how would George Foreman go against today's heavies?

Oh wait but none of those guys are from the "golden age" of the seventies so I guess you guys are right, no one since then could even last a minute with chuck wepner let alone Ali, Frazier, Lyle, Bonavena, Shavers, Quarry. Well I guess from this day foreward there will never be anyone who could beat a heavy from the sixties and seventies so the heavyweight division should just not exist anymore cause from here on in it's just gonna get worse and worse

 

jeez what crawled up your ass and died??

 

what have you said this entire thread that justifies Foreman dogwalking any ****in heavy out there right now like you claim. And yea you are one of the one's who won't give any dude there props cause of prejudice thoughts

 

Learn how to speak coherently and someone might read your posts, but from what I can understand from this mess it's not really worth the effort.

 

Are you taking the ****?

The two versions of Schulz faced by Foreman and WALDO were very different. One was pretty much at his peak, the other was cashing out.

 

Let's be completely honest here: if the fights hadn't actually happened, how many people today would get laughed off the board for saying Old George would need a robbery to defeat any version of Axel Schulz and would get outboxed by Tommy Morrison?

I'm not even sure Farmboxer would've went that far.

 

His footwork is completely underrated. His ability to corner off the ring was uncanny for a big slugger his size. His footwork and footspeed were superior to predecessors like Liston. Ali knew he would get tired dancing and moving and was surprised by how effective George cut off the ring so he averted to the rope a dope. It wasn't like he planned it. So much is wrong with your post.

 

The problem with young George was his ring intelligence (or, perhaps more accurately, the ability to alter his fighting to the circumstances and still win), and I'll use the Ali fight as my example as well- once he cut the ring off on Ali and Ali countered with the rope-a-dope, George never adjusted to that move and continued fighting the only fight that would've allowed Ali to win that one. We all know how that turned out.

It's no shame to get out-thought vs Ali, but the important key I take out of that is that it didn't take a genius to adjust to that particular tactic- but instead of taking the fight plan to another tactical level, George was content to continue fighting on Ali's terms, and then complain afterwards about loose ropes. Well, George, maybe you should've thought about that and adjusted at the time.

Now, George's Plan A was good enough (and still would be) to leave alot of good fighters waking up to arena spotlights in their eyes, but I find that a telling sign for a fighter who had Olympic experience and as many fights as George did at that time (even though only a handful were against good opposition). It's that ring maturity/intelligence factor that would lead me to pick both Klitschkos over a young Foreman, though I wouldn't argue against someone who believed that a young George's plan A would still be good enough to win.

 

..............It was not wlads chin that did not hold up against peter ...it was the back of his head....!

 

Tommy Morrison was a very good boxer, quick hands and good power, and there's no shame for a guy in his mid-40's to get beat by him. Axel is good enough to hang with an old George having a bad guy. Nobody should be surprised by a Foreman of that age having trouble with good fighters. The miracle is that he was still in there fighting them at all.

 

Nothing to be ashamed about from either of those events from the real world of boxing, I just find the fan psychology about fantasy matchups interesting and used that as an example. People get so fired up and iron clad in their opinions when the reality of boxing is that unexpected **** like that happens fairly routinely. Yet, when people call for it ahead of time, they're typically bashed for it despite none of it ever being able to be proven.

A couple more examples: look at the things PacDbest would say on here about Pac's future (both fights and outcomes) and the common reaction to it. The guy wound up being more right than anyone about it, but was basically treated like one of the laughing stocks of the board at the time.

Also, take a guy like Tommy Hearns- had the fights not actually happened, I firmly believe nobody would've pegged Iran Barkley to go 2-0 against him and if there were fantasy fights about it, he'd win handily.

I'm not trying to make any deep observations or anything earth-shattering about it, just a little food for thought I find interesting.:thumbsup

 

pointless thread imo anyone who knows anything about boxing will agree that forman would embaris the hevyweights of today