MAX BAER IN PLACE OF FOREMAN?

You might not me a million miles wrong here.

The stylistic angle couldn't be more against Frazier to be honest.

Swarmers like Frazier, are tailor made for sluggers like Baer.

Swarmers lose to sluggers precisely because their style does not lend itself to imposing upon a slugger.

Frazier is going to have to walk through Baer's heavy artillery, just to get into a position to land his own shots.

Whether Baer chooses to push Frazier back, or fight backing up, Frazier is going to have to keep moving forward into the killing zone.

While this strategy can be very successful against boxers, and even boxer punchers, it tends not to work against volume punchers who can work at longer range.

Sometimes it can be instructive to combine two fighters resumes, and rank their common opposition.

Now I will grant you that Frazier occupies the #1 spot on this list, but I submit that Schmeling would then be the obvious choice for the #2 spot.

After that you would not see much between their opposition.

 

Baer spends too much time moving back in straight lines and only puts up resistance sporadically. And when he decides to unload his delivery takes half an hour to get his fist to the destination. All this space in his output and transparency is going to let Frazier ship a ton of damage.

Again, a Chuvalo like result. Baer's face meets the threshing machine that is Frazier.

 

This content is protected

Manuel Ramos was a little bigger than Baer, moved better, better fundamentals, was a hard hitter, he lasted two rounds against 1968 Frazier. Baer might make two with the less motivated Frazier of 1973.

 

None of this works to Frazier's advantage on any level.

When two big punchers feet, all of the cards lie with the man who can fight on the back foot.

Much as the idea seems to offend you, Max has a great shot at winning this.

 

Please tell me that you are not comparing Max Baer to Manuel Ramos!!!!

I fear that you have a lot to learn.

 

Since you don't seem to absorb the finer points of this rather cut and dry discussion, I will illustrate in a more remedial manner.

What it took to beat Frazier... Ali, Foreman

What it took to beat Baer... Earnie Schaff, 183 pound Tommy Loughran, Willie Davies, Uzcudun, Hapless Jim Braddock, Tommy Farr, Lou Nova

Hint: One of these groups is not like the other.

 

Then you must find the list of people who beat Wladamir Klitschko, much more damning than the list of people who beat Rocky Marciano.

 

Clumsy deflection.

But if we're going to play ball, I can find a ten year stretch where Wlad excelled st the top level of the division. The same sort of stretch, or anything close to it, seems to be missing in Rocky's resume.

 

A deliberately clumsy deflection, of another clumsy deflection.

This is about what happens if Max Baer fights Joe Frazier!

 

Joe Frazier was no Tony Feunte. Feunte was a little bigger than Frazier, moved better, better fundamentals, took a punch, he lasted 1 with Baer....maybe Frazier will make it 2 if he is at his best.

 

Spoiler Alert:
Max gets KTFO.

Joe Frazier continues to be the least respected and acknowledged heavy on this board. He has the greatest victory in the history of the division but is a footnote among this braintrust.

 

Least respected and acknowledged heavyweight on this board.

I would say that Baer also has a claim to that title.

Admittedly Baer probably brought it upon himself.

 

Frazier was almost impossible to put down. Foreman needed to bounce him off the canvas seven or so times before the referee waved it off. Even if Baer managed to drop Frazier I have huge doubts he could keep him there. Baer's finishing abilities were, like the rest of his style, sloppy. I'd put a number of guys that Frazier actually fought above him in those categories including Quarry and even Ali himself.

Sprinting speed does not equal hand speed or even foot speed in a boxing sense. It can have some correlation, but there's not a direct causal link.

To a degree they're related. An athletic fighter is going to be able to pick up techniques more quickly and effectively than a non athletic fighter, and at any rate their natural sense of rhythm, balance, and hand eye coordination will be superior. While an athletic fighter can get away with being unorthodox, you never mistake them for sloppy since the things they're doing are almost always things that no one else around them can do.

Just to clarify, I don't consider Baer to be flat footed like someone like Tua, but his footspeed was not especially impressive any way you slice it. You could easily mock up a couple of clips of Joseph Parker doing similar things and would you consider him to have historically fast feet?

Again, not super impressive. You could pick a dozen other HWs of the past few years with comparable speed and explosiveness.

If it's what you observe it's worth mentioning. Fighters in Baer's day were not especially impressive, either technically or physically. In fact, aside from Louis, Charles and Walcott who else was really worth mentioning?

It certainly is.

When you're straight backed, wailing away like a clockwork toy, that's robotic. It's not the only instance of Baer fighting like that either. What was his excuse for the other fights?

If those are your criteria then fine. Personally I wouldn't have him anywhere the best bodypunchers of all time. Certainly not ahead of fighters like Holyfield, Marciano and Frazier himself.

Possibly. He was a lot more crafty than Foreman, though that's not saying much. Ultimately though, he should not have allowed a fighter like that to take him the distance, no matter how badly injured. Braddock was not an excellent technician, he was an average one, and he had the same sort of chin any 190lber would have.

Foreman has a win over Norton. He wins.

It's easy to look good against a poor opponent. Baer's ability to do that against a fighter of Frazier's calibre is still a very big matter of debate.

Except that it's not. When did Foreman let Frazier walk him back to the ropes then yank him around? He was almost exclusively stalking Frazier from the off using medium pushes and deflections to stop Frazier getting up close. His was a method to keep distance, Baer's was a method to trick a fighter into being thrown into the ropes. Different applications.

 

Frazier didn't lose to sluggers. He lost to Foreman and for very specific reasons. Baer didn't have the stylistic capabilities to emulate what Foreman achieved, nor the physical ones to overcome the tremendous pressure Frazier would bring to bear on him (pardon the pun).

About the most I can see for him would be a knockdown if he happens to catch Frazier early. After that Frazier goes to work on him and batters him into submission. Nothing on video of either man leads me to think differently.

 

If the man can box and pivot. That isn't Baer. Sooner or later he'll have to engage with Frazier and that's when the fun begins.