Is George Foreman the most overrated boxer in history?

Let's try these scenarios then:

Ali's career with no Frazier or Foreman: He comes back after the exile, easily takes the title from Ellis, beats all comers before losing the title to Norton and then regaining it. Stays on as a champ for another 5 years before losing it to Spinks and reegaining it. You know the rest. He would have been champ for about 10 years all in all and a 4 time champion, with only two losses before retiring the first time. His record would almost be identical to Louis's. Not bad.

Frazier's career witn no Ali or Foreman: Well, as far as we know he would retire undefeated and be in the same bracket as Marciano. He's the real winner in this scenario.

Foreman's career with no Ali or Frazier: Harder to say. Maybe he takes the title from Quarry (maybe) and looses it to Young (maybe). It's really hard to predict. He could have been a dominant champ, or he could have never become champ at all.

 

Liston took a dive, and there's a **** load of fighters among those 30 that would not stand a chance even in today's HW division.

 

Oh, man that's weak. He beat everyone there was to beat during 20 years, what more do you want?

I'm sure you're a Tyson nut, or something like that. Aren't you? Your favourite is some "great" modern HW, who would "wipe the floor with Ali and his opposition" and who only lost to journeymen like Douglas/Moorer/McCall-Rahman because of "lack of focus, bad luck etc".

 

Liston may have taken a dive in the second fight, but the first fight was definately on the level and he got his ass kicked. No excuses. As for the rest of the lot that he beat, Ken Norton, Earnie Shavers, Jimmy Ellis, Jerry Quarry, Ron Lyle, Jimmy Young, Floyd Patterson, Earnie Terrell, Oscar Bonavena, George Chuvalo, Buster Mathis, Joe Bugner, Zora Folley and Cleveland Williams were all quality conentenders and he beat most of them in fairly impressive fashion.

 

Okay, so the man who later defeated Muhammad Ali, Jimmy Young, Jerry Quarry and avenged the loss to Luis Garcia was not better? Oh yeah, I forgot, everyone who fought between 1900-2003 was a journeyman, right?

 

To compete in the heavyweight era from 1970-1980 you had to be a bad mofo.

Boxing was still a prime-time sport and some of the most famous fights were then.

Take your greatest heavies from all the eras and George would place somewhere in the Top 10.

 

Fair enough and I agree with that. My point (albeit a bit exaggerated) was that they get overrated to a degree because of the Ali-Frazier-Foreman triangle.

I have no favorite heavyweight, and I don't think there's any single one I'd call the greatest of all times because styles make fights. It's impossible to say how a modern HW does against Ali simply because you can only fight people within your era.

 

I think Foreman is a tad over rated. Not top 5. Top 10 though.

 

Tyson takes the cake.........:shock:

MR.BILL

 

I think this thread is basically closed. Foreman was not overrated, and contrary to the thread title he certainly is not the MOST overrated of all time. If anything he has become underrated through time and distortion of facts. He is often described on these forums as a plodding oaf who has no skill, no stamina, and no real boxing ability. While the man is definately not the heavyweight version of Sugar Ray Robinson, he posseses tremendous skill in other areas, such understanding the value of working the body, tying a man up on the inside, and using both hands when launching an all out attack on a wounded prey. He also has a servicable chin and in his comeback, developed an almost inpenetrable defense.. Lastly, he is among the hardest punchers of all time, and depending on who you talk to, may very well be THEE hardest of the bunch.

Foreman should also be recognized not only for what he did in the ring, but also his social impact on society. Prior to about 1990, people looked at 40 as the gateway to old age - A time in life where tremendous things could no longer be acheived, unless one was running for president. Foreman's example changed the way we thought about middle and old age. Make no mistake about it, part if the reason why we have so many 30 and 40 something year old athletes in virtually every sport today and over the past few years, is due largely to George Foreman leading the path. People all over began changing careers late in life, having baby's later, going back to law school, etc.

Frankly, I've never heard very many people comment on that aspect of Foreman's career and his contribution to society, and personally I think they should. its another reminder to me of how UNDERRATED the man really is.............

 

Spot on.

Foreman gets more criticism than praise around here, IMO.

 

He didn't change at all vs fighters who pressured him hard. he stayed absolutely the same at the beginning (Garcia), the middle (Foreman) and near the end (Shavers, Cooney). His chin or recuperative abilities didn't improve either. He got a gift decision vs Young, and outboxing Quarry, especially 1975 Quarry, was no feat at all. Garcia was a mediocre short-lived contender (he wasn't even ranked, at least at heavyweight, when he whipped Norton's ass).

 

You make a lot of great points.