Would early 70's Foreman have cleared the 90's with ease?

If anything Bowe is overrated not underrated, he avoided pretty much all the known punchers of the 90s. And when he fought the first skilled big man who wasn't washed up in Golota, he bullied Bowe all round the ring in two fights.

 

He won't be, he'll use that power jab to straighten up Bowe, and when Bowe does get close George will shove him around. Foreman by KO

 

Fair enough.

 

Twenty pro fighters took his shot and either lasted the distance or beat him.

70's Foreman's gas tank would get exploited by a number of the 90's bests, certainly Lewis, Bowe, Holy and even the Ruddock version of Tyson.

 

This is reasonable

 

Downgraded Tyson beats him.
Holyfield beats him.
Bowe beats him.
Lewis beats him.
Mercer beats him.
Ikeabuchi beats him.

 

To be fair, Golota punched Bowe in the nuts several times in both fights. That would have seriously impacted Bowe’s ability to, ahem…perform.

 

Downgraded Tyson went life and death with Ruddock, and lost to Douglas.
Bowe couldn't move his head to save his damn life.
Lewis: 50/50. Gun to my head give me Foreman.
Ikeabuchi: Way to unproven, as his career ended prematurely.
Mercer: lol

 

I'm not a fan of Bowe at all. With his potential, the sky was the limit but he ruined it by being a lazy ****. That being said, I don't put much stock in his fights with Golota. Aside from the nutshotting, Bowe was clearly a shell of himself by then (another consequence of his aforementioned defensive issues).

 

Both of whom would beat Foreman.

You act as if Foreman was a defensive genius himself. He was even more hittable and nowhere near as skilled as Bowe.
Bowe beats him.

Lewis obliterates him every single time, it wouldn't even be competitive.

Proven enough for me, he beats Foreman.

Mercer beats him too, he's far more skilled.

 

White Bomber's claims make a lot more sense if you bear in mind (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) that he believes 90s Foreman was about as good overall as 70s Foreman. IIRC, he also argued in the past that 90s Foreman was more durable and stronger than 70s Foreman.

That's probably the root of this disagreement; the rest is downstream consequence of the initial premise.

 

Difficult to say, I think he would have stopped Holyfield in an absolute war - say the later rounds. I see him vs Tyson ending sooner although Mike could have chinned him (less likely than a Foreman win). Guys like Moorer and Ray Mercer would have lost as well.

His biggest tests would have been a prime Lewis and Bowe. Those guys were huge and were both killers. I would honestly give them a slight edge over foreman although they would still be highly competitive fights.

 

Yes but it was clear Golota was the dominant fighter, and it's not like Bowe was the cleanest fighter either. He'd been guilty of many fouls see the Tillery, Coetzer, Mathis, fights for reference.

I think people forget Golota was supposed to be a cherry pick for Bowe it went horribly wrong though, as Golota was alot more skilled than everyone thought.

People put it down to Bowe being completely shot, I whilst i agree that Bowe wasn't at his best. I still think Golota always gives Bowe problems, just look at the Tubbs, Biggs, fights in Bowe's prime. It's clear Bowe had issues with the jab or fighters who didn't fight him on the inside.

Golota was the first real skilled big man Bowe fought, and he got dominated is that a coincidence?

 

Not with ease, but Foreman would have been a serious contender to top the 90s.

 

Cleared? No. You think anyone is going to run the gauntlet of Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield, Tyson, Tua, Mercer, etc? Man that's a rough group.

Holyfield and Mercer would run him ragged. Tyson and Tua could hurt him, and Tyson's speed is going to be an issue. Bowe would be a quick war, however it ended.

Remember that Foreman-Lyle rubber match? Lewis hits on par with Lyle and is an order of magnitude more skilled. The fight could go either way, but if Lewis hurts Foreman first, he's going to finish it.