Foreman The Greatest Heavyweight Ever?

[BKM-]

** A credible case could be made for Foreman.

All that has to be done is enhance his accomplishments which you haven't done, and pick at all the weaknesses in the above fighters, and BINGO, you got the typical American, biggest, most powerful, greatest nation ever, "We're #1" mantra that is the extent of most analysis.

I've always found it instructive to actually compare the fighters to their peers, and Big George and Big Lar are the same age, except........

If boxing were school, Lar would be in special ed. At age 19 with a very limited amateur background, George blasts his way to a 1968 Olympic gold medal against the Soviet/Cuban bloc professionals. Not just a gold medal, but becomes one of the most iconic moments of arguably the greatest Olympic year ever. Not sure what Lar is doing, probably pushing a broom.

Plenty of honor in honest labor. Life is about opportunities and timing and never fair or equitable in that regard. George got into trouble, not Lar, so net result: George gold, Lar broom.

OK, moving on, not sure why George is held back at this point, so scholarship might be needed, but he turns pro a year later, age 20 and within a few fights he's already whoopin' up on Wepner, and the next year on Chuvalo. Let's keep in mind that Ali is the undefeated exiled champ and Frazier the new undefeated champ. Again, not sure what Lar is doing, maybe starting his amateur career, but George has already cut himself into the so called Golden era in a big way with big splash. Ali sure wasn't fighting mature contender types out of the box like that and he's long been held as a young phenom with extensive storied amateur credentials before turning pro.

I'd say George's so called accomplishments are starting to stack up nicely to two era peers you've mention, exceeding in his own fashion.

Moving on, Lar seems to start appearing in Ali camps early in his comeback as Ali can be seen arguing with Cosell about Lar's ability in the ring just before he's knocked ****** by Dwayne Bobick, knocking him out of the 72 Olympic trials. By the time Lar turns pro in 73, George is the new undefeated heavy champ, having bounced the man who bounced the man and making it look like a picnic. George at this point is 3-0 against common Ali title contenders.

By the time of George's retirement in 77, he arguably has a better record against common competition than Ali does. He certainly takes care of the business in much easier fashion, and even his sole loss to Young he puts up a much better scrap than did Ali in his travesty against Young.

What's Lar doing? Not sure exactly when he officially "leaves" Ali's tutelage, but at the time of George's retirement, Lar has zero title contenders on his record and not until 78 when he wins a decision over Shavers and sc****s out a hotly contested split against a fading Norton.

Seems like George has plenty of accomplishments. Some talk about Lar's breaking Rocky's record and how he was robbed by "The Man" who robbed Ali against Frazier, but you never hear them talk about his record of ununified title defenses.

Lar does mighty fine for himself and sure doesn't need to bother with what I think, but today we got the WBC Floydy belts, the IBF Toney belts and the Larry belts that he helped these folks keep as well split as possible, and this is supposed to pass as elite greatness? Even Roy and Joe managed to unify at some point. Manny doesn't really need belts any more.

So I hear about these titles as accomplishments, I'm starting to see pimps in rhinestone. There has to be a more credible look at the records and eras.

Now, Lar was a fine fighter, plenty of spirit, stayed more disciplined than most, but don't make me run a comparsion of their eras when George wakes up one day and decides he wants to become heavy champ of the world again.

Ali given much credit by many for his faith which, if true, leaves him with poor means of financial support for 3 yrs as a convicted felon, finally overturned by the Supremes. I've never had a problem crediting him for his beliefs as derranged as they were. He's a product of his times and left all that behind and it was quite something to behold in the day.

Yet George was snickered at for his faith and 10 yr commitment to it at the exclusion of boxing. We've all heard them along with "quitter," 'no stamina or plan B," "seeing dead people" and other things.

At the end of the day, George has significantly more wins than any you listed above, indeed, more KOs than any listed have wins, less losses than half of those listed. Yet he loses most of his prime years to his faith.

I don't claim George as the greatest, but I do say that all you mentioned could be beat, so just claiming George could be beat to dismiss his accomplishments seems terribly biased. You didn't list Rocky and he was never beat, though he marked up better than some.

lol alright London, i'll try to give a better reasoning for my choices.

