Jack Dempsey vs George Foreman.

Oh I believe George would destroy but a handful of ATG with his best performance, but Zaire was not his night. It was his worst performance. He beat himself as bad as Ali beat him.

Foremans talent was such that he had no competative world class rounds to draw upon when he found resistance. He had never needed to pace himself before. George nearly gassed out in an earlier fight versus Luis Faustino Pires.

 

Of course Ali was not a spoiler per say but he was forced to use spoiling tactics to neutralize George didn't he?

This is where I disagree, I think that is too bold a statement. George showed amazing powers against Norton and Frazier but he had not yet faced a world class fighter who would approach the fight differently to either of Frazier or Norton. The fight showed George was not prepared for that. Regardless of what he was capable of (and yes, I agree he was capable of smashing anyone to pieces) presented with this his tactics got worse, George was frustrated, he fought bad.

The world had got carried away with George (and rightly so) and by the same token, forgotten Ali was still a great fighter just because it took him more rounds to beat the same guys.

Ali was terrific. Truth is, the established opinion on George was he was not as great as first thought and that lasted many many years.

world champions usually have more world class competative experience than Foreman had.

In your opinion.

Have you seen George fight Luis Faustino Pires in New York? Pires survived the same four round load but was stopped in his corner. A better fighter might not have taken so many direct hits and came out of that.

what about the Pires example? Wins over Frazier and Norton eclipsed what had came earlier.

George had not yet fought any world class clever boxers had he? Ali was the first one. Yes he smashed up Chuvalo, Frazier and Norton but these were the kind of guys who came straight at you. Look at Foremans opponent selection before this fight where was the kinds of boxers who might present this aspect? Terrell, Leotis Martin, Joe Bugner, Jerry Quarry?

I know this fight very well. Foreman made impact of course he did. His strength was evident of course but George wasn't satisfied with those connections that's why he became so frustrated. He stayed sharp when he was fighting Frazier and Norton the focus remained once he was landing clean. Ali rode the sting out of the really good ones George landed.

he took the ricochet crease of punches that if they landed clean would have knocked fighters out. Absolutely. Ali did take punishment for sure. But Foreman as he got desperate, used far less quality the more frustrated he got.

 

One point i feel is being overlooked is Ali got him so riled that any semblance of composure went out the window.

Throwing your sunday best at your opponent, then being told that you '' hit like a girl '' and all the while being stung with right hand leads screwed George completely.

Take all that out of the equation and maybe Foreman would have fought more conservably, who knows.

 

Foreman still should have known he would gass out unless he fought more conservatively but without more competative experience he had to learn this lesson the hard way.

Being champion and also "a work in progress" is the wrong time to be a work in progress.

 

Well the whole point of Foremans style was that there was supposed to never be any resistance.

It worked on Norton. It worked on Frazier. It had to have worked on Ali, who was 15 years into his career, so we thought.

 

It only just worked on Ron Lyle proving what foolhardy tactics they were. The signs were there against Luis Faustino Pires.

First time around George was always a work in progress.

And for many years later he was regarded as not being as good as first thought.

 

Again Foreman in his prime was a physical forse of nature. The man who faced Ali in 74 would have beaten most all but the very best past hwt champions. The great boxers having the best shot....Johnson, Tunney, Louis, Holmes, Lewis.

 

I think old George would do better than young George against Dempsey,because Old George had a fight plan.Young George Foreman threw puches until he knocked you out,or punched himself out.Ron Lyle,Jimmy Young and Gregario Peralta come to mind.

 

Lol.. still there people here who think that dempsey would win lol

 

I don't think the Tunney Dempsey II fight helps Dempsey's case at all for those of us trying to stress his point. Too many idiots actually think he was anywhere near prime for that fight. His footwork was slow, hands were slow, head movement decreased, all of Dempsey's strengths had diminished by half. A shell of his former self.

 

Out of the great come-forward destroyers I'd give Dempsey the best chance of an upset. His footwork, range and speed is going to help him both get off first and get out of the way. The danger Foreman presents need not be emphasized but George would be shocked at how much power the slender figure of Dempsey could generate.

If Jack turns in on and off at the right times he can win.

 

I remember David Frost interviewing fight broadcaster Don Dunphy.It was shortly after Foreman beat Frazier for the title.Frost asked Don how he rated Foreman,Dunphy said it was to early to tell.Frost then asked Dunphy for his top five.I think it was Joe Louis at #1.As he worked his way down the list,when it came to Dempsey,he said something like,well if we give a guy high marks, who stands over a fighter waiting for both knees to come off the mat,so he can hit him again,yeah Dempsey is an all time great. He wasn't disrespectful,he was just saying how things have changed.