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

Walcott is a slick, clever boxer who seems more similar to Young than he does guys like Frazier and Norton. He is not going to come after Foreman aggressively and is capable of fighting backing up. I think he is a potentially difficult matchup. Foreman would do better with someone who stands in front of him than someone who presents him with angles and moves away from him (unless the person in question is bigger and stronger than him like Anthony Joshua who beats Foreman at his own game).

 

To be fair, there isn't much film of Buddy Baer or Abe Simon. The only film I'm aware of is their fights vs Louis. Imagine if the only film of Lyle was vs a prime time Joe Louis? Lyle may have ended up being thought of as some big klutz with two left feet.

 

Yeah but he climbed in and went back to work like the punch that hit him was imaginary. It's not like when Shavers hit Lyle with that left hook and the bell had to save him.

 

Ron Lyle is a bad ### mofo and he gives a good go of it but in the end Louis takes him out.

 

Foreman in his day was the bigger stronger man, thats not the case at all today. You think Foreman is going to enjoy suddenly being the weaker, smaller man in the ring?

 

On film they are leagues apart. Speaks of the relative quality difference between eras. Even a depleted post Kinshasa Ali would have a field day in the 1920s.

 

Joshua thus far in his career has not struggled with anyone as small as Foreman. On the other hand Foreman never faced a highly rated opponent that was 6'6 240. The only rated opponents over 220 Foreman beat were Moorer at 222 and Frazier at 224 but Frazier was past his best for the rematch and probably at a weight that was not well suited for him.

Many of the guys Foreman made his reputation against are no bigger than todays cruiserweights. Why do you think his power would translate against skilled big men?

 

You think a 1976/77 Ali beats Schmelling or Tunney because I don't see it.

 

I think he means effective punching power. You may be able to find some unranked heavyweights out there in a gym somewhere that far as one punch power is concerned, hit harder than Lyle, Lewis, Foreman etc. But because they sorely lack in other areas, they won't ever have the success of the above and will remain unknown. Sure, if you put this guy and a prime Lewis in front of a punching machine in a lab, his best right hand may indeed register more force than Lewis right hand. But in the real world of the boxing ring, for all practical purposes, Lewis is the harder puncher.

And I think that's what he's getting at in regards to Schmeling, Walcott and Lyle.

 

Old enough to see how overrated and overhyped the 70s are

 

Lyle probably beats Firpo H2H but the fact remains that in his own era he was beaten fairly easily by the elite guys he faced. Young beat him twice by a wide margin and Quarry didn't have any problem beating him either. His reputation seems to be based heavily on giving Foreman a tough fight much like Firpo's claim to fame is knocking Dempsey down. I also don't see the 70s having a big edge over other eras especially given that in actual fights they didn't do well.

Also, Louis looks good on film film doesn't help your case at all if your trying to argue Lyle would trouble Joe Louis.

 

I agree. That's my thought exactly. I think the 80s crop were just as good, at least if you're comparing fighters at their best. The 70s fighters did excel much more in consistency, though.