George Foreman v Anthony Joshua

If AJ made better use of his height and reach, I'd give him a better chance, but he doesn't. Nor does he have the defense he'd need to avoid at least some of Foreman's assault. And while I don't think AJ's chin is necessarily bad, no man can afford to take so many flush shots from a Foreman type puncher.

For whatever reason, AJ is not the force that he SHOULD be. And even if guys like Parker and Takam are better than given credit for, they shouldn't be able to trouble AJ. Not if AJ is on the level of a fighter that can hang, let alone BEAT Foreman.

 

Nearly ever great fighter has had mediocre guys that have either beaten them or caused them trouble.

Foreman is no different with Lyle and Young. Lewis has Bruno, Mercer, Rahman and McCall. Mayweather had Maidana.

We still need more information on Aj.

I think the Klitschko challenge is underrated. IMO Wlad was close to his best physically and mentally in that fight and fighters these days are scarcely “shot” by their late 30s and early 40s like they were in times past....just look at Hopkins and mayweather.

Also Wlad if nothing else has always been a very dangerous fighter both in terms of raw power but also in terms of overall offensive arsenal. I think that was a good test that Joshua passed.

Foreman was raw power, but he was sloppy with his punches and relatively slow. This worked against smaller fighters but it may not have given him the same level of success against a bigger, taller, probably stronger guy. And if Lyle could drop Foreman a few times, Joshua certainly could. Joshua is also big and strong enough to smother George’s work on the inside.

 

Lyle and Young are being compared with Parker, now?

Laughable

 

And again two more guys that gave Sly's supposed idol fits

Joshua > Ali

 

No Ali fan bases the fact that he’s the GOAT on the 70s version much less the LATE 70s version. Joshua would likely beat the post Manila Ali also. But besides all of that, my only point here is that many very talented fighters have struggled in the past with guys that were nowhere near as good as them. The real test is consistency over time against various styles....not one off struggles. Hearns lost to Barkley twice but we don’t penalize his legacy just because of those losses to a club fighter.

Edited to say the Lyle was pre Manila, my bad. But again I don’t say Ali was a bum just because of that...I look at total body of work and Ali triumphed over a variety of styles...some easily and some more difficult and more importantly he has he style to beat Joshua...I’m just not sure Foreman did.

 

Ali was awful... he got beat by a weak one armed brawler with no chin that Joshua would beat in a round

His greatest win is against another brawler that Joshua would flat out handle

The guys he fought in the 60s were worse and smaller too and even then one of them that was like 195 almost KOd him ... ref would've stopped it nowadays

When you also factor in how small and weak he was compared to huge modern athletes who lift weights and do squats and eat awesome nutritious meals and high tech vitamins, it's no contest

Joshua would dominate Ali and get him out of there in a few rounds... it's one thing to outmaneuver 215 pound Sonny Liston who was 6'1 or take punches from 6'3 220 pounds George Foreman ... quite another to deal with a 6'6 250 pound superstar modern athlete

 

You crack me up Cdogg I must admit

 

Lol indeed, AJ showed he's very limited. Looked very average against Whyte, Takam, Parker and old ass pussy wlad. He gets his ass best by foreman. Violently

 

Damn, Cdoog is on a roll

 

But let's not forget AJ was a former teen delinquent. That has to count for something. That faggot ALi got his bike stolen by a louisville bum

 

You're having fun with this I see.

Anyway, it's funny how things work around here...if you are optimistic about or...heaven forbid...PRAISE a contemporary fighter, suddenly and without warning you're a nut-licker and your proclaiming him to be the GOAT.

 

Optimism is different than fevered myopia

 

It's also interesting and amusing to point out that all of your (and the others here like you) reasons for picking this guy over fighters like Foreman and Frazier apply to Ali as well yet none of you are willing to go there

 

I haven't picked AJ over Foreman you nitwit. I said that we don't know enough information as yet but he has the potential. I pick him over Frazier without hesitation. And NO...the reasons do not apply to Ali. It's not about competition...it's about styles. Pay attention.

 

Read your posts, for god's sake

 

No I suggest that YOU read them for Big Bang's sake.

I only mentioned the fact that great fighters sometimes have boring or drawn out fights with mediocre fighters as a response to people criticizing Joshua for his fight with Parker or Takam.

 

But you're calling guys mediocre that clearly weren't

You've done nothing but justify why Joshua could beat Foreman which is essentially picking him

 

Your justifications for why apply easily to Muhammad Ali

 

I agree with Sly that 30 is no longer the cut-off for a fighter's prime these days. As boxing fans we need to realise that. Somebody who would be seen as past prime in the 70s or 80s is still useful at elite level at the same age in the 2010's.

Listen, I'm not picking AJ to beat Foreman, I actually agree that he gets fucked up big time in this one, but I've spent the last hour or so looking through previous mythical match-ups and it does appear fighters outside heavyweight get far more concessions for bad performances than the big guys. I get that it's the glamour division in boxing and all but shit, I get the impression if AJ cleaned out the entire division he would get absolutely zero credit.

 

Saying that someone could beat another isn’t picking them. “Could” is different to “would”. The entire concept of a LIVE underdog is built around the fact that we think he “could” win but we expect the other fighter to win.

 

Oh please... you've listed two dozen reasons (95% of them either exaggerated bullshit or just blatantly made up) why Joshua could win AND/OR Foreman could lose

 

Who said 30 meant anything ever? Ferdie Pacheco?

There's never been anything remotely clear or agreed upon about that

Thinking that win over wald pussy is some incredible achievement is down to one's view of wald pussy ... I don't think being the only guy that ever got wald pussy to fight in a semi-manly fashion when it was his final career fight 20 years into it is something to get very excited about

You guys are already emphatically picking this guy to beat one great heavyweight and now you're saying he "could" beat another but those of us not ready to jump on that bandwagon are haters

That's insane talk

 

Foreman would get up on his toes and out-box Joshua

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA!!!!

 

LMFAOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

 

Yeah, Frazier would be "buried" against AJ alright....

They'd bury Joe under a cell for committing first degree murder.

 

Based on tonight, AJ ain't beating the 90s Foreman. The Foreman that KO'd Cooney would DEFINITELY stop Joshua.

No longer a point in discussing how he fares against the 70s Foreman.

 

The fucking notion of this stiff robot beating genuine boxers ... all right there plain to fucking see...

Vindicated in my vehement disagreement with people who can't spot the difference in quality between Big Baby Miller and Tim Witherspoon

 

He'd be buried when A.J's Colossal robotic ass toppled over and fell on him after being sparked by a scything left hook.

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA!!!!