Joe Frazier '70 V Mike Tyson '88

[newbridgeboxing]

Who takes this one in the battle of the brawlers , i see it going Smoking Joes way with that sick left hook he throws ! This fight would be something else ..


[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[SteveO]

Seeing the way Joe matched up against Foreman, I don't think swarming Iron Mike would end well.

[Longhhorn71]

Tyson has two hands of destruction, Frazier mostly one.

Tyson slightly bigger.

It is all about who wants it more.

Tyson early.....Frazier late.

[Jbuz]

I think Tyson blows him out. Frazier was a slow starter, Tyson was the fastest starter. Frazier knows nothing but to go forward, and Tyson would exploit it.

[SteveO]

I think Tyson blows him out. Frazier was a slow starter, Tyson was the fastest starter. Frazier knows nothing but to go forward, and Tyson would exploit it.

I think that's how it goes.

[newbridgeboxing]

I think that's how it goes.




Naa no way Mike Tyson would demolish Smokin Joe!!!



[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Jbuz]

Naa no way Mike Tyson would demolish Smokin Joe!!!



[Only registered and activated users can see links]

That's what they said about Foreman.

I know they're different fighters, but I see similar principles with the matchups. I just don't think Frazier matches up well with the elite punchers of the division who start fast. He was someone who broke fighters down with his increasing workrate as the fight progressed. Tyson would explode from round 1, and IF Frazier managed to survive the first 4 or 5 rounds, then he'd be a huge show. But he might be so far behind on the scorecards from multiple knockdowns that it wouldn't matter.

[newbridgeboxing]

That's what they said about Foreman.

I know they're different fighters, but I see similar principles with the matchups. I just don't think Frazier matches up well with the elite punchers of the division who start fast. He was someone who broke fighters down with his increasing workrate as the fight progressed. Tyson would explode from round 1, and IF Frazier managed to survive the first 4 or 5 rounds, then he'd be a huge show. But he might be so far behind on the scorecards from multiple knockdowns that it wouldn't matter.

Have you seen any of Joes fights ? :shock:

[SteveO]

Have you seen any of Joes fights ? :shock:

I have.

And for what it's worth, I'm a Frazier fan.

But in some ways, it'd be like Joe fighting a faster and more powerful version of himself.

[newbridgeboxing]

I have.

And for what it's worth, I'm a Frazier fan.

But in some ways, it'd be like Joe fighting a faster and more powerful version of himself.

I disagree completely Mike Tyson wasn't all that spectacular, he got beat in his prime by Buster Douglas and soo on.. I think your opinion of Mike Tyson is to high compared to the 1970s heavyweights!!, in which Frazier fought !!

[OBCboxer]

Frazier is my favorite of all-time and have seen almost everyone of his fights. I think the ref will save Frazier to fight another day inside of 5. Tyson was too fast of a starter and Joe would start slow and would KD multiple times until the ref just stops it.

[BlackWater]

I disagree completely Mike Tyson wasn't all that spectacular, he got beat in his prime by Buster Douglas and soo on.. I think your opinion of Mike Tyson is to high compared to the 1970s heavyweights!!, in which Frazier fought !!
1990 was not prime tyson. By that time he had lost his conditioning and head movement.

Joe Fraizer was essentially a prototype of Mike Tyson.

[SteveO]

I disagree completely Mike Tyson wasn't all that spectacular, he got beat in his prime by Buster Douglas and soo on.. I think your opinion of Mike Tyson is to high compared to the 1970s heavyweights!!, in which Frazier fought !!

Pound for pound rankings, Frazier is higher.

Head to head, I feel Joe loses.

[newbridgeboxing]

1990 was not prime tyson. By that time he had lost his conditioning and head movement.

Joe Fraizer was essentially a prototype of Mike Tyson.


Still hes only 24

[BlackWater]

Still hes only 24 Wasn't his peak.

1987 MegaTyson™ was faster, had more power, better hand speed, better head movement, and all around better defense than Joe Fraizer.

[newbridgeboxing]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Jbuz]

Have you seen any of Joes fights ? :shock:

Nah.

:think:roll:

[newbridgeboxing]

Wasn't his peak.

1987 MegaTyson™ was faster, had more power, better hand speed, better head movement, and all around better defense than Joe Fraizer.



A '87 Tyson fought these ...
Larry Holmes (2 years out + old)
Tyrell Biggs
Tony Tucker
James Smith
Pinklon Thomas

ok now compare Joe fraziers..

