Overlooked Reasons Why Muhammad Ali Beat George Foreman

Ali was 32, which is hardly an old man. He was in excellent shape, coming off an excellent win against Frazier, and was probably in his second peak.

Also, you crucified Liston for his losses to Ali when he was 34 at the youngest. Can we dismiss his losses to Ali on the basis of him being an old man? Or is that to objective for you?

While I agree, Frazier was past his best, he was still the undisputed champion, 29, undefeated, a top 10 ATG, and coming off quite possibly the greatest win in heavyweight history. Foreman absolutely smashed him. Undoubtedly one of, if not the best win in heavyweight history.

Yes, his confidence shattered after his loss to Ali, and his mental health was in shambles, and he hadn't fought in nearly a year and a half, and he was very rusty. Instead of taking on, instead of dipping his toes in the water before getting in, he just straight up jumped right back in the deep end. He should've fought a couple lesser fighters to get his confidence back, but wanted to reestablish himself, so he went looking for the most dangerous fighter he could find, and that seemed to be Lyle coming off a brutal victory over Shavers.

He'd also fought at a more measured pace, which was unnatural and all wrong for him, and caused him to struggle a lot more than he should've. Even so, he showed tremendous heart, getting off the canvas twice, and coming back to KO Lyle.

Not to different than what transpired in Zaire, Foreman had given himself literally less than 24 hours to acclimatize to the environment in Puerto Rico and trying to fight a style that was all wrong for him. Even so he nearly knocked out Young in the 7th round (which Young himself conceded).

If you're referring to Peralta, as I assume you are. This is a flat out lie. Peralta did not "lay on the ropes". He was also not a lhw in these bouts, he was 197 and 196 in both bouts. Foreman may have struggled but he was also extremely green against a formidable opponent who was coming off a draw to a peak Bonavena, and would later hold Ron Lyle to a draw in his last fight.

Correct. In his prime, the only people he lost to were Foreman and Ali, with only Foreman demolishing him in 2 rounds. I have no idea why you'd bring this up in an argument against Foreman.

 

Ali had been fighting for over a decade. He’d been through the ringer countless times at this point and Foreman hardly made an impression the entire fight, in one round George cut the ring amazing stuff- he got man handled, hit with insulting lead rights and gassed out by the fifth he was fish in a barrel for just about the whole fight all the while convinced he was winning.

Frazier was a small guy, looking past Foreman with an alright chin and 100% far from his best days now. I think there where a number of guys who’d have beat Frazier, Ali made Joe look a lot better then he was. No offence to Joe.

Mental shambles? He was coming off one loss in his career. Sure let’s say he was that’s not Lyles problem, speaking of Lyle he was meant to be the perfect mark for Foreman to comeback they wanted a guy to make George look good... He was almost stopped multiple times and his wide open looping punches where exploited by a very rudimentary boxer in Big Ron. Pace? He looked the same stop it now.

Foreman had a good round I think I gave him quite a few it happens he wasn’t a low calibre fighter. Don’t forget all the other rounds where Young took it to him, stood in front of Foreman “The destroyer” stunned and hurt him multiple times and made George look like a second rate fighter. More excuses for Foreman then Duran lol.

Watch the fight fight with Parelta. I didn’t see George cutting the ring and showcasing anything spectacular. Did you? He was Ali’s blue print in Zaire. He might have been a HW then but he is about as much a HW as Archie Moore.

Norton was literally Foreman’s perfect fight, a chinny guy who anyone could cut the ropes against. He benefits from the circular reasoning of the Ali effect more then anyone else.

 

Brilliant post. You are killing it lately.

 

This means absolutely nothing. Some people have yet to reach their prime after fighting for over a decade. Ali also had over three years off.

You know who else had been fighting over a decade? Patterson when he fought Liston, and you said the following about him

Double standards of enormous proportions.

Liston doesn't get any credit for beating Patterson because despite fighting for over a decade, Floyd had yet to reach his prime.

But Foreman's loss against Ali should be held against him, to a further degree because Ali had been fighting for over 10 years.

You're an agenda driven clown.

Name one time Ali had been put "through the ringer" one time other than Frazier up to that point.

Foreman hit Ali with tremendous shots, and by Ali's own admission had him out on his feet.

This content is protected

Ali himself said Foreman hit with shots that would've knocked out four men, and was confirmed to have been urinating blood afterwards.

Perhaps, but nobody after including Frazier beat Frazier

Nobody cares what you think. You're a joke.

Are you dumb? All it takes is that one loss to shatter your aura of invincibility, and you're never the same after. It happened to multiple fighters, like Wilder, Dokes, Davey Moore, Cooney, etc.

