Is George Foreman the most overrated boxer in history?

He'd still be remembered as an absolute destroyer if he never came back.

 

it bothers me to see when people rank him higher than holmes, liston, and marciano!

 

He could hit...but..do you remember when he would have these lackluster fights on his way up...and the crowd would boo and jeer...then he beats a shopworn Frazier who had left everything he had in the ring with his fight with Ali in 1971...then beats Joe"King"Roman...then a blowout of Norton...then fights one of the dumbest fights and loses...by KO to a past his prime Ali in 1974...then fights what...5 guys in one night in that foolish exhibition?....loses to Jimmy Young...and gets floored in the process..retires and then comes back and beats the Immortal Micheal Moorer...yeah,...he's too high on some lists for me...

 

The only two people to beat any good version of the majority opinion greatest heavyweight of all time were sodomized by him in under four total rounds, combined, and he's the oldest champion ever. While I don't rate him in the top five...why should I have a big problem with it? :think I shouldn't, and don't. Simple. And counting his loss to Young? When he had a close fight with the guy, before needing medical intervention to save his life, soon afterward? Get the hell out of here. It neither needs counted against Foreman nor for Young. Tadow. :deal

 

My dad said to me that before the Foreman-Ali fight he thought Foreman was going to kill Ali in about 2 or 3 rounds - Ali was my dads idol really and he was genuinely worried the he was going to get badly hurt - says something for what Ali pulled of in surviving and beating him let alone Kayoing him - nobody has KO'd him before or since - I have to credit George Foreman for going up against tough guys again and again - think he went something like Chuvalo-Frazier-Norton-Ali-Frazier-Lyle in a row or close to that - thats some serious comp - althought to some extent I do think he gets overrated as all guys do who are big scary and intimidating and KO artists - its easy to think they are indestructible

 

My opinion on George has changed.
He certainly had his flaws and weaknesses, but he was an absolute beast.
His comeback was the greatest ever.
His win over Joe Frazier was so awesome it cannot be easily explained away.
He crushed Frazier and Norton when he was still something of a novice.
And he wasn't just a bully - he showed a warrior's heart.

Foreman has to be up there among the top 5 or 6.
In his absolute prime I'd make him some sort of a favourite over all other champions apart from Ali, Louis and Liston. Probably an even-money proposition against Holmes.

 

I've probably said the same thing myself at times. Holmes has the tools, the shrewdness and the grit to make Foreman pay. To slap him silly, make him look foolish, fool him and school him.

But on the other hand, Holmes had some fairly tough or very tough fights with big strong guys who really didn't possess the same strength, presence or intensity of a prime Foreman. (Examples being Norton, Weaver, 'spoon, Cooney).

So I'll sit on the fence today.

 

Where Foreman fits in in the big picture of alltime heavies is one thing, but to jump to the extreme of considering him the "most overrated boxer of history" is attempted modern day revisionism at it's worst.

 

I agree with that,cobra. George was awesome. In his prime,it took one all time great and one very good fighter to beat him.

 

Depends how highly you rate Norton,Frazier and Moorer,I suppose.Three very good,but not particularly great heavyweights with questionable chins.Beat them at their best,plus a couple of other solid wins - I'd say he did enough to be considered a top ten ATG heavyweight.

 

Absolutely:thumbsup

 

No george foreman is not the most overrated fighter of all time but old comeback george comes prety darn close.

In order to become a great fighter a champion must beat the best considered HW in the world. First time around george did this, he beat frazier when Frazier had beaten ali. so yes, regardless of losing to ALI foreman was a great fighter because he beat Frazier when Frazier was still regarded as the beat HW in the world.

second time around george did not establish this. moorer had a lineal claim but he was not the best fighter in the world in 1994. Foreman would have to have taken out lennox lewis, riddick bowe, evander holyfeild and maybe ollie mccall before he could be considered the best HW in the world - something george had no intrest in doing.

He was coming off a loss to a non great like tommy morrison when he got his shot at Moorer. before that old george got a shot at holyfeild for beating unrated terry anderson in london who was fresh off a KO loss to bobby crabtree, a guy old foreman already beat but not after tony tucker, james pritchard, renaldo snipes, fransesco damiani, james broad, quick tillis and anyone else who wanted a win before him!

Truth was aside from losing to holyfeild, morrison and getting beat up by alex stewart, Foreman was only beating journeymen like mike jameson, big foot martin, terry anderson. part time fighters and cruiserweights. george was not beating contenders. old george was not special.

 

No no no, it's Liston that smooth technical boxer-puncher that flattened the contenders of the late 50's and crushed Patterson twice that's the real stud. It was only until the sneaky trickery of Clay to wait for Liston to become an aged overnight alcoholic for him to ever look beatable.

All I know is Foreman would've done far better than Liston did against that Clay. Foreman had his own way about him. He cornered and tried to destroy. If you had mobility, stamina, and a good chin you could out-box him. Of course, stamina seemed to be George's biggest weakness. Tell me though, what Heavyweight would ever be able to come back 10 years after retiring to win the HW championship of the world at 45? Regardless of whether or not that champion was a chinny LHW. Moorer didn't buy the title, he did beat Holyfield.

 

whatever happened to DINAMITA?