It raises an interesting question whether Foreman was a better fighter at 45 or 25.
I definitely give old Foreman the edge in will and determination and that goes a long way but would that edge have factored into a different outcome if Moorer had fought Big George 20 years earlier?
Does the 25 yr old George Foreman knock out Michael Moorer as well just as the 45 yr old Big George did?
The only way I see Lewis vs Foreman going is Lewis getting ko'd early with one of georges upper cuts, against Holmes it would have been interesting, I don't think however he has the chin to hang on.
George Foreman in his prime would have beaten most heavyweights.
Foreman only lost to Ali because he got stupid and out smarted by Ali. Ali would lay on the ropes, blocking most of the punches, and pop Foreman with a stright right every now and then. Ali was actually up on two of the scorecards when the KO happened. I really do believe that Foreman in his prime would have beaten Louis, Marciano, Patterson, Liston, Frazier (did), Tyson, Holyfield, Bowe, both Klitschko's.
Foreman-Holmes and Foreman-Lewis would have been interesting though.
The only fighters I would give a chance against the 25yr old Foreman:
- Lennox Lewis (wins)
- Ali (wins)
- Tyson (50/50)
- Holmes (50/50)
- Holyfield (25/75)
- Vitali K (25/75)
You have to wonder how good Foreman could have been. Imagine the experience and mental strength of the older Foreman combined with the physical prowess of the younger Foreman. Add to that 5+ years training at his physical prime (25-30) with a top class trainer (which he never really had) and he could have been formidable. Ifs and buts though. Like if Tyson never went to jail or Cus never died.
I said this many times on this site, and I'll say it again. There aren't too many heavyweights that a prime Foreman WOULDN'T walk through and destroy.
Honestly I think Ali would have been the only one that could beat him and that's it, others would have been destroyed.