News just in! George Foreman the best of the 80's Era, superior to Muhammad ALi!

[aboutfkntime]

Read all about it!





Did Ali have bad match ups stylistically? Guys like Ken Norton, Fraisier and others?

To me if you take that into account Foreman could be considered the best of his era or at least equal to ALi, because he only lost to Ali due to a sneaky tactic and bad match up stylistically/genetically.

He took care of the rest of his foe in a far more impressive way. Ali did not.

It seems to me that Foreman is the king of the 70's the best of his era but ALi gets the recognition for it unfairly.

Ali lost to his poor match ups and didnt take care of the rest of his foe in the same dominant one sided way that foreman did.(for the most part)


I mean in fighting there is a rock paper scissors thing going on, their may be a best of everyone in history, but even he might have a guy that beats him just because of of stylistic/genetic match up where he is scissors and he meets a rock , but that doesn't mean hes not the best of all time, or that the other guy that can beat him is.


Ali won and lost vs Norton, 1,1, (JUST) and lost/won vs Frazier, and had close calls/non dominant fights with others, Foreman wiped them out, and all his others pretty much, overall you could argue hes the better man more impressive in his era

Ali beat Foreman

/story

Ali was clearly a better-skilled, more well-rounded, fighter

[AlexKid]

Except Ali would have beaten Forman 10 out of 10 times.

Im not disputing this, but that simplistic kind of notion is exactly what im talking about. Lets say Sanders beats Wlad 9/10 but cant dominate the rest like Wlad can. Is sanders better than Wlad? I dont think so.


Also Foreman fell for a TRICK, rope a dope, it undermines Foreman's loss and Ali's win, because with a rematch he would not fall for it again then ud get to see how they really square off.


Foreman didnt punch to the head much, and just exhausted himself on the body. Ali has taken on harder punchers than foreman, but also downed by much lesser punchers, and Foreman one of the hardest punchers of the era had a really good chin to boot so he can unleash more without fear of being KOed unlike the others so maybe a good punch could have got through.


We didnt even get to see a rematch, perhaps the most important rematch. So we dont know.


It was one sided in the 1st fight, and it looks to be a win for Ali in a rematch, but we still do not know how it would have gone down, and how it would have gone minus the trick.


But more importantly my argument doesn't hinge on Foreman needing to beat Ali.

[boliodogs]

TOTALLY. Rewatching that fight really clues you in: Brother Muhammed was smoking Foreman well before he went into the rope-a-dope tactic.

Virtually everyone forgets this, or ignores it.

You are right. Ali didn't come from behind. He was always ahead.

[aboutfkntime]

Im not disputing this, but that simplistic kind of notion is exactly what im talking about. Lets say Sanders beats Wlad 9/10 but cant dominate the rest like Wlad can. Is sanders better than Wlad? I dont think so.


Also Foreman fell for a TRICK, rope a dope, it undermines Foreman's loss and Ali's win, because with a rematch he would not fall for it again then ud get to see how they really square off.


Foreman didnt punch to the head much, and just exhausted himself on the body. Ali has taken on harder punchers than foreman, but also downed by much lesser punchers, and Foreman one of the hardest punchers of the era had a really good chin to boot so he can unleash more without fear of being KOed unlike the others so maybe a good punch could have got through. I mean he struggled with Norton its not unimaginable


We didnt even get to see a rematch the most important rematch. So we dont know.


It was one sided in the 1st fight, and it looks to be a win for Ali in a rematch, but we still do not know how it would have gone down, and how it would have gone minus the trick.


But more importantly my argument doesn't hinge on Foreman needing to beat Ali.

but your argument is... " if we had a do-over "

everyone can play that tune

Ali was a better fighter than Foreman

[AlexKid]

but your argument is... " if we had a do-over "

everyone can play that tune

Ali was a better fighter than Foreman

Im not here to play trollshido, if anyone wants to discuss properly I will reply.

There's something effective but also worthless about tricking someone, its like the Anderson Silver vs Vitor fight we never really got to see who was best because he fell for a trick. You know tricks are great part of the game but also if you win that way you dont see who is best you dont get to see the real fight, you dont get to see who is better like you would in a best of 10.

Also over simplistic counter argument you are just trolling

[aboutfkntime]

Im not here to play trollshido, if anyone wants to discuss properly I will reply.

There's something effective but also worthless about tricking someone, its like the Anderson Silver vs Vitor fight we never really got to see who was best because he fell for a trick. You know tricks are great part of the game but also if you win that way you dont see who is best you dont get to see the real fight, you dont get to see who is better like you would in a best of 10.

Also over simplistic counter argument you are just trolling

no, I wasn't trolling

Ali was clearly a better fighter than Foreman

[Curtis Harper]

History section

86 that place.

[Hooded Terror]

Except Ali would have beaten Forman 10 out of 10 times.

No way. Not even sure how it would fare if they fought 2 or 3 times.

[JakeTheBoxer]

Ali was far superior boxer. Boxer always beats puncher.