George Foreman Is Overrated

[QueensburyRules]

He should never be ranked ahead of Larry Holmes ever. Under any circumsances. I have seen that a lot.

- - Yo, Sir Monkey Mike, Big George born in the same year as tubby Lar who used to be skinny, and from the Olympics to Ring Rankings, anytime Big George was active Lar was unranked, period, end of!

Ya could look it up like Lar title record vs champs holding titles won in the ring is 0-6, 0 KO. Or maybe get thee thy keeper to look it up for U as well as the single belt Lar held in a multibelt era.

A Giant Sukking sound was heard when Ali, Frazier, and George retired leaving aging Kenny who became the first snail mail WBC champ wif U and Lar trying to lift Rocky's jockstrap.

Jus da fax, ma'am.

[Willow The Wisp]

Now Larry Holmes....There's a figher deserved of high rating.

[MikeyMike100]

- - Yo, Sir Monkey Mike, Big George born in the same year as tubby Lar who used to be skinny, and from the Olympics to Ring Rankings, anytime Big George was active Lar was unranked, period, end of!

Ya could look it up like Lar title record vs champs holding titles won in the ring is 0-6, 0 KO. Or maybe get thee thy keeper to look it up for U as well as the single belt Lar held in a multibelt era.

A Giant Sukking sound was heard when Ali, Frazier, and George retired leaving aging Kenny who became the first snail mail WBC champ wif U and Lar trying to lift Rocky's jockstrap.

Jus da fax, ma'am.

While George was preaching Larry was holding the heavyweight division down. After Ali, Fraizer, Norton, and Foreman retired Larry Holmes kept the heavyweight division alive. Titles defenses Larry Holmes 20, George Foreman 2. No comparison stop it. George even ducked him in the 90s.

[billeau2]

Yes I know he's a legend Big George im a fan of his too. But his resume is thin. In his 1st career he was protected and after 37 fights fought Joe Frazier for the title. He completely dominated him, great win. He had 2 other defenses one vs Ken Norton, who was coming off a loss, and dominated him, great win. He then lost to an older Ali. He had a few more fights and the lost to Jimmy Young. He then retires from boxing.


Years later (10) he makes his come back and changes his image around. He fights a bunch of tuneups (most notably against a coming out of retirement Gerry Cooney) and then fights Evander Holyfield for the title. He does better than people thought but still loses clearly. He then cherry picks Tommy Morrison after Morrison got chined by Ray Mercer and loses almost every single round. He then cherry picks Michael Moorer after Morrer beat Holyfield (he didn't fight Bowe after Bowe beat Holyfield) and knocks him out after losing every round prior. Great win and great accomplishment.

He then vacates the belt to avoid fighting his mandatory Tony Tucker and doesn't fight any of the major competition for the rest of his career ruining the lineal title.

He has a padded record. He has like 10 fights vs legitimate competition and lost around half of them


George Foreman for me doesn't have enough strong wins to be considered better than Larry Holmes, Evander Holyfield, Lennox Lewis or Wladimir Klitschko but often times is ranked ahead of them on all time lists. History remembers him well because of his personality and being in the Golden era of heavyweights with Ali, Fraizer, and Norton.

What do you guys think?

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...

[billeau2]

He should never be ranked ahead of Larry Holmes ever. Under any circumsances. I have seen that a lot.

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.

[QueensburyRules]

While George was preaching Larry was holding the heavyweight division down. After Ali, Fraizer, Norton, and Foreman retired Larry Holmes kept the heavyweight division alive. Titles defenses Larry Holmes 20, George Foreman 2. No comparison stop it. George even ducked him in the 90s.

- - 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.

[Ivich]

Yes I know he's a legend Big George im a fan of his too. But his resume is thin. In his 1st career he was protected and after 37 fights fought Joe Frazier for the title. He completely dominated him, great win. He had 2 other defenses one vs Ken Norton, who was coming off a loss, and dominated him, great win. He then lost to an older Ali. He had a few more fights and the lost to Jimmy Young. He then retires from boxing.


Years later (10) he makes his come back and changes his image around. He fights a bunch of tuneups (most notably against a coming out of retirement Gerry Cooney) and then fights Evander Holyfield for the title. He does better than people thought but still loses clearly. He then cherry picks Tommy Morrison after Morrison got chined by Ray Mercer and loses almost every single round. He then cherry picks Michael Moorer after Morrer beat Holyfield (he didn't fight Bowe after Bowe beat Holyfield) and knocks him out after losing every round prior. Great win and great accomplishment.

He then vacates the belt to avoid fighting his mandatory Tony Tucker and doesn't fight any of the major competition for the rest of his career ruining the lineal title.

He has a padded record. He has like 10 fights vs legitimate competition and lost around half of them


George Foreman for me doesn't have enough strong wins to be considered better than Larry Holmes, Evander Holyfield, Lennox Lewis or Wladimir Klitschko but often times is ranked ahead of them on all time lists. History remembers him well because of his personality and being in the Golden era of heavyweights with Ali, Fraizer, and Norton.

What do you guys think?

He's top ten whatever way you look at it.

[Willow The Wisp]

He's top ten whatever way you look at it.

Right on brother. Holmes and Foreman Both rank very highly among the others on any informed list of best or most able or most accomplished MOQ professional Heavyweights ever. This isn't even a point worth debating.

[Willow The Wisp]

- - 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.

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

[MikeyMike100]

He's top ten whatever way you look at it.

I agree. Sometimes I see him in the top 5 or the Mount Rushmore of Heavyweights and I just dont agree with that.