Was comeback Foreman a scam?

[TheGreatA]

You're right but that's Holyfield not Briggs.

Holyfield threw a lot of elbows against Foreman. He was always doing that sort of stuff and somehow the referees never called him out on it.

He looked a bit pissed off about the fact that he wasn't able to budge this old guy.

Foreman dropped the "Old Mongoose" style cross-arm guard after this fight because he felt like it just made him a sitting duck for punches. It was supposed to be combined with upperbody movement and counter hooks, but Foreman was too slow and stiff to pull that off. He went back to his old "Mummy" style as Ali called it, and I suppose it was the right move since it won the belt for him against Moorer.

 

[defjaam]

Ali would take him in 64-75, after that Ali couldn't whip much of anyone.

I recall a video from Richard Dwyer (YouTube) in which he suggested that George could have beaten Ali in 74 if he had just jabbed Ali on the ropes instead of going nuclear on him.

@sweetviolenturg also once mentioned a private conversation he had with Angelo Dundee once, which I'll quote here:

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.

So to me this sort of seems as if George could've won the match in 74 already if he had played it smarter. What if he asserted himself against Don King and demanded the event to take place in Madison Square Garden instead of Africa?

Anyway, what happened, happened.

 

[mozfonky]

I recall a video from Richard Dwyer (YouTube) in which he suggested that George could have beaten Ali in 74 if he had just jabbed Ali on the ropes instead of going nuclear on him.

@sweetviolenturg also once mentioned a private conversation he had with Angelo Dundee once, which I'll quote here:



So to me this sort of seems as if George could've won the match in 74 already if he had played it smarter. What if he asserted himself against Don King and demanded the event to take place in Madison Square Garden instead of Africa?

Anyway, what happened, happened.

Ya, I remember Sweet posting that. I don't think George could have beaten him in Zaire because Ali was just too smart for him. The reason I think George could have pulled it off in the right circumstances, post 75, post-manila is that Ali truly was finished after that, truly was damaged goods. Just look at his fights after that, it's more than him not showing up in shape, which was the case for almost every fight except for the Norton3 and Spinks 2 fights, he just wasn't the same. It's a significant statistic that after kayoing Richard Dunn, he never scored another knockdown again or knockout. He held on to his title with help from the judges and his own boxing brain and great heart. People still think he got gifts against , pick them, Norton (3), Jimmy Young, or Earnie Shavers. That's a lot more close, gift decisions than most of our great Champions get. Joe Louis got one with Jersey Joe, Holmes got one or maybe two if you count the Witherspoon fight, Ali got several and even Spinks 1 was a split decision, which is ridiculous because he hardly won a round.

 

[defjaam]

Ya, I remember Sweet posting that. I don't think George could have beaten him in Zaire because Ali was just too smart for him. The reason I think George could have pulled it off in the right circumstances, post 75, post-manila is that Ali truly was finished after that, truly was damaged goods. Just look at his fights after that, it's more than him not showing up in shape, which was the case for almost every fight except for the Norton3 and Spinks 2 fights, he just wasn't the same. It's a significant statistic that after kayoing Richard Dunn, he never scored another knockdown again or knockout. He held on to his title with help from the judges and his own boxing brain and great heart. People still think he got gifts against , pick them, Norton (3), Jimmy Young, or Earnie Shavers. That's a lot more close, gift decisions than most of our great Champions get. Joe Louis got one with Jersey Joe, Holmes got one or maybe two if you count the Witherspoon fight, Ali got several and even Spinks 1 was a split decision, which is ridiculous because he hardly won a round.

I still wonder how much truth there is to George being drugged. I know George still believes something was off, he'll take it to the grave, but he obviously doesn't say it publicly anymore.

His corner was definitely giving him false instructions. Even Joe Frazier was commenting at ringside that George is falling for Ali's strategy.
That doesn't necessarily mean anything though. Rob McCracken was also giving Joshua false information during the first Usyk fight. Coaches make mistakes.

