers fight indicate he was a powerful wrestler. It’s more than enough for me to favour him against a pure striker with very limited grappling who has never fought under those rules.

We also can’t even fully establish if Heenan was that much worse technically or was physically weaker because he just hasn’t proved his strength and technique like George has. All we know is that Herman’s physical strength was very highly regarded at the time by pretty much anyone who witnessed him, but it’s still unproven from what I know of. Still though, can we just ignore his strength being widely acclaimed?
His punching technique was praised against Morrissey before fatigue from poor conditioning set in:

“Heenan fought in such a masterly manner that doubts were entertained about Morrissey's being able to stand such hitting long.”

The Morrissey fight is technically Herman’s first fight, so it’s fair to say he must’ve had some experience beforehand to be able to perform this well. We just don’t know how big the experience and skill gap is within striking. The one with more grappling experience is obvious.

Again, I just don’t think Foreman is not a world class fighter in this scenario, he is a very limited striker with minor grappling skills who is not used to fighting fighters who are experienced under this ruleset. Picking Heenan to beat him isn’t even a testament as to how highly I regard Heenan, or to how lowly I view George. Its a testament as to how lowly I regard boxers competing outside of their rules without knowledge of other martial arts. Foreman is outgunned.

 

I'm not buying what you're selling. You have failed to provide any sort of credible wins over skilled big men and/or competent wrestlers. Without that, there is zero logical reason to favor Heenan over Foreman even if grappling is allowed. He is shorter, lighter, weaker, less skilled overall, has no footage, and has a terrible record. Sorry, not sorry.

 

To each’s own. I personally don’t think Heenan really needs any of those accolades to beat a grappling, overall LPR novice like George. He displayed his grappling skills against a top 2 fighter in King who has fought and beaten other efficient grapplers.

Also, like I said, we have zero proof that Heenan is physically weaker than George, or less skilled than George from a striking perspective. It’s reasonable to assume George is batter striker, but bare knuckle boxing striking is entirely different to boxing and what we know of Heenan suggests he had highly regarded when it comes to striking technique from the era. If reading about that era teaches anything, it’s not to trust official records. Heenan battered the American champion in his “debut”.

 

But he lost the fight with King so I'm not sure how much mileage you can get from that match to claim his good of a wrestler he was. It's also a bit of a circular reasoning since you would then need to establish the credentials of King himself to make Heenan look good.

As for bare knuckle, sure, maybe if the rules are both bare knuckle AND free style wrestling Heenan has a chance since Foreman is out of his element. However, Heenan's record still sucks, he has no footage, he's still the smaller man, and he still lacks wins against notable wrestlers or big men. Thus I'd still give Foreman a very good chance of pulling something off. Foreman was also a monster fighting in the streets of the 5th Ward with his bare hands in case you forgot or didn't know, so I wouldn't be so sure Heenan has an easy path to victory just because Foreman spent more time boxing than street fighting.

 

He lost the fight with King due to being out of shape though, which is something that multiple eye witnesses agree on. The King fight is the only recorded fight that describes Heenan outgrappling people near his own weight, so why shouldn’t it be used as an example to prove Heenan’s grappling abilities? Just because he lost due to being out of shape doesn’t take away from the fact that he was practically dominated King within grappling standards beforehand by every source. Since King has fought and beaten people with effective grappling abilities, why wouldn’t he be relevant in proving Heenan’s own wrestling abilities considering he was mandhanlded by him?

 

I didn't say you can't use the fight. I said using a fight where he loses isn't a very convincing argument and doesn't hold much weight to me. Saying Heenan lost because he was out of shape is a convenient excuse and doesn't change the fact he has a terrible record and has no wins against big men or notable wrestlers.

If you have stamina problems, the last place on Earth you want to be is in the ring with George Foreman.

 

I don’t see it as a convenient excuse when it was an accepted fact by those who watched the fight. Heenan still did dominate those fights before his body gave out, and it’s also important to consider that engaging in grappling exchanges with other experienced grapplers affects your cardio in a radically different way than fighting a pure striker would. Even an unconditioned Heenan lasted 11 rounds with Morrissey, and 24 with King. It does seem like Heenan’s conditioning in his fight with Sayers was solid, though Sayers was like 150 lbs so it’s hard to tell how much he really challenged Heenan’s conditioning. Still though, chasing a lighter faster man for 2 hours doesnt exactly paint a pour picture of his cardio.

