Public perception of George Foreman going into the first Frazier fight

Perhaps a bit like Fury....big, strong, dangerous....but against who?

 

Foreman was a 3-1 underdog going in.

 

The casual fan was thinking nobody was beating Joe Frazier, the conqueror of Muhammad Ali. The boxing fan, was thinking this was a dangerous fight for Frazier, with others asking, yeh dangerous....But who has he beaten. Frazier, was a 3-1 favorite.

 

I love how so many posters nowadays say they knew Foreman was going to anhillate Frazier before their 1973 title fight. And there are quite a few of you. No ****ing Way! I lived through that period, and I'm telling you nobody thought Foreman had a prayer versus Frazier. Nobody.

The gambling consensus was though he was past prime, Smoke would be simply too tough, too fearless and too experienced for Foreman and that he would knock the Texan out long before the final bell.

The consensus afterwards was contrary to popular belief, George got a shot Frazier (due to the oh so great FOTC) and prime for prime, Smokin Joe would've beaten him.

 

There was very little feeling that George Foreman was going to beat Joe Frazier, from what I can remember from that time. Foreman was seen as a big, strong,powerful puncher who was largely unproven, and that Frazier was going to gradually whittle him down and dispose of him as he did most of his other opponents. I felt that way too at the time and I remember being truly shocked at how George utterly destroyed the champ. I remember saying to friends that GF looked like Superman in bouncing Frazier off the canvas 6 times like he did. The concensus between me and my boxong fan friends was that Foreman was a tune up for his rematch vs Ali.

 

I remember reading a preview of this fight by Jack A. Tree in an Australian boxing magazine - where he predicted Foreman would be much too strong for Frazier and score a 2nd-round knockout!

 

This is pretty much how I saw it at the time. Foreman was also seen as the probable next champion once Frazier and Ali had left the scene. Some sports writers were writing that this Frazier-Foreman fight will give Foreman valuable experience for a future challenge at the title. From the Frazier viewpoint, yes - this was a serious tuneup against a top contender for the Ali rematch after the Daniels and Stander fights of the preceding year.

In an early 1972 Ring Magazine editorial, Nat Fleischer, in commenting on the Frazier-Daniels fight of January, 1972, stated that while he could see Foreman as a future opponent for Frazier, he would not want to see that fight take place in 1972. The thinking at the time was that Foreman was a big, slow-moving guy, and therefore Frazier's cup of tea.

I watched the fight on closed-circuit TV at a theatre, and when Foreman scored that first knockdown, my immediate thought was that Joe will get up, shake it off, and get down to business. When he went down in that second knockdown, I did not think he would beat the count. It was then that I knew that Joe would not win and could only hope that he would not be seriously hurt.

In the aftermath of the shocking upset, not everyone was quick to hail the new champion. There were many comments, spoken and written, to the effect of Frazier not being in proper condition - his weight given as supporting evidence, along with comparative lack of activity since the FOTC.

 

One of the interesting things with boxing and people's knowledge of the sport lies in the ability to pick the underdog winners. It is and always has been a popularity based sport.

But there are people who do pick underdogs. And if you think about it, a lot of people liked Foreman's chances going in. He was a big undefeated guy that was a slugger of the highest order, afterall.

Me, personally going in liked Joe. I sure didn't love him going in, if that's what some folks think. Loved Joe was the Stander and Daniels fights. Later on, the Quarry rematch and nobody was picking Bugner.

But liking is a lot different than loving a guy's chances. George as a minimum was considered dangerous for Joe. But aside from George and Ali, those were really the only dangerous opponents for Frazier. Nobody thought much of the Norton chances against Joe. Or guys like Lyle or Shavers or Quarry or the rest of the top 10. The top 10 was real top heavy but after the first 3, a big dropoff. George was not part of that lower echelon and had thatundeated record and amateur pedigree going for him. And a good corner as well, which how many of the remaining top 10 had?

 

I don't think many people at the time viewed Foreman as a boxer. They knew he had power but it was thought a skilled fighter, such as Frazier, would avoid his looping punches and land first. I think the absolute amount of power he had, and his ability to land those punches, looping or not, caught many by surprise. In truth,l think his footwork and his ability to cut off the ring was, and still is, underappreciated.

 

You bet it is.

He was flat out terrific at cutting off the ring and putting the opponent where they know they shouldn't be. Me, I have not seen a better slugger with footwork and the geometry he used in there.

Man, did that ever show up in that Norton fight. I did not like Kenny's chances 1 iota with his footwork against George's. Nevertheless, it was so impressive watching that footwork--when we were all accustomed to seeing Ali fly around the ring.

That was one part of his game that was never the same after the Ali bout. Foreman's footwork. Even against guys like Ledoux and Dennis he was just not as adept and that geometry or actually maybe the footspeed itself.

What do you think? Almost everyone else evaluates everything strictly from the shoulders up. Nice to have a conversation about the waist down. Things like hips.

 

Here's my take as a 19 yr. old at the time. I think it was closed circuit but we elected not to go. My buds and I were at my late friends apt. playing cards and self-medicating ourselves.
George had beaten Chuvalo quite handily but, aside from that, the resume didn't look good to us. We were all boxing fanatics and around 11:00 Mike says: "Hey Brad, call the Indy Star sports hot-line and see how Frazier-George turned out."
I called and the guy says: "Yes, that was Foreman on a 2nd round TKO." I hung up the phone and Mike says: "Well?"
"I...don't know". "What the **** do you mean you don't know?"
I called back and the guy says: "I just told you! Foreman...2nd round TKO!" We were flabbergasted! I think that summed up what most people thought at the time; that Foreman didn't have a chance in most boxing fan's minds.

 

Joe was was set by Vegas odds makers as 3 1/2 to 1 favorite by fight time it had come down to 2 to 1.

Foreman was very popular following the 68 Olympics, his waving two American flags after winning the gold was an iconic image from those games Foreman was considered to be untested against quality opposition, but was thought to have a bright future

 

Kinda like Fury Klitschko. Casual fans, or those who were irrationally in love with Frazier, thought no chance. More rational and well versed fans thought the challenger presented a kind of problem that the champ hadn't seen before, and that an upset was a distinct possibility.

 

its nothing like k bro-fury. that's the most far removed fight you can possibly name.

but I don't blame a kliturd for not being able to think past the klitschko name in any discussion.


as for frazier, he'd unified, unbeaten and just caned the best, and unbeaten, previous champ. He was seen as a future atg.