George Foreman vs. Ray Mercer in 1995

The Mercer that gave Lewis hell, would give Foreman a great fight..However, Foreman had his best wins against pressure fighters WHO came forward like Mercer did.
It would be a tough fight for the old man, but I think he would be able to controll Mercer with his power jab, and time him with big uppercuts as he came closer. That was always Big Georges prime weapons..And in 95, although faded, he still had enough for a guy like Mercer.

 

But not in 1995, Axel was making him look bad at this piont.

 

At that point,Mercer was also drawing with Marion Wilson, who didn't have a winning record. Granted, Wilson's resume is filled with guys who went on to become world-class names and he would've had a better record if it were more padded, but he still wound up 12-41. That's not somebody Mercer should've been drawing with.

Mercer was tough and dangerous, but he wasn't much of a boxer at the world level when you really look at it. Morrison and Damiani were Ray's 2 best wins, and they were both come from behind knockouts. While I did think the Lewis fight could've gone either way and a rematch should've happened, Ray consistently got outboxed at higher levels outside of that fight.

Not that he needed to be Willie Pep in heavyweight form against that version of Foreman, of course. That's what makes this such an interesting matchup...I'd probably favor Foreman just because I'm not sure Ray had it in him not to trade over 12 rounds, and I'll take Big George in that firefight. Then again, I didn't think Tommy could pull it off either, so what do I know.

 

Mercer only fought once in 95, and that was his solid effort against Evander. He would follow that up with an even better performance against Lewis despite being in rough physical shape, than a less than stellar outing against Spoon. He was simply erratic.

Realistically, I think Foreman edges him in a decision most probably feel Mercer deserved. I just thought the Shavers post was a bit comical in that it seemed to imply Foreman would do a Frazier or Norton on him.

 

True, it was a solid effort against Holyfield. I was starting to see Lennox's name pop up though, and figured if we were going to go forward a year from the Holyfield fight, it made sense to look a year back, too.

I also don't see a destruction here...Foreman's destroying days were pretty much behind him at this point, and Mercer's toughness was certainly world class. I can't say either man winning would surprise me.

 

Then in late '97 George looks decent but loses by robbery to Briggs.

 

Theres a hell of a difference between Schultz and Mercer stylewise. Schultz ran around, darted in and threw a one-two then ran Again...Mercer came to war, behind a heavy jab and a big right, you basically cant find two more different fighters than these two...
If Schultz had come forward against George, like Mercer would, he would have creamed inside three rounds...Runners, and fast runners, never made George look good, but Guys WHO came forward was yummy for Big George...

 

Tommy Morrison was a come forward fighter too, everyone becomes a mover against a slug with cement shoes.

Moorer was an accident waiting to happen, Mercer isn't getting knocked out.

 

I think that's getting carried away.. In 81 professional fights, there have been only a handful of guys who have found a way to give him serious trouble, and even fewer who have actually beaten him. The one man you referenced happened to catch him in 1993, at age 44 and when he wasn't fighting as actively as he did earlier in his comeback, not to mention had already struck it rich. Is it everybody's opinion that Foreman was the same guy, completely unchanged over a 10 year period between 1987 to 1997? Because if it is, then I would be in the minority who disagrees. Addilson Rodriguez was arguably a better boxer in 1990, than was Morrison in 1993, and equally chiny. He danced around Foreman for two rounds, before finally getting laid out. The man's comeback style and approach wasn't built around speed. It was based on solid defense, throwing straiter punches, conserving energy, and working the body. It worked fine for him most of the time.. But after making his money, cutting his number of appearances down annually, and getting dangerously close to age 50, he was softened up enough for some lesser men to get to him, and even those "lesser men" weren't tomato cans.

 

We are talking about 1995 when he was holding the lineal title hostage, 2 years after the Morrison fight with him even older and looking bad against Shulz. Not the Foreman of the Rodrigues and Holyfield fights. In 91 he probably beats Mercer on points without controversy.

 

I am aware of the timing and circumstances of the discussion, but was referencing your concrete block comment. In either case, I posted my opinion a few years ago, when this thread was originally started and gave mercer a chance.

 

If you are aware of the timing and circumstances of the discussion you wouldn't be bringing up fights from 1990. Foreman being a bit more mobile 5 years prior to the hypothetical fight in question isn't any kind of retort to what I posted. Not sure why you think I was getting "carried away" if you also agree he was going downhill.

 

Because you said this: " Tommy Morrison was a come forward fighter too, everyone becomes a mover against a slug with cement shoes."


Figured you meant all across the board and whenever. And in the past you've picked lots of people to beat comeback Foreman for that same perceived reason. I believe a year ago we debated about how a 1991 Tyson would do against Foreman, and you referenced George's fights with Morrison '93', stewart 92', Schultz 95', etc, etc, etc.. And used those fights to say how Tyson would just casually bob and weave and Make Foreman miss every shot, while easily taking him apart.

and THAT folks is where my reasoning came from...:good

 

-Well, not literally "everyone", I think that should be obvious.

Ah, the real reason behind the post is revealed:

-And Tyson would do just that. Even at the start of his comeback, Foreman was still too slow and stationary for Iron Mike. And Foreman's performances against Stewart and Morrison are certainly relevant to that match up. Even Holyfield, who when aggressive and moving forward was able to batter a helpless Foreman with incredibly long combos. At one point like 20 straight punches in Round 7?

-Mercer is another story, his chances and the second tier guys increase much more dramatically as Foreman ages. If Morrison can outbox him by 93, Mercer probably could do it 95.

 

LOL.. I had no agenda by bringing that up.. I only used it as a reference point. But yes I think Mercer would have a chance at decisioning Foreman in 1995, but not so much in 1990. And no I don't think Foreman would have been an easy proposition for Mike Tyson in 1991.