 

[mozfonky]

I still wonder how much truth there is to George being drugged. I know George still believes something was off, he'll take it to the grave, but he obviously doesn't say it publicly anymore.

His corner was definitely giving him false instructions. Even Joe Frazier was commenting at ringside that George is falling for Ali's strategy.
That doesn't necessarily mean anything though. Rob McCracken was also giving Joshua false information during the first Usyk fight. Coaches make mistakes.

George had a million excuses after that fight, like a lot of fighters. Some of them were definitely true, he claimed the ref rushed the count, for whatever reason, the ref did do that. He was saying he was drugged in the 90's when his book came out. Claimed someone in his corner gave him something that tasted like medicine.

As far as his corner, I think he just wasn't listening to a word anyone said, if they were giving him good advice. He was pretty full of himself at that stage of his life. Some have pointed out how George's trainer, Dick Sadler, was later spotted in Ali's camp but that's just boxing. Dick was once in talks to be Ali's trainer at the beginning of his career, it didn't work out because he said Ali was too crazy and drove him nuts (go figure) and later told Dundee that he should get a medal for putting up with that kid. But, they were clearly on friendly terms, even before the Foreman fight where Ali chases Sadler around. Archie Moorer was also an early Clay trainer but to think he sabotaged his own man, nah. I think George said he looked to archie for the signal to get up and Archie waited too long to give him a sign to get up. If he did, why would he do that. Archie didn't personally get along with Ali, lost to him by kayo and I can't see why he'd want to see him win.

As far as sweets post, I just don't know. Dundee said a lot of things and they have a kernel of truth to them. He once said George Chuvalo "mighta got lucky" against Ali if he had jabbed with him. that could have been true, Chuvalo gave Ali rough fights both times and if he'd thrown a jab he would have fared better in the way Norton did. Not many folks jabbed with Ali, Norton jabbed simultaneously with Ali and that caused Ali tons of problems. He wasn't used to it.

 

[dog y]

You're right but that's Holyfield not Briggs.

Thanks. Yet another reason to love Mr. Clean Holyfield lol

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

Holyfield threw a lot of elbows against Foreman. He was always doing that sort of stuff and somehow the referees never called him out on it.

He looked a bit pissed off about the fact that he wasn't able to budge this old guy.

Foreman dropped the "Old Mongoose" style cross-arm guard after this fight because he felt like it just made him a sitting duck for punches. It was supposed to be combined with upperbody movement and counter hooks, but Foreman was too slow and stiff to pull that off. He went back to his old "Mummy" style as Ali called it, and I suppose it was the right move since it won the belt for him against Moorer.

Yeah Holyfield did look discouraged with Foreman's ability to absorb the punishment he was dishing out. Foreman could still take a punch even at 42. I believe that having 49 lbs on Holyfield made him tougher to put a dent in.

 

[mozfonky]

George still used crossed arm in the coetzer fight I think but ya it's a style that's hard to punch out of if nothing else.

As far as holyfield and his butts and elbows, he was always dirty and wasn't seen that way until late in his career but his opponents were telling us the whole time.

 

[defjaam]

In case anyone's here interested, this guy on YouTube has quite a negative opinion of boxers from the past. Here's a video of him comparing a notorious heavyweight scrap from 1974 to a recent heavyweight scrap.



I'm on the fence about what he's saying. Obviously back then the boxers didn't operate as calculated as today, hence the considerably higher punch frequency of old fights.
At the same time I think he's underselling the past boxers and misjudging their skill compared to today.
For instance I definitely wouldn't pick Usyk over George Foreman. If Dubois had utilized his size and strength like George, and cut off the ring better on Usyk, it would have been a much harder fight for Usyk.
Why did Chisora cause Usyk so much trouble without any notable technique, slickness, defensive moves?
I think Lyle, Shavers, Norton would give him hard fights too.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

In case anyone's here interested, this guy on YouTube has quite a negative opinion of boxers from the past. Here's a video of him comparing a notorious heavyweight scrap from 1974 to a recent heavyweight scrap.



