In Shape '70's Foreman vrs. Any Tyson

[clark]

After watching the first round again of the second Frazier-Foreman fight, it seems Foreman would have over-powered any version of Tyson. Foreman was always in tip top shape for Frazier and that
Foreman would be too much for Tyson. Any comments??

[McGrain]

I'm alone in the world in picking Tyson. I think Foreman is to wide and slow to do anything but get stopped by Tyson. For me it was always Tyson's speed that set him apart rather than his power, and here it would kill.

However fast Foreman could possibly be KO'd is what would happen here for me, maybe 3 or 4.

[Longhhorn71]

I'm alone in the world in picking Tyson. I think Foreman is to wide and slow to do anything but get stopped by Tyson. For me it was always Tyson's speed that set him apart rather than his power, and here it would kill.

However fast Foreman could possibly be KO'd is what would happen here for me, maybe 3 or 4.

I have read Cus Damato didn't want Tyson to fight Foreman.

If Tyson had never heard Cus say that, then it wouldn't ever had been in his head.

Both George and Evander thought they could beat Tyson and understood what it took to beat him. Of course Buster Douglas with his "My Mother just died, and I don't give a flying F " attitude, did it first.

[BUDW]

Foreman would KO Tyson in a round or 2 period.

[Sonny's jab]

Foreman by early KO.

[JohnThomas1]

I Am Legend?

[BUDW]

Foreman holds no advantages. He would be obliterated.

George has reach, power, jab, smarts over mike tyson

[anon1]

i am a tyson fan (not apologist) but i would pick foreman although i would not put money on it. tyson probably gets ko'd by midrounds. he lasts longer than frazier because he is NOT an inside fighter but a MIDRANGE fighter. i don't see foreman have an easy time pushing tyson around at MIDRANGE - reason is because he'd actually have to reach out his arms (mummy) and be open for a quick counter by tyson. tyson is less vulnerable (but still not "safe" like a distant boxer) being midrange fighter. second, tyson really did have a chin made of stone. he could take punishment. when he was young, healthy, and fit -he could take a very powerful punch (ruddock smash), recover quickly, and come right back. of course this ability has its limits and foreman could easily reach that.

tyson swung wildly too many times (even in his prime) UNLESS the opponent was out on his feet (his best combinations came when the opponent was out on his feet - great for highlight reels and making people think it was the norm). so tyson's failure to patiently time & counter could cost him the fight. foreman was a sloppy swinger but would tyson exploit it like the way a smart, thoughtful holyfield would? i'm not putting money on it. so tyson swinging wildly and foreman swinging wildly - i take foreman. tyson can certainly surprise us all.

[Sonny's jab]

Foreman holds no advantages. He would be obliterated.


Foreman would turn it into an alley fight, push little Mikey around and take his head off with an uppercut.

He'd probably hit Tyson full on in the face as Tyson scrambles on the canvas groping for his mouthpiece.

The best Tyson can hope for is a DQ win while he's crying his eyes out like a scared little boy on the canvas.

As he realises he has a badly cut eye and a split lip he cries, "Look at me! Look at me!. I've got to go home to my kids; they're going to be scared of me."

[anon1]

George has reach, power, jab, smarts over mike tyson

tyson isn't exactly the most tactical fighter...but i gotta disagree. foreman does not have an advantage in SMARTS.

[BUDW]

tyson isn't exactly the most tactical fighter...but i gotta disagree. foreman does not have an advantage in SMARTS.

He certainly is smarter than Tyson,look where the two of them are now.

[JohnThomas1]

Terrific film.

Good but i expected more mate to be honest.

[JohnThomas1]

This is how i summise it

Make Tyson go backward (or even stop him coming forward) with any consistency and his effectiveness drops dramatically. Eddie Futch said before the Holyfield fight that he thought Holyfield would halt the massive favourite Tyson's forward movement and picked Holyfield as an upset winner. He was indeed correct. I have it all in black and white pre fight.

This is the case with most every swarmer, the list of swarmers effective when backed up consistently would be miniscule.

Foreman does indeed have the ability to back Tyson and any other swarmer in history up IMO. D'Amato shared this opinion, and said quite famously that no swarmer in history beats Big Daddy Foreman.

Bottom line IMO - Foreman halts Tyson's forward progress and tho taking some big blows himself wears the smaller man down with his huge clubbing shots and stops him in 3 or 4. Foreman's size and sheer strength will allow him to both tie up Tyson and push him off at will as he is wont to do when need be. I can see him backing up Tyson at times and even cornering him - Tyson won't be used to going in reverse and will not be particularly evasive when so. Tyson will not be neither smart enough nor adaptable enough to pace himself early and let George wear down a bit.

Call me silly but i can see Tyson being intimidated at an early point in this fight. Peak Foreman is a damn scary prospect.