That's not true. If they wanted a guy to make Foreman look good, they would've bought a tomato can, or a lower contender to feed him. Not someone coming off a Viscious KO victory, in a brutal slugfest like this one

This content is protected

This supposedly very rudimentary boxer who was ranked number 3 earlier in the year, and had given the champion all he could handle and then some, before being stopped while ahead on the cards.

You're a ****ing idiot if you think he fought the same as he did against Frazier and Norton.

This is a flat out lie. Please show me these "multiple times" Young stuns and hurts Foreman. Even the KD was a result of his exhaustion. His stamina, already nothing to write home about, was already hampered by him not being able to acclimatize to the environment.

These are all, easily verifiable facts. If you think they're excuses, go ahead and disprove them. I'll wait.

Again he was very green against Peralta, not even old enough to drink a beer, and having only 15 fights prior. Peralta was also not fighting off the ropes as you previously claimed, and that's obvious to anyone who bothered to watch the fight (something I highly doubt you've done).

Wait a sec, Foreman beat a HW comparable to Archie freaking Moore that early in his career? That's the best point you made all night! Seems I've been underrating Foreman, to overlook something like that. Thank you for pointing that out!

Norton never proved to be "chinny" before this bout. His brutal KO losses came long after this, at the end of his career. He took multiple punches from Ali, without even coming close to being stopped, a feat that eluded the likes of Liston, Foreman, Frazier, Bonavena, etc. All known for their durability.

 

This is a flat out lie. Please show me these "multiple times" Young stuns and hurts Foreman. Even the KD was a result of his exhaustion. His stamina, already nothing to write home about, was already hampered by him not being able to acclimatize to the environment.

These are all, easily verifiable facts. If you think they're excuses, go ahead and disprove them. I'll wait.


Again he was very green against Peralta, not even old enough to drink a beer, and having only 15 fights prior. Peralta was also not fighting off the ropes as you previously claimed, and that's obvious to anyone who bothered to watch the fight (something I highly doubt you've done).

Wait a sec, Foreman beat a HW comparable to Archie freaking Moore that early in his career? That's the best point you made all night! Seems I've been underrating Foreman, to overlook something like that. Thank you for pointing that out!

Norton never proved to be "chinny" before this bout. His brutal KO losses came long after this, at the end of his career. He took multiple punches from Ali, without even coming close to being stopped, a feat that eluded the likes of Liston, Foreman, Frazier, Bonavena, etc. All known for their durability.[/QUOTE]

In a few short words. "If casuals where personified" Ugh.

 

Thanks! I try not to engage with him, because he's an arrogant *****. But sometimes, he just says something so agenda-driven or stupid (most times both) I can't help myself.

 

You mean if casuals WERE personified? . You're attempting to dismiss my knowledge as that of a casual, and you can't even ****ing spell "were". This validates everything I said about you being a ****ing dumbass, and waste of space on this board, something you should've figured out when you were permabanned.

 

People like to give all the credit to Ali’s style v Foremans style. Ali’s chin was the more important factor. Greates chin of all time imo only because no other chin was tested in the way his was over time.

And to the people who think George wasn’t that good…are your crazy!? Gold medal, two time Hw champ. Has wins over Frazier x2, Norton, Moorer, Chuvalo, Lyle, Qawi, etc. He also cost himself a win against Holyfield when he probably could have knocked him out in the fourth had he gone all out (was afraid of gassing).

 

Ron Lyle has one of the best HW resumes of a contender to not win it ever. He was no joke. Ali reigned for a few more years beating excellent completion. Let’s not pretend he was useless.

 

Treating a grammar mistake as some kind of triumph is just about the saddest thing about internet debates. You are a propaganda fed dumb @$$ who needs others to tell him what to think, you're ability to formulate your own opinions is YouTube comment section at best. I need to make a master thread of all my "weird" opinions so I stop wasting time retyping for "When we were kings" spoon fed morons.

 

I do not think the guy was lying about Peralta, more likely it was a mistake, wrong fight, did not watch it all, saw it second hand...
Also I believe Liston was a maximum of 34 in his fights with Clay/Ali, but I agree with the rst of what you said!

 

Well the 1940 census indicates he was born in 1930 (or late ‘29) so he was at the minimum of 34 and 35 for the respective bouts.

However prison records, police records, newspapers, and his marriage record also says 1928.

Maybe we’ll learn more in about a week when the 1950 census is released.

 

You've just verified my opinion, and reinforced your reputation as an immature, arrogant, *****. Grow up kid.

 

The irony.

 

(I could bring up all other posters who can't stand you, but I only have 1 lifetime )
Ever heard the saying "If you run into an ******* in the morning, you ran into an *******. If you run into assholes all day, you're the *******."?

I sense another ban coming. Hopefully, you can use that time to grow up.