I'm on the fence about what he's saying. Obviously back then the boxers didn't operate as calculated as today, hence the considerably higher punch frequency of old fights.
At the same time I think he's underselling the past boxers and misjudging their skill compared to today.
For instance I definitely wouldn't pick Usyk over George Foreman. If Dubois had utilized his size and strength like George, and cut off the ring better on Usyk, it would have been a much harder fight for Usyk.
Why did Chisora cause Usyk so much trouble without any notable technique, slickness, defensive moves?
I think Lyle, Shavers, Norton would give him hard fights too.

The guy that made this film study has been around for a very long time within the YTBC. He had another channel previously. Used to go by Precise Presenter. He's not wrong about the glaring technical deficiencies that Ali & Foreman displayed in their fight. Neither were known for their fundamentals but their success in the ring is undeniable. Against Usyk, Chisora fought a very rough, dirty fight (allowed by the ref due to home advantage) and was about 40 lbs heavier. He's never been afraid to take one in order to give one. Another often overlooked aspect is that Usyk was still acclimating to heavyweight. Did Crawford look good in his last fight? No, but I'll bet he looks significantly better in another couple fights at JMW.

 

[mozfonky]

In case anyone's here interested, this guy on YouTube has quite a negative opinion of boxers from the past. Here's a video of him comparing a notorious heavyweight scrap from 1974 to a recent heavyweight scrap.



I'm on the fence about what he's saying. Obviously back then the boxers didn't operate as calculated as today, hence the considerably higher punch frequency of old fights.
At the same time I think he's underselling the past boxers and misjudging their skill compared to today.
For instance I definitely wouldn't pick Usyk over George Foreman. If Dubois had utilized his size and strength like George, and cut off the ring better on Usyk, it would have been a much harder fight for Usyk.
Why did Chisora cause Usyk so much trouble without any notable technique, slickness, defensive moves?
I think Lyle, Shavers, Norton would give him hard fights too.

guys like that are always european, I'll check to see if this one has an accent.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

guys like that are always european, I'll check to see if this one has an accent.

Actually, he lives in Ecuador. I've seen him before and he's unmistakably Latino. He's all about fundamental boxing and has historically shit on the American school because so many of their fighters have leaned more on their athleticism than technique.

 

[mozfonky]

Actually, he lives in Ecuador. I've seen him before and he's unmistakably Latino. He's all about fundamental boxing and has historically shit on the American school because so many of their fighters have leaned more on their athleticism than technique.

ecuador huh? Since when have boxers even come from there? I'm sure there are a few but none of my faves. As far as Latino's, of course there have been some great ones, statistically, probably not as many champs as America but no doubt some great ones.

America doesn't have just one style, he doesn't know what hes talking about if hes saying that, there are too many good fighters with too many different styles and strengths and weaknesses. I heard the accent and I shut him off, I have no time for another guy trying to diss the great fighters of the past. Someone always did it, the difference in earlier times were those someones' were usually older people who at least put in their time as a fan/writer/trainer or whatever. These nobodies today aren't gonna merit listening to.

Sure, I have mags that seriously asked if ali was as good as dempsey and Louis, from the 70's. They were talking about him like we might talk about someone fighting today, only todays guys don't usually have dozens of wins over world rated fighters. A fury or a Wilder gets a title and already people are talking about greatest this or that. I think our old poster Kid McCoy plead guilty to writing an article like the one I mentioned, and he was certainly totally off about a lot of stuff but I sure had a world of respect for him. This kid? nah, won't even listen.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

ecuador huh? Since when have boxers even come from there? I'm sure there are a few but none of my faves. As far as Latino's, of course there have been some great ones, statistically, probably not as many champs as America but no doubt some great ones.

