If George Foreman had to fight against every heavyweight Champion before him how would he fare?

Jimmy Young wasn't exactly a tower of might when he dropped Foreman, either. Nor was Ali known as a monster puncher.

And then there's Lyle, who was big and strong by 70s standards, but not huge compared to Louis.

 

Ali and Young dropped him when he was completely exhausted, so they don't count.

 

Then there goes Billy Conn hurting Louis, at minimum.

 

I'm sure Lyle's arms were tired during his later knockdowns of Foreman. He would also have been suffering from the aftereffects of multiple concussions that Foreman had inflicted on him. So we'll count Lyle's punches as powder-puff, weak punches that nevertheless put Foreman on the canvas.

Two can play at this game.

 

That doesn't make you physically stronger.

So they don't count because you say so? They certainly weren't more powerful than Louis.

 

If that's the standard, the counterargument is easy.

Johnson handled Willard in the clinch. Willard was taller and larger framed than Foreman. Therefore, by the reasoning above, Willard was stronger than Foreman. So Johnson must have been stronger than Foreman, too.

 

You are right, Willard was taller and bigger, but he wasn't exactly very muscular, was he ?

 

Come on man, now you're exaggerating. Foreman was completely exhausted, you know this yourself. Everyone on this forum knows it.
In Lyle's case, he wasn't. Sure, Foreman's blows clearly affected him, he was hurt. But he still had gas in the tank and could punch.

 

So you are adding apparent muscularity as another indicator that somebody's stronger, then?

Wouldn't it be simpler just to look at how easily people moved their opponents around in the ring?

 

Both Lyle and Foreman looked quite tired by the end of their brawl. As most people would be trading knockdowns like that over multiple rounds against another brawler.

 

Also, of course I'm being unreasonable. I was responding to the claim -- which I also find unreasonable -- that getting knocked down / out by two non-punchers doesn't count. You didn't qualify that statement at all. It's just meaningless to your durability if someone (who is also tired, btw) puts you away like that? I find that view a stretch.

 

Foreman beats all of them except for Louis and Liston (50-50)

Foreman would destroy any sub 200lber with his strength and power alone. He’s the most powerful fighter in boxing history.

Foreman showed against Frazier and Norton he can demolish prime ATGs early and easily.

Foreman also had an underrated jab, and he was excellent at cutting off the ring. He could wing those haymakers from all angles.

somebody said ingo? He would run out of that ring faster than he did vs boogeyman Ed sanders in the Olympic

 

I gotta go with the majority here....

Ali, sure
Maybe Joe
Maybe Sonny
And that's it folks

 

Prime Foreman probably loses to Ali (67 version) even if he employs a smarter gameplan
Somewhat Evenly Matched with Liston, Louis, Dempsey, (ruleset matters for the latter)
I give Schmelling, a 20% chance.
Marciano, Johnson, Baer, Jeffries and Walcott a slight punchers chance (like 5-10%(ruleset matters here too)
100% Crushes everyone else.

So yeah, probably Ali, and maybe Liston, Louis, and Dempsey,

 

Ezzard Charles and Joey Maxim wete borderline, but Tiger Jack Fox was clearly in this category, despite never winning the title. Proving definitively that the Light Heavyweights of early on Louis's reign were better than those that came after.