[BlackWater]

A '87 Tyson fought these ...
Larry Holmes (2 years out + old)
Tyrell Biggs
Tony Tucker
James Smith
Pinklon Thomas

ok now compare Joe fraziers..
I'm not saying Tyson's opponents were better, I'm simply comparing the fighters themselves. Joe's legacy is undoubtedly better, but Tyson was just a better head to head fighter.

[newbridgeboxing]

I'm not saying Tyson's opponents were better, I'm simply comparing the fighters themselves. Joe's legacy is undoubtedly better, but Tyson was just a better head to head fighter.


Ok saying this how would you fair Tyson if he was in his 87 prime in 1970 and in the mix back then , how would he compare to all them great champions, i'm feeling you lot are only going to say 2nd to Ali and thats all ..

[MRBILL]

Who takes this one in the battle of the brawlers , i see it going Smoking Joes way with that sick left hook he throws ! This fight would be something else ..


[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Tyson of '88 KO's Frazier of 1970...:shock:

MR.BILL

[ripcity]

Tyson by ko within 6 rounds. Too bigg, strong and fast.

[fists of fury]

In my book this could get ugly really quickly.

I have a ton of respect for Frazier and his legacy will never be forgotten but here is a situation where he could get blown out quickly.

"But it's Joe Frazier!" I hear you say. Well yes, but reputation aside it could still get ugly very quicky for him.

For one thing, it's quite remarkable that Foreman aside Frazier never fought a serious puncher. Perhaps his management knew something?
His chin was good enough for the most part, but it was not rock solid. Tyson fought guys with better chins and still knocked them out.

Frazier would also come directly at Tyson, and I can't see how this can spell anything other than disaster, frankly. He would be right in Tyson's face all night long, and even if he crowded him at some point Tyson is going to hit him flush, and my guess is that it would be sooner rather than later.
Tyson had excellent accuracy and would throw punches in bunches, often faster than the other guy could react.

I see Frazier, a slow starter, being overwhelmed early. Tyson could take his best punch, but Joe could not take Tyson's. Joe's lack of height may (may) be a problem for Tyson at first, but once Mike finds his range my bet is it gets very one-sided.

I don't neccessarily buy into the "Frazier late" scenario either. If Tyson didn't take you out early, he adjusted and broke you down one piece at a time. His power and handspeed would dissuade Joe from simply boring in as he was prone to do against the likes of Ali, who lacked the punching power to put serious hurt on Joe.

In any event, I don't think it goes very far. Tyson within 2 rounds, maybe less.

[Holmes' Jab]

I favour Tyson by early stoppage.

[SteveO]

Ok saying this how would you fair Tyson if he was in his 87 prime in 1970 and in the mix back then , how would he compare to all them great champions, i'm feeling you lot are only going to say 2nd to Ali and thats all ..

Not necessarily. And I agree with this poster who said that, head to head, Tyson beats Frazier, but Frazier ranks higher overall in terms of accomplishment.

Make a list of some matchups with Tyson, if you'd like, and I'll give you my spin on them.

[ChrisPontius]

Joe Fraizer was essentially a prototype of Mike Tyson.

This statement shows you don't really know much about their respective styles.

Sorry to come off as an arrogant prick.

[jaysuperman27]

I disagree completely Mike Tyson wasn't all that spectacular, he got beat in his prime by Buster Douglas and soo on.. I think your opinion of Mike Tyson is to high compared to the 1970s heavyweights!!, in which Frazier fought !!


We're talking bout tyson of '88...back then he was smart, patient, in his physical prime,mentally tough enuf to take the fight to 12rds. but i do agree a fight with a frazier of '70 would be a toss up, but still im leaning in tyson.

[jaysuperman27]

In my book this could get ugly really quickly.

I have a ton of respect for Frazier and his legacy will never be forgotten but here is a situation where he could get blown out quickly.

"But it's Joe Frazier!" I hear you say. Well yes, but reputation aside it could still get ugly very quicky for him.

For one thing, it's quite remarkable that Foreman aside Frazier never fought a serious puncher. Perhaps his management knew something?
His chin was good enough for the most part, but it was not rock solid. Tyson fought guys with better chins and still knocked them out.

Frazier would also come directly at Tyson, and I can't see how this can spell anything other than disaster, frankly. He would be right in Tyson's face all night long, and even if he crowded him at some point Tyson is going to hit him flush, and my guess is that it would be sooner rather than later.
Tyson had excellent accuracy and would throw punches in bunches, often faster than the other guy could react.

