Worse Technique, Max Baer or George Foreman

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by rm36, Jul 3, 2009.


Page 2 of 3
  1. My2Sense

    My2Sense Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,935
    92
    Aug 21, 2008
    Baer didn't dominate either of those fighters. Both those fights were actually quite competitive, and partly as a result of Baer's limitations.


    Having said that, the Schmeling fight is the one fight where I thought Baer showed semi-decent technique and savvy, by covering up on the ropes and allowing Schmeling to work and punch himself out. I suppose you could say it was a crude forerunner to the rope-a-dope.
     
    My2Sense, Jul 3, 2009
    My2Sense, Jul 3, 2009
    #16
  2. rm36

    rm36 Active Member Full Member

    1,311
    8
    Jun 26, 2009
    Yes, but technique wise, simply watching the footage, you can easily tell he's not in the same class as Louis.
     
    rm36, Jul 3, 2009
    rm36, Jul 3, 2009
    #17
    moneytheman12 likes this.
  3. punchy

    punchy Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,801
    10
    Oct 10, 2005
    So true boxing is about winning not how good you look these two were effective.
     
    punchy, Jul 3, 2009
    punchy, Jul 3, 2009
    #18
  4. rm36

    rm36 Active Member Full Member

    1,311
    8
    Jun 26, 2009
    I don't mean to do them a disservice. But, they were both extremely crude. I agree they had certain qualities that were desirable, which allowed them to become champions (mainly power, size, and good chins), but in spite of that their basic approach was still crude. I recognize that Foreman's shots were very powerful, but they were still thrown in an amateurish way. Baer was even worse with many punches which looked more like slaps on film. You say it's all relative, but my thread is about comparing champions.
     
    rm36, Jul 3, 2009
    rm36, Jul 3, 2009
    #19
  5. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,585
    27,251
    Feb 15, 2006
    I think that they both used a "crude" style because it worked for them, but ocasionaly mixed in sophisticated elements.

    They would both slip in a shot that the oponent didn't see coming at the critical moment.

    They would both be able to tell you pleanty about boxing technique that you never knew if you asked them.
     
    janitor, Jul 3, 2009
    janitor, Jul 3, 2009
    #20
  6. rm36

    rm36 Active Member Full Member

    1,311
    8
    Jun 26, 2009
    I wouldn't doubt that. But, I bet both could tell me quite a bit about the intricacies of Sugar Ray Robinson's style that I didn't know. That doesn't mean they could duplicate it.
     
    rm36, Jul 3, 2009
    rm36, Jul 3, 2009
    #21
  7. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,585
    27,251
    Feb 15, 2006
    Why would they try to duplicate it mwhen what they had was working so well?

    Incidentaly thy both went over to a cross arm defence of the type used by Archie Moore when they started to decline physicaly.

    They both used it to some effect.
     
    janitor, Jul 3, 2009
    janitor, Jul 3, 2009
    #22
  8. rm36

    rm36 Active Member Full Member

    1,311
    8
    Jun 26, 2009
    So you're saying they could have, had they wanted to ? :huh
     
    rm36, Jul 3, 2009
    rm36, Jul 3, 2009
    #23
  9. ripcity

    ripcity Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    20,449
    51
    Dec 5, 2006
    Foreman's trainers must not have seen a lot of Joe Louis fights.
     
    ripcity, Jul 3, 2009
    ripcity, Jul 3, 2009
    #24
  10. Rock0052

    Rock0052 Loyal Member Full Member

    34,221
    5,875
    Apr 30, 2006
    I can't disagree with them. After all, Joe was in his mid-50's at that point.
     
    Rock0052, Jul 3, 2009
    Rock0052, Jul 3, 2009
    #25
  11. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,433
    9,421
    Jul 15, 2008
    Foreman was far superior ... at least he knew a jab ... Baer was just a nut ..
     
    he grant, Jul 3, 2009
    he grant, Jul 3, 2009
    #26
  12. The Kurgan

    The Kurgan Boxing Junkie banned

    8,445
    31
    Nov 16, 2004
    Both are underrated by most and overrated by a few, but Baer was worse. Though Foreman (and I assume we're talking about the young Foreman, not the Gil Clancy-version who threw short snappy punches or the older and more refined jovial gent) often fought like a caveman, he did have very good footwork and knew how to put his punches together very well.
     
    The Kurgan, Jul 3, 2009
    The Kurgan, Jul 3, 2009
    #27
  13. rm36

    rm36 Active Member Full Member

    1,311
    8
    Jun 26, 2009
    I agree, he actually was quite good at cutting off the ring.
     
    rm36, Jul 3, 2009
    rm36, Jul 3, 2009
    #28
  14. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,585
    27,251
    Feb 15, 2006
    Frankly yes.

    Both these guys could have adopted a more defensive aproach at any point in their carers had they chosen to. They didnt do this because their slugging style was working for them and it seemed better to be a grade a slugger rather than a grade B counterpuncher.

    As they got olde rnad their reflexes started to slow a more defensive aproach sudenly represented a more atractive option and they both adopted the cross arm defence (to some effect I might add).
     
    janitor, Jul 4, 2009
    janitor, Jul 4, 2009
    #29
  15. rm36

    rm36 Active Member Full Member

    1,311
    8
    Jun 26, 2009
    I'm sorry, but I just don't agree that they could have successfully emulated the styles of lighter weight fighters. They very well may have attempted to model themselves after those styles, but they would have been poor copies of them because they did not have the technical ability to fight in such a way. But, you seem to be misinterpreting what I'm trying to get at with this thread. I think, even as a slugger, Max Baer had extremely poor technique. There's no question he could have maintained his slugging style, but fought more effectively simply by improving on it.
     
    rm36, Jul 4, 2009
    rm36, Jul 4, 2009
    #30
Page 2 of 3