The best technique between Louis, Lewis, Wlad and Vitaly?

You would be hard pressed to find many lists that rated him higher. Almost every RING list since Foreman first retired, has placed him above Frazier. Bert Sugar rated him above Frazier. Not saying it's right to do so, but that is just the popular opinion.

It probably has a lot to do with Foreman knocking Frazier out twice, and utterly destroying him in a famous title exchange. It's hard to justify Frazier as a greater fighter.

You are underrating Foreman's opposition a bit.

Boone Kirkman for instance was viewed as a pivotal win. You bring up Machen and Doug Jones as good wins for Fraizer, well Kirkman also beat these men within months of Frazier. He also beat Ellis prior to Frazier's rematch of him. Kirkman was known as a counter puncher.

[url]http://www.josportsinc.com/item_images/1457101752.jpg[/url]

And again, proving himself against Ellis and Quarry would have been nice but necessary for an evaluation, but he destroyed Frazier who beat these men, he also beat others that defeated these men.

What else is going to expose something we don't know?

 

It was because Foreman destroyed Frazier. Alos, the Young fight could have gone either way

 

That was my personal perception.

 

Young said at one point he was out on his feet and,"if George had sneezed I would have gone down!"

 

Yes, RING in fact did. And it's not hard to figure out why.

[url]https://blog.rdny.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Foreman-knocks-down-Frazier.jpg[/url]

Charles and Walcott beat more rated heavies than Marciano. Patterson beat more rated heavies than Liston...etc.

He was certainly rated. #8 in that RING magazine he graced the cover of. He had a shoulder injury that removed him from the ratings.

In May 1968, Ring Magazine recognized Boone’s accomplishments, ranking him 8th in the world.

[url]http://www.ibroresearch.com/2008/06/boone-kirkman/[/url]

He returned to the ratings prior the Foreman bout when he ran up 4 KOs

He was rated again in 73 for the Ellis win.

Well RING ratings aren't the end all be all for evaluation in these things, Michael Grant was RING #1 when Lewis demolished him and he's rarely talked of as his best opponent. That said, Chuvalo was in the top 5 when Foreman beat him. Chuvalo KOed #3 Quarry, and the win over Chuvalo is what got Foreman histitle shot at Frazier.

Not as simple as that. He stopped a really good backwards fighter in Peralta, who was rated after holding #3 Bonavena to draw. Lyle and Kirkman were good boxers, that could counter and move backwards. Norton was a great boxer, not at going backwards, but great none the less.

Ali took a heavy beating few could endure and beat Foreman in what is regarded as one of the greatest fights of all time. Young was most excellent at this point and survived some scary moments where he was badly hurt and got what is considered his greatest career win.

So what's the mystery? We know Foreman is capable of losing to excellent technicians with durability and great survival skills. Ellis and Quarry don't fit that.

It wouldn't hurt. But I don't see the necessity. We know Foreman's vulnerabilities and strengths, he is no enigma.

 

First of all Young dominated Foreman on the scorecards. Clearly outboxing him in really a one sided fight aside from round seven. Round sever Foreman landed a hook that nearly ended the fight. It didn't however, Foreman further exhausted himself trying to KO young. Young from that point coasted to the unanimous decision win. After George retired in 77 he was NOT looked upon as a ATG fighter. Frazier was ranked ahead of him. George was considered a highly flawed hwt, easily outboxed without stamina.

 

Young won by 7, 1, and 4 points. Not really a domination on the score cards.

During the time they were actually active, Foreman was considered the better fighter after beating Frazier. Even after the Rumble in the Jungle, Foreman remained rated over Frazier until he was dropped for inactivity. Remember, it was not considered a foregone conclusion Ali could have beat Foreman in a rematch. The way Foreman handled Frazier and Norton, and the way the Rumble played out, Foreman was still though of as the most dangerous man in the division until the Young loss and sudden retirement. Frazier going out the way he did, also briefly hurt his legacy. He shows up in a fan poll in 1978, but him and Foreman both spent most of 77-94 off most publicized lists.

• 
  Bill Brennan 1978 (Former President of the WBA)
  
  1. Muhammad Ali
     
     
  2. Joe Louis
     
     
  3. Jack Dempsey
     
     
  4. Jack Johnson
     
     
  5. Gene Tunney
     
     
  6. Jim Jeffries
     
     
  7. Max Schemeling
     
     
  8. Rocky Marciano
     
     
  9. James J. Corebett
     

• 
  Sports Illustrated, 1979
  
  1. Jack Johnson
     
     
  2. Joe Louis
     
     
  3. Muhammad Ali
     
     
  4. Jack Dempsey
     
     
  5. Rocky Marciano
     
     
  6. Gee Tunney
     
     
  7. Sam Langford
     
     
  8. Jersey Joe Walcott
     
     
  9. Floyd Patterson
     
     
  10. Ezzard Charles
      

• 
  Gilbert Odd, 1985 (Kings of the Ring)
  
  1. Muhammad Ali
     
     
  2. Joe Louis
     
     
  3. Jack Johnson
     
     
  4. Floyd Patterson
     
     
  5. Jack Dempsey
     
     
  6. Jim Jeffries
     
     
  7. Tommy Burns
     
     
  8. Gene Tunney
     
     
  9. Jim Corbett
     
     
  10. Max Schmeling
      

 

Young really dominated Foreman. Calculate the numerical scoring into rounds. Four points is a significant margin and WATCH THE FIGHT.

Reality is that via RING Ali and Frazier entered their top ten in the mid 70's. Foreman never was rated in the top ten by RING during the 70's, never rated over Frazier during that time and was only rated over anyone of note until his comeback to rewin the worlds hwt championship 20 years later.

 

Sorry if I've misunderstood your post, Perry - but, George Foreman was Ring rated, in their Top-5 Heavyweights, annually, from 1970 to 1976, inclusive.

 

I am talking ATG rankings not top contender rankings.

 

Ah - Understood.