Is Foreman a better boxer than Ali since he destroyed fighters Ali had wars with (and lost to)

[spacetime]

It's true. No proficiency at combos, not a great finisher. All he had was that right hand.

 

[sweetviolenturg]

Shavers wasn't even a good finisher and he still beat him.

Um, what?!!
We're talking about one of the deadliest finishers in the history of the heavyweight division. A man who knocked out 68 of the 74 opponents that he beat. Damn, son. Just because he wasn't able to finish two of the greatest champions of all time in Ali & Holmes doesn't mean that he couldn't finish fights.

 

[Woldog]

Style makes fights.

 

[spacetime]

Um, what?!!
We're talking about one of the deadliest finishers in the history of the heavyweight division. A man who knocked out 68 of the 74 opponents that he beat. Damn, son. Just because he wasn't able to finish two of the greatest champions of all time in Ali & Holmes doesn't mean that he couldn't finish fights.

Nah. He rarely needed to be a finisher because the one-punch did all the job. When it didn't do that for him and he had to follow up, he couldn't. You can see from his highlight reels that the fighters were already totally out of it. If he had better finishing abilities he most likely would have beaten Holmes in at least one of those two fights, if not both, and Parkinson Ali as well.

 

[sweetviolenturg]

It's true. No proficiency at combos, not a great finisher. All he had was that right hand.

The vast majority of the time that right hand was all he needed. No, he wasn't a blazing fast combination puncher & he didn't need to be. He also had a very underrated, dangerous left hook. Watch the Norton fight again. It's his left hook that initially hurts Norton. Also, watch his blowouts of Jimmy Ellis, Henry Clark ( in their rematch ) & Howard "KO" Smith for examples of how well he could finish high caliber opposition.

 

[spacetime]

The vast majority of the time that right hand was all he needed. No, he wasn't a blazing fast combination puncher & he didn't need to be. He also had a very underrated, dangerous left hook. Watch the Norton fight again. It's his left hook that initially hurts Norton. Also, watch his blowouts of Jimmy Ellis, Henry Clark ( in their rematch ) & Howard "KO" Smith for examples of how well he could finish high caliber opposition.

He seems to share this achilles heal with Wilder. Wilder goes berserk when he tries to finish guys off and looks his absolute worst. I actually think Wilder has more ability than Shavers, though.

 

[Cylence]

Shavers wasn't even a good finisher and he still beat him.

Eh, it really depends on how you define finisher. If you define it in the Trinidad or Pacquiao way in that if they hurt you, chances are they're going to bomb you and not going to let you off the hook, then I guess you're right.

On the flipside to that though, Shavers was such a monstrous puncher that a lot of guys didn't even survive the initial bomb.

 

[tehmvp]

Ali beat Foreman. Nothing else need be said.

 

[defjaam]

I don't think that Ali would have been able to repeat the victory over Foreman had there been a rematch though. And Angelo Dundee told me as much back in 1985 when we had a conversation about the Foreman fight.
He said that Ali fought the perfect fight under the perfect set of circumstances that October night in 1974 & that repeating it would have been extremely difficult for him. And that it would have been impossible for him after his third fight with Frazier because of how much that fight took out of Ali. He was a shell of his former self afterward. His legs were pretty much shot & the snap on his punches was gone. Dundee said he couldn't have kept Foreman honest in a rematch & that George would have likely walked right through him. Which is why they never intended to fight him again. He said that Foreman's upset loss to Jimmy Young was the only thing that kept Ali in the game post-1976. He had fully intended on retiring after the Norton rubber match but when Foreman lost to Young & subsequently retired for a decade that Ali decided to keep going. Thus the hastily arranged title defense vs the undeserving Alfredo Evangelista in May of '77.

Interesting.
I agree with Dundee... First I thought it was heading to Ali getting lucky in Zaire, but then it went Ali deteriorating physically. Though maybe it was luck too, to a certain extent... "Perfect set of circumstances" sounded like it.

Anyway, it would have been interesting to see 1973 Ali (2nd Norton fight) box Foreman, and then the 1974 version for the rematch.

Prime Ali (1966/67) wins 2 out of 2 times, I think.

