Was Prime Foreman overrated?

he may look crude & unpolished, not much on technique but I've seen him demolish men bigger than himself, and smaller men like Frazier were punched to pieces quick

He's right up there with Jeffries, Johnson, & Dempsey

 

Marciano should have lost to "Tiger" Ted Lowry, who died at 90 in 2010. Lowry was a connected fighter who was warned several times for passivity, knew he "should" not win the fight-but deserved the decision anyway. First LaStrada fight was close, but definitely Lowry should have won his first w/Rocky.

Much as I like Rocky, he would not beat everyone from any era, no way.

He was great especially with his limitations. But a small HW (in height, reach, weight...) without much speed nor great boxing ability (sometimes wild, limited accuracy)...Shows what his heart & skills could accomplish.

But he would not beat the top boxers & sluggers ever.
Nor peak Tyson, & I would slightly favor Frazier over him.

 

Yes.

Just about any skilled boxer from his era to now would have made him look like the amateurish flailer that he was. Holmes would have smacked him around and knocked him out within 10. I would take Jimmy Ellis and Jimmy Young to beat any version of GF as well.

 

I see it the opposite way to you. It was his FIRST career that guarantees his place in an all time top 10. Look at the way he dismantled a Joe Frazier who was n't THAT far over the hill. How many others could have done that to a 1973 Smokin' Joe ? It took a still awesome incarnation of Muhammad Ali to wrest the title from him and in 1974,there was n't another fighter around who could have beaten him let alone in such an emphatic fashion. No way would Larry Holmes and Jimmy Young have been ready at that point in time.

George deserves kudos for what he achieved during his comeback but Michael Moorer aside,he was no longer capable of beating the very best of his time.

 

And he could take a good knock and keep fighting, at least while his stamina still held. And he could cut a ring well.

 

Labeling George Foreman as just being " crude and having no skill " is an inaccurate description of the man. He knew how to tie a guy up and neutralize attacks. He was very good at cutting off the ring. He understood the value of working the body and could fight with both hands. His limiting factors were speed and stamina, but even those are overstated at times..

 

:rofl

 

Overestimated by the near consensus that saw him destroying Ali, but not overrated no. Subtle but important linguistic distinction.

 

This

 

Foreman was a wonderful talent. He did not fulfil his potential in his first career because he was UN-seasoned. second time around with an older head on his shoulders he proved that at 50% he could still use size and experience to his advantage. We were left wondering what he might have been had he been sensible enough to be a combination of both carnations. But. He never was. He was either Green George or Old George.

Foreman suffered because he was the world's first unseasoned champion. Who knows what might have been had he not been navigated around more fighters who could have stretched him on the way up. His match Making was poor.

The timing was perfect for getting shop worn Frazier, he exposed Norton but this was no preparation for a 32 year old Ali. He wound up losing badly to a victim of the champ he beat.

 

Nah, Rahman had good seasoning. Wars with Sanders, Tua and Maskaev really made him. Those kinds of fights were absent from Foremans matchmaking.

He should have fought Joe Bugner, Jerry Quarry, Bonavena and Larry Middleton. Guys like that. Not Terry Sorrell, Levi forte and co. I still don't know what win made Foreman #1 contender to Frazier over ALi.

 

Don't know that I'd call Marciano " underrated."