Some early published reports credited Foreman's jab as the key punch in winning his Gold Medal, but he got away from it a bit when no longer having to be concerned with a three round limit.
Where it may have made a significant difference is in the amount of energy expended. I think if Foreman would have jabbed a lot more, he wouldn't have tired himself out as early as he did.
Saying that Foreman should have used the jab more is fine. Saying it might have made a difference is fine. But it's all fine only in retrospect. Foreman was sent out to jab, walk, corner Ali and then go to work on him with big punches. Ali's strategy means he doesn't have to worry about part 1. He did exactly what anyone would have thought he should be doing, certainly they thought so in the corner, certainly most people thought so at ringside.
I agree. But after 3 or 4 rounds it was obvious the strategy wasn't working. Ali beat him all the way, more or less. Truth is, I'm not sure anything would have made much difference. The gulf in handspeed was so pronounced, and Foreman was tired and open after just 3 rounds, he was always going to be outclassed. The "jab more" theory is just born out of the "he couldn't have done much worse" analysis. Having just reviewed the fight, I'm not sure it would have helped much at all.
Norton, Holmes, and Doug Jones neutralized Ali's jab. Even Bob Foster did... used the same approach. "Jab at the same time Ali jabs" they were told.....and they were pretty successful. Foreman made a big mistake by not jabbing Ali enough right under the heart..because the target was right there to be hit.