Old Foreman vs Jimmy Young

I watched Foreman vs Frazier 2 a few months ago and I thought Foreman looked as sharp as ever in that fight. Outside of the Lyle fight in which Foreman was a bit a rusty there's nothing to suggest in Foreman’s prior fights to Young that he was slipping.

 

When I say "I wouldn't have expected this opinion from you." it's not like that, lol. I said above that I thought the opinion that you and CT hold is just absurd, and so, I wouldn't have expected it from you.

Difficulty, yes. Young would provide most, if not all heavyweights difficulty had they matched with him. He's a hard guy to look good against, and he's one of my favorite heavyweights due to that fact.

But saying that they'd give him trouble is not equivalent to saying that they'd beat ANY VERSION of Foreman. You say that all of them would give him trouble, I agree. But, if you said that all of them would beat him, I wouldn't.

 

I think all the fighters I mentioned are capable of beating any version of Foreman yes and I don't see what's so absurd about it quite honestly.

Does that mean they would all necessarily go 4-0 ? of course not no. Because you can never predict a fight especially with someone of Foreman’s power who can turn a fight on its head with 1 punch.

But durable tricky defensive fighters like Young, Byrd, i think are capable of beating any version of Foreman yes.

And I certainly think Usyk, Holmes, would aswell.

If you disagree then tell me which fighter Foreman has beaten stylistically that leads you to believe confidently Foreman would beat all the fighters I mentioned above.

 

You interpret me corrrectly — I actually came across my previous post on the ‘Four Foremans’ while musing on Big George’s passing.

Some want to chop George up and put the pieces of his career into different boxes: George the Brute in his younger prime, George the Shattered (psychologically) after Ali and a couple iterations of his later ‘old George versions.’

I maintain that there’s basically two versions, young and old. Each had strengths and flaws, but they are distinct from each other in how he fought and what he had physically/mentally. Older George is more relaxed and calculating, younger George is a force of nature. I don’t think there’s a difference between the George who crushed Frazier/Norton and the one who lost to Ali/Young. Just ran into difficult styles for hiim (Ali beat him mentally and Young offset most of Foreman’s offense and fought the best fight of his career to pull the upset.)

I do think there’s a point late in Old George’s career over his last few fights where there was something gone wrong in his right shoulder and he couldn’t get across the right straight like he did against Moorer and, at times, Holyfield, but he’s still the same guy there imo, just a bit more handicapped.

 

George still gets outboxed but most likely to a decision unless he has a panel of judges who hate Young’s style ( which many did. )

 

"How does he beat a better version of Foreman? Just watch the version of him barely survive against a lesser version of Foreman!"

George took a 13 month break after the loss to Ali, I think it's pretty fair to make a distinction between the Foreman of before, and the Foreman after it. It wouldn't be something to talk about if there wasn't a genuine difference between George's ability and skills after his break, BUT WAIT, there was. I talked about it, Swag talked about it, and most people can see the difference between the man who crushed Frazier and Norton, and the one who struggled against Lyle and Young. Just because he beat solid guys after the change doesn't mean that there isn't a difference. I don't think that Foreman was at his best in Zaire, either, which I said before.

Then again, we'll have to agree to disagree.

You can never FULLY predict a fight, but if we're talking in fantasy head to heads, you can lower the variables. Both men are in top shape, both men have whatever they need to do their rounds, it's however amount of rounds, it's got this big of a ring, etc. etc. Thin chances of winning don't mean a lot to me, especially in fantasy matches.

I don't think that Byrd or Young were that durable, but rather that they could keep their heads cool in tough situations. Byrd was hurt against Ike (he was green there, though), Vitali, Wlad, Golota, and others, but he still was able to survive in tough bouts most of the time. The thing is, Foreman isn't like these guys, and if Byrd is having a tough time winning against someone like Golota, I don't doubt that George could beat him, too. Young was hurt against a lesser version of Foreman, Norton, Cooney (that fight should've been stopped before the cut), etc.

Usyk and Holmes both have tough times against George, and like I said in another thread, I wouldn't bet on Usyk to win very many matches against him- Holmes maybe has more luck due to his style and chin, but even then, it depends on which version of him you throw in the ring.

"If you disagree with me, tell me in this specific way." is not very effective when we're talking about two fighters at hand, it's not just about Foreman winning against movers (as he fought very few), it's also about the opponent's history against big time competition. When I look to these fighters, I think of all of their tough times against lesser fighters and punchers, and match that with how George has done against tough competition. You can see how a younger Foreman dealt with Peralta, and how he was able to corner men like Frazier or Norton, and some of his combinations on the ropes against Ali, add that with how whichever opponent fared against this type of pressure, and get a solid idea of just what might happen when the two get in the ring.

 

Jimmy takes it. George wouldn't risk the fight.

 

I was about to say that at that point Holmes wasn't ready for Foreman... but he pulled off that masterclass against Shavers in '78, and later that year looked fantastic against Norton. So, man, that would have been a fight.

 

I don't know why you keep saying "Young barely beat Foreman" or "Young barely survived vs Foreman" 2 judges scored it 116-112, 118-111. Young comprehensively outpointed Foreman with 1 scare along the way in which he recovered in the same round and finished the round stronger.

So your logic is Foreman going 20 rounds vs Light Heavyweight Peralta who never even weighed 200 pounds is evidence he'd deal with the likes of Young, Byrd, who were considerably better Heavyweights that's not making much sense to me.

Foreman did face some tough competition but the likes of Lyle, Norton, Frazier, were aggressive fighters and not remotely like any of the fighters I mentioned stylistically.

You said yourself Foreman doesn't really have a track record of beating tricky boxers so it's more an assumption on your part based on Foreman’s reputation of being a great fighter but that doesn't always mean anything.

If Young had never faced Foreman I doubt many would've picked Young to beat Foreman and that's the beauty of boxing styles make fights.

It doesn't matter if Foreman is greater than the likes of Young or etc stylistically they are still a major problem for him.

 

I scored it 115-112 for Young.

 

Because some of us think the fight … which Young absolutely won, there’s no question of that … was an aberration rather than a conclusive sign of who would have the edge if those individuals met multiple times.