I don't see many around Rocky's era beating him, Louis or Liston though, possible. I don't match up fighters from completely diffirent eras because that brings us nowhere. The reason I say Foreman was so beatable was because his career stretches out from the 70s to the 90s. The 70s and 90s are IMO the best era's in boxing!

Unfortunately for Foreman, he became a more skilled boxer at an old age when his physical abilites detoriated. So therefor, the young raw Foreman would IMO be beaten by the likes of Ali, Young, Holmes, Lewis, Bowe etc. Those kind of smart boxers could beat him. I do not buy this 'too strong, too powerful to beat' crap, boxing is more than just that. NOBODY gets a free pass like this, and I won't give Foreman one either.

The old Foreman had a great jab, and was very dangerous to anyone. But his foot speed and lateral movement was gone. He was outboxed a lot of times by much less capable fighters like Morrison, Stewart, Moorer etc. Imagine the big boys of the eras.

You see where i'm going with this? But that is only 1 of 2 factors that come in for me when I try to rank greatness.

The more important one is accomplishments, which I have to say you make a pretty good case for Foreman. First i'll say that you can't really argue a top 2 that involves Ali and Louis. Most people have it like that and it's very solid.

"Lar" LOL, was a bit of a late bloomer. Foreman was a beast at a young age, which is why his career took off so fast. BUT, I believe his career would have been a lot shorter if he didn't take such a long break. Foreman always took punches, and as his losses were starting to pile up, I don't think he would be a force anymore after his 30s.

What really makes Larry great is his consistency and longetivity. You know about his long title reign. Say what you want about it, to stay unbeaten that long and consistently beat solid fighters that many times warrants greatness recognition. And the Tyson fiasco, people thought he was done. Then he came back at an even older age and beat a prime Ray Mercer like it was taking candy from a baby, and most importantly, he almost beat a prime Evander Holyfield. Some even thought he won that fight.

Their careers are so similar you know. I don't have a problem with people consider Foreman greater than Holmes.

[Squabbles94806]

George Foreman's on my list. He's dope.

Yes, Ali out-smarted the bigger Foreman. That's only because Ali knew that he couldn't fight him head on. That 1st round took a lot outta Ali, and he knew if he continued at that pace with that much intensity, he wouldn't last.

So he did the Rope-a-dope.

It took a while before Foreman got over that loss. But then he came back with a better personality, not to mention the Foreman Grill, and became the oldest Heavyweight.

Yeah, Foreman's dope. What was his nickname?

[Reggie Miller]

Think about it, He Destroyed Joe Frazier and the Only Reason he lost it to Ali is because he was out smarted, He then Made a Comeback and became the oldest Heavyweight Champion of all time, He has acomplished much more then anyone, and He has accomplished much more out of the ring as well, If anyone said Foreman was the Greatest Heavyweight of all time, i wouldn't disagree , I think Foreman Could Beat Louis and Dempsey, i also beleave he would beat Ali in a rematch, Im not saying i think he is the best, I just think he is a contender for the #1, 2 Time Heavyweight Champion, Perhaps the Hardest Puncher To step into the ring, Great Chin, The successful Comeback that no one thought Possible.

THis is what makes me laugh, when people on here say "Old fighters are overated" LOL Foreman came back and gave a PRIME Holyfield all he could handle, and Evander was fighting a OLD Foreman, And then Foreman Makes Briggs and Morrison Run , and then he KOs Moorer, So if there Overrated then DAMN the young generation must be bums lol, (Not Saying They Are)

McGrain is that you?

[Tha_Greatest]

Think about it, He Destroyed Joe Frazier and the Only Reason he lost it to Ali is because he was out smarted, He then Made a Comeback and became the oldest Heavyweight Champion of all time, He has acomplished much more then anyone, and He has accomplished much more out of the ring as well, If anyone said Foreman was the Greatest Heavyweight of all time, i wouldn't disagree , I think Foreman Could Beat Louis and Dempsey, i also beleave he would beat Ali in a rematch, Im not saying i think he is the best, I just think he is a contender for the #1, 2 Time Heavyweight Champion, Perhaps the Hardest Puncher To step into the ring, Great Chin, The successful Comeback that no one thought Possible.

