George Foreman Is Overrated

[MikeyMike100]

If you look at the relative strength of Big George's resume it is probably stronger than the average heavyweight. He lost fights but he lost to two great fighters during his heyday: Ali (obvious) and Young (criminally underated). People say Frazier was older yada yada... Fighters stay prime preciously small a time... Ali had his best years when he obviously lost a step... Part of the game.

Your also not giving George credit for fighting guys like Lyle... And Norton. Two excellent fighters...

I gave him credit for Norton and the Lyle win is a good win but Foremans resume is really thin

[MikeyMike100]

Holmes had a better resume than Foreman? Is that what you are implying? if so kindly enlighten me.

I don't care about Titles... Talk about fighters fought against... Big difference.

Both beat Norton although Foremans win was much better. Larry beat top contender and future title holders one after another for years with Cooney, Shavers, Witherspoon, Berbick, Carl Williams, Leon Spinks, Bonecrusher etc etc. Even in his losses to M Spinks they were respectable and I thought he won the 2nd fight. Foreman did beat Michael Moorer for the title which was something that Larry Holmes wasnt able to do but Larry Holmes thoroughly outboxing Ray Mercer who was an undefeated top 5 heavyweight is close to as impressive.

Foreman has the best win with the Fraizer win thats his only real claim over Larry. If your criteria is best win then Buster Douglas is better than Lennox Lewis which is obviously ridiculous.

[MikeyMike100]

- - That was E'eu de Lar Stink blanketing the division. 0-6, 0 KO vs champions holding a title won in the Ring.

When George was active, he was ranked wher as whenever Lar was active in the same time periodwith George, Lar was unranked save for his rank stink.

It's like U was born yesterday.

George Foreman took off 10 years so ya thats kind of a big caveat

[billeau2]

I gave him credit for Norton and the Lyle win is a good win but Foremans resume is really thin

How do you figure that? I mean what are you looking at that makes you believe that? Compared to? Certainly not Holmes. And im talking quality of opponent... not trinkets lol.

[billeau2]

Both beat Norton although Foremans win was much better. Larry beat top contender and future title holders one after another for years with Cooney, Shavers, Witherspoon, Berbick, Carl Williams, Leon Spinks, Bonecrusher etc etc. Even in his losses to M Spinks they were respectable and I thought he won the 2nd fight. Foreman did beat Michael Moorer for the title which was something that Larry Holmes wasnt able to do but Larry Holmes thoroughly outboxing Ray Mercer who was an undefeated top 5 heavyweight is close to as impressive.

Foreman has the best win with the Fraizer win thats his only real claim over Larry. If your criteria is best win then Buster Douglas is better than Lennox Lewis which is obviously ridiculous.

Foreman lost to Ali... I happen to adore Witherspoon...but like the rest of the eighties guys you cite, they are not like Lyle, Shavers and Norton with respect to consistent talent and delivery. I mean Williams? Bonecrusher? Mercer? Ill give you Shavers and Cooney with a side of Leon! As much as I like Witherspoon can't really cite him as consistent the same way Lyle (for example) was... Foreman stopping Norton was also pretty impressive. I have not even spoke about George's second coming...

[Willow The Wisp]

Could it be? Just spitballin' here; that we are placing to great an emphasis on resume alone with Foreman? Jerry Quarry beat Alongi, Machen, Orbillo, London, Miteff, Daniels, Patterson, Spencer, Mathis, Foster, Doyle, Bodell, Corletti, Middleton, Neumann, Lyle, Shavers and Zannon, who had like 573 wins between them, as a resume qualifier; and Big George has frequently commented that Quarry was the only man he actively avoided. So do we suppose that Jerry Quarry was a better Heavyweight than Foreman was?

[QueensburyRules]

You're too much, man. Stick around and show em' how it's done!

- - Justa facts, ma'am, justa facts...

[QueensburyRules]

I gave him credit for Norton and the Lyle win is a good win but Foremans resume is really thin

- - U never provided a benchmark rating, thus providing the lead incoherency attracting the usual suspects as bereft as U.

My provided rating facts are inviable and immaculate.

[QueensburyRules]

Could it be? Just spitballin' here; that we are placing to great an emphasis on resume alone with Foreman? Jerry Quarry beat Alongi, Machen, Orbillo, London, Miteff, Daniels, Patterson, Spencer, Mathis, Foster, Doyle, Bodell, Corletti, Middleton, Neumann, Lyle, Shavers and Zannon, who had like 573 wins between them, as a resume qualifier; and Big George has frequently commented that Quarry was the only man he actively avoided. So do we suppose that Jerry Quarry was a better Heavyweight than Foreman was?

- - Quarry and Foreman were not contemporaries save one brief slice in time when MSG offered a million dollar purse to fight Jerry, killed by exorbitant NY tax laws that sent MSG into the homeless encampments for a generation.

George got the same $$$ tax free in Japan vs Jose Roman. Point in fact because of instability in American boxing finances, he never defended his title in American nor did he win his title in America.

George has always been very generous in his musings on other fighters, so no doubt U confused his magnanimous generosity with an avoidance that never happened save once dictated by finances.

[MikeyMike100]

Foreman lost to Ali... I happen to adore Witherspoon...but like the rest of the eighties guys you cite, they are not like Lyle, Shavers and Norton with respect to consistent talent and delivery. I mean Williams? Bonecrusher? Mercer? Ill give you Shavers and Cooney with a side of Leon! As much as I like Witherspoon can't really cite him as consistent the same way Lyle (for example) was... Foreman stopping Norton was also pretty impressive. I have not even spoke about George's second coming...

How is Ron Lyle consistent but Tim Witherspoon isnt ?