Monte Cox' article on George Foreman

BIG DEE HERE= Cox is absolutely correct about the Foreman vs Young fight
as Foreman showed up in San Juan the day before the fight. Foreman came from a gym that was a country club compared to the place he was going to fight and Young did his training in San Juan. The heat the night of the fight was brutal 85% humidity and 95 to 100 degrees. YES HIS ABILITY AS A BOXING HISTORIAN IS VERY IMPORTANT AS HE HAS SPENT HIS LIFE STUDYING AND VIEWING FIGHT FILMS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE ABSOLUTELY
NO WAY OF VIEWING. THE GREATEST FIGHT FILM COLLECTION OF THE
LATE JIMMY JACOBS AND THE LATE BILL CAYTON WHICH IS NOW OWNED BY
ESPN SPORTS. WE WILL NEVER SEE THESE FILMS BUT MONTE COX AND
MIKE HUNNICUT HAVE SEEN THEM. OVER AND OVER. TO SEE THE GREATNESS
OF THE OLD-TIMERS YOU HAVE TO WATCH THE FILMS NOT JUST A COUPLE
OF TIMES BUT A THOUSAND TIMES AS WE HAVE. I HAD A VERIABLE SPEED SUPER-8 MM PROJECTOR AS A KID GROWING UP WATCHING THEM TILL I WORE THE FILMS OUT.

 

............Caps off, please.

 

It's interesting that you and Janitor feel as though you never agree on anything, because I think of you both as guys I frequently agree with!

 

Gregorio Peralta was a skilled and durable boxer ,imo.

 

I would favor Lewis if he fought the Foreman of Zaire. A few other fighters I think would/could beat a prime Foreman as well. He's going a bit over the top with his Foreman love in that article, I think.

 

Great historical knowledge might be of use if it is used to enlighten us about relatively obscure fighters of the past, let's say someone like Young Corbett III or Melio Bettina. But this is about one of the best known fighters in history and I honestly didn't see that Cox provided any insights or perspective beyond that of an average poster on this board. His view that Foreman beats Holmes or Lewis are merely opinions, and frankly are stated without any analysis or insights to back them up.

 

I for one appreciate a historian like Monte Cox. He does not deserve an eggs and tomatoes treatment at all. Cox’s is one of the few historians who shells out his own money to pay for a web site, and video edit fights for you tube.

Whether you disagree with Monte Cox or not, boxing could use 100, people more like him. While I enjoyed this article, I don’t think it was one of Monte's best. I also think his conclusion that “ Lennox Lewis and Wladimir Klitschko, who were both knocked out in early rounds by lesser fighters, would fall in two rounds to Big George is a bit of a reach.

 

Let me start off by saying I have the greatest respect for Monte Cox, I've read all his articles and I value his opinion. However, I too have read this article several months ago, and I have the same conclusion as you. On this particular article he went a little over board on his praises of Foreman, and I personally think a fight between Foreman and Lewis could go either way, although I personally would pick Lewis. Nor was Foreman as well rounded as he may of been, in terms of boxing skills and dealing with movers.


Having said that, I very much look forward to reading more of his articles.

 

I appreciate Monte Cox and would probably be more inclined to agree that Foreman may well be a top 5 all-time HW.

The article is not one of his best -I think he wrote it quickly; and admittedely have a problem with any article that says Foreman or whoever would "destroy so and so inside of 3 rounds." It's lazy analysis.

 

Oh please.

Foreman was still physically fine; there was nothing wrong with him. I dont believe the Ali fight finished him at all, but it remains a rather convenient excuse for some when the cracks in George's armour started to appear, like against Lyle and Young. One loss and suddenly the man is all sixes and sevens? I don't think so.
His psyche surely couldn't be that weak, could it?

The problem is Foreman, a great puncher, would have trouble with the great boxers as punchers normally do.

 

Normally I also have a hard time with excuses like those, but in this case I think it might actually be something to it. Zaire was nothing but the ultimate confidence buster.

Here we have someone whose whole identity as a fighter, and probably to a large degree also as a man, is built on his destructive strength and power. And for almost the whole fight he has Ali exactly where he wants him, but still can't do anything about it. Instead his greatest asset is used as a weapon against him as he punches himself out. That could probably **** most men up.

 

Foreman, my No. 6 heavy, would have been greater had he had amateur seasoning. As it was, an expert boxer like Ali noticed his flaws and saw he could beat him.

Still, Big George was not merely an untechnical brute, although of course it was his legendary power that propelled him to the championship. But his lack of roundedness was there to be exploited, a sizeable hole in that impressive armor.