America doesn't have just one style, he doesn't know what hes talking about if hes saying that, there are too many good fighters with too many different styles and strengths and weaknesses. I heard the accent and I shut him off, I have no time for another guy trying to diss the great fighters of the past. Someone always did it, the difference in earlier times were those someones' were usually older people who at least put in their time as a fan/writer/trainer or whatever. These nobodies today aren't gonna merit listening to.

Sure, I have mags that seriously asked if ali was as good as dempsey and Louis, from the 70's. They were talking about him like we might talk about someone fighting today, only todays guys don't usually have dozens of wins over world rated fighters. A fury or a Wilder gets a title and already people are talking about greatest this or that. I think our old poster Kid McCoy plead guilty to writing an article like the one I mentioned, and he was certainly totally off about a lot of stuff but I sure had a world of respect for him. This kid? nah, won't even listen.

To be specific he's a Chilean guy that lives in Ecuador. That's the accent you heard. Sure, he runs down ATGs at times but he's also pointing out actual flaws in both Ali & Foreman (not that they needed to be pointed out, the ones he mentioned are quite obvious). No boxing coach/trainer would teach a student to fight like that. Well, maybe the Ingles would. That's his point I guess.

 

[mozfonky]

To be specific he's a Chilean guy that lives in Ecuador. That's the accent you heard. Sure, he runs down ATGs at times but he's also pointing out actual flaws in both Ali & Foreman (not that they needed to be pointed out, the ones he mentioned are quite obvious). No boxing coach/trainer would teach a student to fight like that. Well, maybe the Ingles would. That's his point I guess.

guys that advanced have put in the time to eschew the things a beginner like him would need to know. It's the old thing you hear across many fields of interest, "you have to know the rules before you break the rules". Most great fighters do not hold their hands in "proper" boxing position, not in the past or the present. They know those rules though, Dempsey and Louis wrote boxing tutorials and they weren't always in line with how they fought. Foreman? Foreman was foreman, a force of nature, teaching him "proper" anything would have been a waste of valuable time. It was best just to let him go and improve him where they could. Liston was the same way, of course, the truth is, both of their shortcomings caught up to them with Ali but Ali was Ali, not some sammy lunchmeat.

I met a guy at autozone who claimed to have sparred and trained guys like George and Shavers. Do I believe him? Not necessarily but he clearly knows George's habits in a way most random fans wouldn't. He claimed to be able to dance and box George's ears off, I was skeptical because Ali said that George was the best he ever fought at cutting off the ring but the way he described it, how george would take that big step (part of the reason ali called him a mummy) and this guy would step to his left and wait for george to turn into him and clobber him with a hook. That's a thing that the random fan won't even know what he's saying, he's talking about walking the guy into his shot, making him turn into it. Anyway, it was sparring, didn't mean he'd beat him and didn't mean he didn't like or respect george's ability. Everyone has flaws, even Sugar Ray Robinson took too goddamned many punches. Duran couldn't handle boxers from a temperament point of view, Arguello couldn't deal with speed and movement, etcc., etc.., That doesn't mean we should shit on them. Fact of the matter is, I've seen some really great fundamental fighters and they just often don't have the attributes to get anywhere. The perfect technical fighter with no punch and no physical strength is gonna have a hard time in the sport, it's a lot more than technique, especially the pros.

 

[Deaths Head]

Wasn't it Tyson that avoided him?

Foreman said he’d never fight Tyson as long as King was involved which is just saying he doesn’t want the fight . He said different things in public but all the nonsense Tyson was afraid is nonsense I remember him literally telling everyone he needs to fight Foreman bf rigor mortus sets in after one of his fights bf Ruddock .

 

[treelo]

Foreman avoided a fair few fighters on his comeback, people have short memories and just remember the Moorer win with some rose tinted glasses

he said multiple times he didnt want to fight Lewis...i think his words were "momma didnt raise no fool"