I see a 75-76 ron lyle giving joe louis a dangerous fight

I mean Bellew is 2-0 (2 KO) against David Haye, whose the same height as Foreman and probably hits just as hard. Haye is easily a top 10 heavyweight h2h.

This must be the greatest era in hw history. True monsters weve got in the rankings.

 

Hey, think of who we are talking about here!!!

 

I knew you'd come around! I had faith in you and you didn't let me down!

For my next post I'll explain why Charles Martin destroys Holmes and Bowe in the same night. I'm sure to convert more true believers!

 

Wladimir is a big puncher probably a harder puncher than anyone Foreman fought by a big margin. He probably also beats the smaller foreman. Foreman got dropped by Ali and Lyle yet you take issue with Joshua getting dropped by Klitschko that doesnt make much sense.

 

Foremans reputation is based on beating guys at 220 and below. How are wins over a 212 lb norton a 214 lb Frazier or a 220 lb Lyle relevant to todays division of comparative giants?

 

I dont see Usyk beating Joshua no but he could beat some hravies in the top 20 just not the best.

 

And do you base this kind of summary assessment all on size, or are there other attributes you might include?

 

but Usyk doesn't rely on size to beat his opponents, he boxes them. Foreman, at 6-3, 217 relied on size, he pushed and shoved, stood straight and threw relatively wide punches. Foreman and Usyk are similar in size but they are not similar in style. Usyk might beat a huge heavyweight or he might not but regardless he won't be fighting like a 70s George Foreman.

Usyk is another type that wasn't seen in the 70s, a tall (at least for the 70s), fast, southpaw. The only rated southpaws around then were Dunn and Mildenberger, neither of them had the combination of size, quickness, and amateur boxing pedigree of Usyk. No fighter in the 70s faced anything similar to Usyk and if Usyk wins over a huge heavyweight, it won't mean that the 6-3, 215 pound 70s heavyweights could do the same. Usyk is lucky he came along in this time period, in the 70s he probably wouldn't have been able to get fights or he would have been turned around to fight out of a right handed stance by his trainer.

 

Joshua is no doubt bigger and stronger than a young Foreman.
How is that even a question?

Joshua is jacked 250 lbs, young Foreman was like 225 lbs.
Now Foreman did have a big frame and if he had smart people around him and boxed today, he would be rock solid +240 lbs, no doubt.
But we can only use in this match ups versions that we saw in the ring, and it would definitely be interesting to see how would Foreman do with someone who was stronger, bigger and faster than him.

Takam is a 240 lbs strong mofo, and Joshua dwarfed him and manhandled him easily.

 

Yes Foreman is probably bigger and stronger natural, but that doesn't mean much when Foreman, like you said, didn't even push ups, and Joshua developed serious size and strength in the gym.

You can be stronger naturally than the other guy, but if you don't train and the other guy puts some serious numbers in the weight room, he's gonna be stronger than you.

Tyson was naturally bigger and stronger than Holyfield, but Holyfield was able to control him in the clinch after he put some muscles on him and became stronger.

Also Foreman was like 227 vs Norton and 220 vs Frazier, and Joshua was like in low 250s vs Takam and Klitschko. That's more like 20-25 lbs difference.

 

True.
The drawback of having too much muscle of course is the muscle needing oxygen, leading to the "Frank Bruno syndrome" in the later rounds.
If George fought today he´d come at 230-235lb I guess, obtaining some more pounds of functional muscle.

 

Heavyweight garbage taking over and pushing out everything else on General day in, day out? I never would have imagined!