I see Frazier, a slow starter, being overwhelmed early. Tyson could take his best punch, but Joe could not take Tyson's. Joe's lack of height may (may) be a problem for Tyson at first, but once Mike finds his range my bet is it gets very one-sided.

I don't neccessarily buy into the "Frazier late" scenario either. If Tyson didn't take you out early, he adjusted and broke you down one piece at a time. His power and handspeed would dissuade Joe from simply boring in as he was prone to do against the likes of Ali, who lacked the punching power to put serious hurt on Joe.

In any event, I don't think it goes very far. Tyson within 2 rounds, maybe less.


well explained bro:happy

[Bokaj]

This statement shows you don't really know much about their respective styles.

Sorry to come off as an arrogant prick.

Yeah, I'm not too fond of this comparison, either. Tyson was more like Patterson than anybody else.

As for the matchup... What speaks in Joe's favour is that Tyson never was too happy fighting at close range and that he wasn't the type to come out on top in a war of attrition. Frazier also has the superior stamina and will power, and is the better fighter at close range.

What speaks in Tyson's favour is that he's faster, as quick a starter as Joe is slow, more powerful, has a better chin and probably is stronger as well. He also has a better right and he demolished Marvis Frazier, who had a style smiliar to his dad's, while Joe never met anyone like Tyson.

The smart money probably would be on Tyson, but I would root for Joe...

[Minotauro]

Frazier forces Tyson to fight on the back foot and beats Tyson on the inside where he holds an advantage. Tyson doesn't have the physical strength to push Joe around like Foreman did. Frazier stops Tyson late after getting up from the canvas.

[PowerPuncher]

I love Frazier but Tyson is faster, superior defense, a better boxer, more versatile, better jab, better right hand, and hit harder with a seemingly better chin. Tyson within 5 or he holds of for a decision. Also Tyson would be fighting someone with the same height and reach for once, which takes away his usual big disadvantage

[BlackWater]

This statement shows you don't really know much about their respective styles.

Sorry to come off as an arrogant prick.

I would say the same thing about Floyd Patterson or Jack Dempsey. But as for Joe Fraizer his movement toward his opponents and his defensive style look like Tysons. They were certainly different types of fighters, but I believe you could still make the comparison if you look at how he advances toward opponents.

[BlackWater]

Frazier forces Tyson to fight on the back foot and beats Tyson on the inside where he holds an advantage. Tyson doesn't have the physical strength to push Joe around like Foreman did. Frazier stops Tyson late after getting up from the canvas.
He doesn't have to push Joe around. If he was in close Tysons defensive and counter punching abilities would set Joe up in the mid rounds. People argue in favor of Foremans power, but Tyson was definitely the faster and more accurate and he catches Joe flush.

[Minotauro]

He doesn't have to push Joe around. If he was in close Tysons defensive and counter punching abilities would set Joe up in the mid rounds. People argue in favor of Foremans power, but Tyson was definitely the faster and more accurate and he catches Joe flush.

Tyson was at his best mid range when it comes to in fighting Frazier is a lot better then Mike who was far to easy to clinch with and hold. If the fight is fought on the inside Joe will win if its at mid range Tyson will take it.

[BlackWater]

Tyson was at his best mid range when it comes to in fighting Frazier is a lot better then Mike who was far to easy to clinch with and hold. If the fight is fought on the inside Joe will win if its at mid range Tyson will take it.
No argument there.

Except Tyson would still manage to let off uppercuts in close and I think he could keep Joe at mid range.

[Bokaj]

I would say the same thing about Floyd Patterson or Jack Dempsey. But as for Joe Fraizer his movement toward his opponents and his defensive style look like Tysons. They were certainly different types of fighters, but I believe you could still make the comparison if you look at how he advances toward opponents.

You think Tyson's style differed much from Patterson's? I don't.

[ChrisPontius]

You think Tyson's style differed much from Patterson's? I don't.

Of course, both their styles came from the old master D'Amato.... but having said that, there are significant differences between them. Tyson has much bigger one-punch KO power, he has a great right hand (uppercut, straight, hook) whereas Patterson mainly relied on the left, and of course there is the vast difference in durability between them.

Okay, several of those are as much physical factors as stylistic ones, but the reason i mention them is because they are...... kind of important. :)

[Bokaj]

Of course, both their styles came from the old master D'Amato.... but having said that, there are significant differences between them. Tyson has much bigger one-punch KO power, he has a great right hand (uppercut, straight, hook) whereas Patterson mainly relied on the left, and of course there is the vast difference in durability between them.