THis is what makes me laugh, when people on here say "Old fighters are overated" LOL Foreman came back and gave a PRIME Holyfield all he could handle, and Evander was fighting a OLD Foreman, And then Foreman Makes Briggs and Morrison Run , and then he KOs Moorer, So if there Overrated then DAMN the young generation must be bums lol, (Not Saying They Are)

i always believed this

[Abstraction]

Im sorry, but "The only Reason he lost to Ali because he was outsmarted" does not break the ice for me. I thought that was what every boxer tries to do ??

Ali never just beat him, he never sc****d a dodgy desicion. He Humiliated and KO'd him.

__

Prime v Prime, you can't really make an accurate list. Since it's so hard and it's all a matter of opinion.

Guys like Ali had 3 years away from the ring, so his Prime is hard to find, that said, he Whooped everyone that was close enough to his prime.

Foreman had effectivley two careers, so can't really say when his prime was, but you could probably narrow it down to the time he beat Frazier the first time.

The "Best HW of all time" lists are effectivley useless, but if there is one, imo, Foreman should be atleast in the Top 10. But like i said, these Lists are effectivley useless, you can simply not agree and make a legitimate list of boxers of all time. So it's pointless worry about it too much

[ironalex]

Think about it, He Destroyed Joe Frazier and the Only Reason he lost it to Ali is because he was out smarted, He then Made a Comeback and became the oldest Heavyweight Champion of all time, He has acomplished much more then anyone, and He has accomplished much more out of the ring as well, If anyone said Foreman was the Greatest Heavyweight of all time, i wouldn't disagree , I think Foreman Could Beat Louis and Dempsey, i also beleave he would beat Ali in a rematch, Im not saying i think he is the best, I just think he is a contender for the #1, 2 Time Heavyweight Champion, Perhaps the Hardest Puncher To step into the ring, Great Chin, The successful Comeback that no one thought Possible.

THis is what makes me laugh, when people on here say "Old fighters are overated" LOL Foreman came back and gave a PRIME Holyfield all he could handle, and Evander was fighting a OLD Foreman, And then Foreman Makes Briggs and Morrison Run , and then he KOs Moorer, So if there Overrated then DAMN the young generation must be bums lol, (Not Saying They Are)

lol i do agree with your second paragraph, however i do not think foreman was the best heavy, one of tho, and defo the hardest hitting,(altho i believe dempsey is a harder hitter p4p). 70's golden age for heavys.

[LondonRingRules]

I don't see many around Rocky's era beating him, Louis or Liston though, possible. I don't match up fighters from completely diffirent eras because that brings us nowhere. The reason I say Foreman was so beatable was because his career stretches out from the 70s to the 90s. The 70s and 90s are IMO the best era's in boxing!

Unfortunately for Foreman, he became a more skilled boxer at an old age when his physical abilites detoriated. So therefor, the young raw Foreman would IMO be beaten by the likes of Ali, Young, Holmes, Lewis, Bowe etc. Those kind of smart boxers could beat him.

** Let's keep in mind that Rocky could've been stopped on that split nose in the 2nd Charles fight.

I like the Holmes/Foreman comparison because it highlights 3 different eras they both span in completely different fashion. Any fighter is potentially beatable so you don't buy into bigger more powerful whereas I would expand that to include I don't buy into too skilled and talented.

Ali was was very beatable all through his career, being susceptible to sluggers, but he also had difficulty with with crude brawlers, swarmers, and boxers, yet most fans and historians put him at or near top.

Just getting back to enhancing George, gotta keep him at the top to honor the thread, when he retires in 77, his record is 45-2 including 3 blowouts over the only two fighters credited with beating Ali, 53-2 at the time. Yet George is no closer to getting a title shot than he was with 5-0, 5 KOs post Ali loss going into Young.