 

Wait, so this guy gassed out while wrestling a 150 pound man? And you want to match him with George Foreman...?

 

….how did you come to that conclusion while reading my message? Lol

The King and Morrissey fights were the fights where Heenan came in out of shape, the Sayers fight was what I used as an example of Heenan’s instances of good conditioning. The fight with Sayers lasted two hours and 47 minutes and Heenan was constantly on the chase against the smaller and faster man in a ruleset that was infamously exploitable by a smaller man, and was beating him in most of their exchanges, especially within grappling which Sayers wanted nothing to do with. He was being ragdolled and pretty much every round ended with Sayers being thrown. On top of that, Heenan held his own within the striking exchanges and not just because he was a bigger man:

The feature of the American's play at this stage, aside from the accuracy and force of his blows, was his remarkable footwork. Sayers. though so much the lighter man, was not more nimble and sure In rushing, sidestepping and drawing away, than the big fellow Heennn carried himself on his lithe limbs with catlike balance and precision.

Just read about Mitchell-Sullivan 2 in 1888 to see what I mean about smaller fighters exploiting the London Prize Ring ruleset, Sayers was allowed to just run around and slip to the ground whenever he felt he was in danger.

“Sayers, laughing, released his own hold and slid to the ground.”

When did I say Heenan had conditioning issues in that match? A description of both men’s shape after the fight:

“Heenan showed what condition he was in by leaping the ropes and running most of the way to the railroad station. Aside from his eyes he was still in good shape. Sayers was weak but might have continued for many rounds.”

 

Foreman wins, because he's a full time professional athlete from a large talent pool with 20-30 pounds and a lot of boxing technical development on Heenan. And he's on film.

That said, the counterarguments against Heenan's wrestling don't seem great. The point is that Heenan fought in a type of boxing where techniques called side-falls, backfalls, cross-buttock throws, back-heels, and several varieties of chancery holds (including one that's basically a standing guillotine choke) were part of the standard stuff you trained as a boxer.

Foreman going up against Heenan without those techniques is at least as bad as Heenan (probably) going up against Foreman without a modern left hook. It's a missing part of the armory.

The stuff about needing Heenan to have wrestling coaches attest to his grappling sort of misses the point. Boxers back then were a type of grappler. They had their own specialized form of grappling. Just like the modern Thais have their version of the clinch. Heenan was apparently good at that specialized form of grappling. Foreman hasn't seen it before. Imagine going up against a Thai clinch for the first time. That's what you're dealing with.

Leave aside boxers vs elite wrestlers. Do we have evidence of heavyweight boxers being able to outgrapple anybody who knows how to throw them? Jeremy Williams threw Lennox Lewis in sparring when he got frustrated. Renowned mall ninja Steve Jennum threw a decent -- and very large -- journeyman puncher who was wearing modern MMA gloves in an early UFC. (The throw he used was basically a cross-buttock.) Some random Toronto 5 guy tackled Foreman to the ground on film. Where are the wrestling coaches who attest that Foreman could deal with throws?

...That said, I think Foreman is likely so much better as a striker that none of this changes the outcome. Foreman probably knocks Heenan out. And his stamina is likely better, too.

 

Good to see you back!

With regards to striking, I just find it hard to know how much better George was. Heenan did appear to be a good striker for his era, often times being described as “masterful” and “cat-like”. Donovan and Edwards do appear to throw decent left hooks in the footage we have of them as old men too. Much more than the bizarre arm-swings Corbett would throw.

I also have my doubts that George’s cardio was better than Heenan’s considering he often went hours and ended the fight with Sayers in good condition. Sure, fighting 150 pound Sayers isn’t really comparable with how he’d fight 220 pound Foreman, but chasing a smaller faster man for nearly 3 hours couldn’t paint a bad light on his cardio. We’ve also never seen George’s cardio deal with grappling which is a whole new level of exhaustion.