Okay, several of those are as much physical factors as stylistic ones, but the reason i mention them is because they are...... kind of important. :)

Sure, there were big physical differences, but for being so physically different I think their styles were very similar. Sure, Tyson probably had a more varied arsenal, but that's more down to differences in technique than style. Make Floyd 2-3 inches shorter and 30+ lbs heavier and you more or less have Tyson.

[teeto]

Ive just logged in and now and saw this thread, whenever i see this matchup here i say the same thing. There is the doubt of the mental strength of Tyson up against a fighter of this style, mentality and level. But provided Tyson will be ok in that area, i see it for Tyson everytime. These are a different type of fighter, one is a pressure fighting swarmer who relies heavily on his great, naturally swinging left hook. The other is a rare breed in that he at times is somewhat of a sharp-shooting combo hitter who looks for and has an eye for the perfect blow rather than smothering. Tyson doesnt just have two great hands, his co-ordination in terms of his combos is brilliant. Both are immensely strong, Frazier stronger by my reckoning, as his style relied more on strength than did Mikes also. Tyson does have a better chin imo, but its not a major factoer here as both are devastating hitters. Anyway, Mike's skillset is brilliant, he's technically more eficient, his footwork is spot on and his defence is good, Frazier in his peak was great at dodging shots, this is so difficult against Mike though, probably moreso than against Ali, as Ali's are them straight shots that Frazier dodged so well in the first bout. Tysons are them combos to body and head.

At any rate, this is a head on collision, i just think Tyson's great attack (and it is so great), gets him a stoppage. Frazier would need to fight the absolute fight of his life to win this, (maybe he can, im not disrespecting this warrior), and he would have to put the iron one on the backfoot and sustain it, we're talking about breaking Tyson down here workmanlike, that is the way to beat him, very very hard when you fight like Frazier and are constantly in his your opponent's face and chest. If anyone has the mindset to do it though it would be him.

[Canibus81]

Wasn't his peak.

1987 MegaTyson™ was faster, had more power, better hand speed, better head movement, and all around better defense than Joe Fraizer.

Excatly and the whole bullshit myth they use about him fading after 5 is only relevant when he quit training and lacked the disipline in his later yrs. When he was in his prime he had punching power in the late rounds too. Ribalta and Biggs fight clearly show that. Rooney had Tyson sparring over 15 rounds to maintain his contioning and power. People need to quit listening to all these so called experts when assesing Tyson's career, cause they paint a lot of myths about Mike by not being objective. We have 2 eyes just like them.

[Muchmoore]

Tyson KO 2. Theres few fighters I pick over the prime Smokin Joe, but Tyson is one of them. Frazier WAS suseptible early, and Tyson may well have been the fastest starter ever. The only fighter Frazier fought with a comparable punch to Tyson was Foreman, and we know what happened there.
I see Tysons faster, and more powerful punches getting to Frazier early and finishing him.
Nothing against Frazier, but I'd expect him to struggle against nearly every elite puncher and be in SEVERE danger early of being stopped. And by elite I mean top 40, 50 all time HWs.

That being said, I'd pick Joe to beat every boxer type who ever lived, except a 67 Ali and I go back and forth on even that one. Tysons just a horrible style matchup.

[he grant]

I love Frazier but feel the fast starting Tyson may be a terrible match up for the slower starting Frazier ....

[Mendoza]

Tyson wins early.

[Unforgiven]

I never saw Tyson look good against a short fighter who crowds him.
Tyson was good against guys who stood there tall like statues, or guys who backed up and dropped their hands when they jabbed. Tyson was devastating exploding upward and with space to spring forward. Slipping past and under jabs and long rights.
But Frazier would smother him.
Tyson had shabby footwork for dealing with those guys with low centre of gravity. Tyson was good at butting upright guys, but vulnerable to guys who came in as low as him - another factor to consider.

Frazier seemed to like guys who were willing to swarm forward and meet him for an infighting exchange.

And in terms of toughness and ability to fight at 100% when under pressure, Frazier was superior to tyson. More heart I reckon.

[OBCboxer]

Joe frazier wins by KO in 5 in 6 rounds. Frazier would be too active, not scared at all ( Tyson would be scared) and would land 5 punches for every punch Tyson landed.

Frazier was never active in the early going and how would you know Tyson would be scared.

[Bokaj]

I never saw Tyson look good against a short fighter who crowds him.

How about Marvis Frazier? That was a pretty convincing perfomance, wasn't it?

[ljj]

Tyson would Ko Frazier within three rounds at the most, Tyson would walk him down quickly...