George correctly ascertains he's being frozen out and follows a more compelling calling than boxing. King never would've let him challenge Holmes' title. I don't understand why the 80s gets stamped as weak when we have top shelf talents in Dokes, Tucker, Coetzee, Tubbs, Page, Spoon, Douglas and many others.......like Foreman, did we forget his career spans 4 decades. Average size of these 80s contenders in 6-3, 215-220 range that everyone likes to claim is the ideal size, not that I buy ideal size any more than too powerful or too skilled.

Both the 80s and 90s actually have more of a higher talent level of prime heavies than 70s, but something happened in boxing that is festering to this day, the split orgs, so the fighters not always properly developed with fights against each other.

I disagree that Foreman in the 90s couldn't handle the so called big dogs of the era. Need to remember his comeback was targetting Tyson when he was still in his invincible phase. Foreman turns out to be the only fighter that Tyson absolutely refused to fight and was actually terrified of.

He did fight Holyfield and almost almost had him save for a lack of footspeed to catch him after hurting him. Since Lewis and Bowe never held a title for long, there was no incentive or time to really fight them since George's whole comeback was about staying busy for a title shot, not trying to prove he could beat EVERYONE.

According to you, he's susceptable to boxers, so by all rights he had no business beating Moorer any more than Bowe or Lewis or Holy, boxer/puncher types all. Yet he does something Holy couldn't do with Moorer, not only winning knocking him out in a highlight for the ages. Bowe was no longer a factor in the division by then and Lewis only just getting back in the title picture again. Does anyone really believe Bowe fight would've been any difficult than the Briggs fight for him which he wasn't really credited for?

Holy tasted George's power and used hit and run tactics. He was not afraid of Bowe's power and Bowe couldn't move and fight and not enough power to bother George. Lewis better in footwork, but not a full fight's worth, better boxer and more power, but not as good a chin. I like George's chances against these two, but where George is susceptable is he could be marked up and was starting to bleed and puff up quite a bit against potshotters like Holy, Morrison, Stewart, and Moorer.

Oddly enough Morrison ends up the closest in pitching a masterclass on any version of George I've ever seen, so go figure that one. Just shows that boxing is not easily quantifiable by snazzy formulas and such.

[boxing_great]

I think Foreman has one of the best chins ever.The guy was a brick wall to hit

[McGoorty]

Think about it, He Destroyed Joe Frazier and the Only Reason he lost it to Ali is because he was out smarted, He then Made a Comeback and became the oldest Heavyweight Champion of all time, He has acomplished much more then anyone, and He has accomplished much more out of the ring as well, If anyone said Foreman was the Greatest Heavyweight of all time, i wouldn't disagree , I think Foreman Could Beat Louis and Dempsey, i also beleave he would beat Ali in a rematch, Im not saying i think he is the best, I just think he is a contender for the #1, 2 Time Heavyweight Champion, Perhaps the Hardest Puncher To step into the ring, Great Chin, The successful Comeback that no one thought Possible.

THis is what makes me laugh, when people on here say "Old fighters are overated" LOL Foreman came back and gave a PRIME Holyfield all he could handle, and Evander was fighting a OLD Foreman, And then Foreman Makes Briggs and Morrison Run , and then he KOs Moorer, So if there Overrated then DAMN the young generation must be bums lol, (Not Saying They Are)

No Way In Hell.

[Mintcar923]

I'd say that he's definitely one of the greatest ever. I know to choose the GOAT is pretty much a matter of opinion. He was the oldest.

But, then Jersey Joe Walcott held that distinction before that and I don't think anyone had rated him that high before George made history. Mike Tyson was the youngest but I really don't think anyone takes that into account when rating him. I'd say it was amazingly impressive what he had accomplished but then there were other champions who had done alternatively impressive things. Rocky Marciano retired at 49-0 and defeated every relevant opponent of his era. Ali had beaten every top rated fighter of his era and captured the title three times which was incredible. Lewis did the same beating everyone he'd ever faced as a pro. Homes and Louis had 20+ title defenses. Tyson had phenomenal skills, speed and power and captured 5 title belts in his career defending them for a total of almost four years or so. Holyfield was the Undisputed Cruiserweight champ and was a four-time heavyweight champ. It goes on and on.

George has great credentials but I don't think they were superior to some of the others. However, i'm sure he'd be in my top-ten. I've really gotta think about it!