i think a 41yr old mccall could beat a 45yr old foreman

Has McCall learned to slip a thudding jab in his old age ?

 

I could see it.

 

Same.

Foreman had a lot of power even during his comeback, but as his career progressed he just couldn't pull the trigger, nor was he fast or hand or foot to catch most fighters.

Foreman's three opponents when he was 45 and upwards, after catching a overconfident Moorer who was trading punches with him were Savarese, Schulz and Grimsley.

None of them were iron chinned, nor was Morrison who he fought immediately before facing Moorer.

If he didn't stop any of those four at that time in his career he isn't stopping McCall.

 

I am in agreement also, McCall is one of those guys who no matter of how old he is is stubborn and hard to beat when he is pressed against the wall.. All George brings is power and it would be useless against Oliver, Its skill that wins it for Oliver, he knew how to slip jabs and land combinations and occasionally can look extrordinary.. George was never a great strategist.. Moorer just did a silly thing , he stood in front of a big man like that...

 

McCall by decision.

 

McCall had a great chin, and may show little effect if punched by Foreman seems to be a common point in this thread. You want to know who else had a great chin? George Foreman. I don't think that McCall would be capable of hurting Foreman either. This is a fight that would probably go the distance.

A 29 year old, reigning champion McCall almost lost to 45 year old Larry Holmes. A 30 year old, still reigning by the skin of his teeth champion McCall did lose to Frank Bruno. I'm not so sure a 30 year old McCall could defeat a 45 year old Foreman.

 

A 45 year old Holmes who also happened to be the finest heavyweight boxer in history imo. Hell even if I were McCall, I wouldn't feel shamed in losing to that legend.

 

By the way, does anybody happen to have this fight on tape. I have always wanted to see it and am pissed that nobody has put it on youtube. Surely it was televised...

 

And yet McCall did beat that Holmes, the very same Holmes who easily went through a prime Ray Mercer.

Bruno's performance against McCall was the finest of his career and he was still holding on for dear life the last few rounds, almost getting stopped like McCall did in the final round against Akiwande.

 

Foreman wins decision.

 

I happen to think that a 45 year old Foreman would lose against a 45 year old Holmes, but that is another fight and has nothing to do with the point I am making.

I don't think that Foreman or Holmes were close to being the best of the best when they were at the age of 45. Beating them may have been an accomplishment, but it should have been an almost certain accomplishment for the division's best. A 30 year old McCall was never the best in the division, he merely had a win over one of the division's best fighters. I think that a 30 year old McCall would have had his hands full with a 45 year old Foreman. Handicapping McCall 11 years gives him little chance for victory.

 

Holmes was 3 years older when he faced McCall. 45 year old Holmes may have been cheated against McCall. 42 year old Holmes would have defeated McCall with less dispute.

 

Agreed on both points here. Holmes would win a very easy ud over Foreman in both their primes, and at the age of 45. Both were not among the best at 45, but they were still forces to be reckoned with. They are entitled to full respect.

 

You're aware of how long Holmes would fight on for, right?