 

[ssx]

To answer the topic... No. Foreman is not a better boxer than Ali. Doesn't matter that he clobbered guys that gave Ali tough fights. If they fought a rematch I could see Foreman winning I guess, but the version of Ali that beat Foreman was not a prime version and as more time passed he would only get worse. If we are talking Prime vs Prime, I'd take Ali over Foreman every time.

 

[mozfonky]

better puncher, stronger, bigger, fast and pretty advanced technically. Not as smart as ali (who was?) even the old ali still had some speed and more determination and confidence than when he was young. he was experienced (the same thing that made sonny overlook him too, he was an olympic champion with 10 years of hard work underneath his belt when they fought, not the amateur that people thought he was). But boxing is really all about styled, frazier was to small to fight head to head with george and kenny was a headcase who lost to every big puncher he ever fought. Ali also was very adaptable on the spot, improvisational in ways that mark the greatest fighters.

 

[OhBam]

You're goddamn right.

Prime Holmes vs Prime Foreman would have crowned the PFP best heavyweight of all time. It's a shame it never happened in the 70s.

Add in Ali ducking George, and I'm surprised he even cracks people's top 5 heavyweights. That Zaire shit was shady.

 

[Hagler]

Foreman's resume is great, but Ali's is still better. And he did beat Foreman.

 

[deucesarewild]

Norton couldn't even beat Shavers.

Norton is a good enough boxer to have four razor close decision fights against ATG's: three fights with Ali, one with Holmes. The loss to Shavers was late in his career, as was the Cooney loss.

I am not saying Norton is an all time great, but I could see him doing well in other HW eras.

 

[spacetime]

he did beat Foreman.

Spinks beat Ali.

 

[Hagler]

Spinks beat Ali.

And Ali beat Spinks.

 

[KillerIsBack V2]

I say yes, even though styles make fights. You could argue against if it was just one fight but he repeatedly destroyed guys Ali struggled with. Psychology aside, I would expect Foreman to beat Ali as well if he learns his lesson and they repeat it 10 times. I don't care how different they were style-wise ALi lost to far worse boxers than Foreman. It's by no means an impossible task to defeat him,

Frazier and Norton were cannon-fodder for Foreman. It wasn't even a fight. Both had wars with Ali. Neither one could go many rounds with big George. Ali said Norton in particular, he could never fully get passed even in the rematch, though Ali won. Norton got creamed by Foreman. Frazier got equally destroyed by George and did only marginally better in his rematch, still woefully inept and got stopped there as well.

We're playing Boxing math? I can do that too see:-
Ali beat Jimmy Young and Jimmy Young beat Foreman.
It's that easy and it's your own logic.

Now that we got that out of the way.

Foreman just hit super hard so it was pointless to charge forward at him aggressively all night. Ali and young beat both beat him off the ropes. No, I don't think foreman would have beaten either cause that's the only way Foreman knew how to fight(masterfully cut off the ring and bomb), but older come back foreman had improved his own jab far more.

It's bs that you wanna call out Ali's jab for a length advantage and not consider Foreman's inhuman raw strength advantage. But I'm just wasting my time, since people like you and Tidwel just reply with "you're triggered" to everything that disagree with you.

 

[spacetime]

We're playing Boxing math? I can do that too see:-
Ali beat Jimmy Young and Jimmy Young beat Foreman.
It's that easy and it's your own logic.

Now that we got that out of the way.

Foreman just hit super hard so it was pointless to charge forward at him aggressively all night. Ali and young beat both beat him off the ropes. No, I don't think foreman would have beaten either cause that's the only way Foreman knew how to fight(masterfully cut off the ring and bomb), but older come back foreman had improved his own jab far more.

It's bs that you wanna call out Ali's jab for a length advantage and not consider Foreman's inhuman raw strength advantage. But I'm just wasting my time, since people like you and Tidwel just reply with "you're triggered" to everything that disagree with you.

Foremans jab was not just great because he had power, and Ali had bigger fists than Foreman anyway

 

[spacetime]

And Ali beat Spinks.

Because Spinks gave him another chance to get beat. Foreman was never given another chance

 

[spacetime]

We're playing Boxing math? I can do that too see:-
Ali beat Jimmy Young and Jimmy Young beat Foreman.
It's that easy and it's your own logic.
.

Did he destroy or completely outbox Jimmy the way Foreman did with Norton and Frazier??