[JohnThomas1]

Tyson would lay Foreman the fuck out just like Muhammad " C level power" Ail did.



Why is it such a given that foreman can force tyson back? Tyson was heavier and probably stronger than foreman. Tyson is no frazier, Tyson starts faster, is faster, has a better chin, and is basically better in every single regard than frazier. Pushing frazier back doesnt mean you can push tyson back. Anyway, pushing tyson back just pushes him back in the mid range, which is absolutely the place you dont want tyson to be at.

Tyson wasn't strong for his size and build at all. When Foreman pushes Tyson off Tyson sure ain't moving forward, he's just where Big Daddy wants him.

[BUDW]

Better chin? you are ignorant if you think that.

[Sonny's jab]

Tyson would lay Foreman the fuck out just like Muhammad " C level power" Ail did.

Why is it such a given that foreman can force tyson back? Tyson was heavier and probably stronger than foreman. Tyson is no frazier, Tyson starts faster, is faster, has a better chin, and is basically better in every single regard than frazier. Pushing frazier back doesnt mean you can push tyson back. Anyway, pushing tyson back just pushes him back in the mid range, which is absolutely the place you dont want tyson to be at.

Tyson was piss-weak compared to Foreman, and got spanked by a mediocre fighter.

Tyson couldn't even go the distance with Holyfield, and Foreman did it at 42 years of age, Evander was hitting upside his head for 12 rounds and George just kept coming.

Ali would knock Tyson out too, or bust his face up so bad Tyson would quit. Frazier beats Tyson.
These guys were tough, not frontrunners.

Every big heavyweight could push Tyson back, his stance was all square on. Bonecrusher was walking him back, and Smith didn't even wanna fight that night.
Tyson didn't like it none when Frank Bruno was pulling on the back of his neck, Foreman would do that and throw little Mikey across the ring, spin him, push him, bully him.

Seriously though, I'll give credit where it's due, Tyson can mow down some pretty good boxers, guys who backpedal or "civilized" stand-up punchers.
But 70s Foreman is another animal entirely.
He's a brute, he'd mashed Tyson.

[JohnThomas1]

i've seen videos of tyson throwing up 400+ pounds on the bench like it's nothing.


Tyson was an insanely strong person. anyway. Pushing tyson into the range where has room to explode is stupid. Especially for someone as slow as foreman.

Unfortunately for Tyson the bench pressing sure didn't show much dividend in the ring. Holyfield was all over him for strength and regardless of peak quotient Tyson was as strong or stronger as he'd ever been.

In the ring Tyson showed average strength if that, he was handled around by an ex cruiser, tho Holyfield certainly built up in all the right ways.

Pushing Tyson back forces him to firstly check his backward momentum before attempting to come forward, do you really think this is bad for Foreman? Come on. Foremans not after a chest to chest fight any more than Tyson is - he wants Tyson back where he can get full power as well as having the opportunities to catch Tyson moving in with that monster uppercut.

I can't see Tyson soldiering on to the point Frazier did (kudo's to him) and don't agree with your next rebuttal that he won't have to because Foreman won't have him in such trouble.

[JohnThomas1]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

:lol:

[AnthonyJ74]

It would be a tough fight to pick. But I have a feeling that Tyson just might be able to stop George. Tyson's speed, power and delivery were phenomenal. He was no Joe Frazier. I find it hilarious when people point to the Joe Frazier fights as evidence as to what Foreman would do to Tyson. Tyson and Frazier were not that similar at all in terms of ability and strengths. Tyson's speed would be a huge problem for Foreman to contend with. To me, George Foreman, while definitely strong and powerful, was too wide open and clumsy with his punches. He could definitely hurt Tyson if he tagged him cleanly, but I think Tyson would be able to strike first and strike more often.

[BUDW]

It would be a tough fight to pick. But I have a feeling that Tyson just might be able to stop George. Tyson's speed, power and delivery were phenomenal. He was no Joe Frazier. I find it hilarious when people point to the Joe Frazier fights as evidence as to what Foreman would do to Tyson. Tyson and Frazier were not that similar at all in terms of ability and strengths. Tyson's speed would be a huge problem for Foreman to contend with. To me, George Foreman, while definitely strong and powerful, was too wide open and clumsy with his punches. He could definitely hurt Tyson if he tagged him cleanly, but I think Tyson would be able to strike first and strike more often.

Your right Tyson was no Joe Frazier,Tyson wasnt as good as Joe,Joe had heart Tyson didnt.

[mr. magoo]

I think George Foreman had the style and physical attributes to beat just about any version of Tyson, including a 1987 rendition.

[Popshots]

I don't care who you are, Tyson's early round press will give any heavyweight fighter hell. Tyson was very too skilled, fast, and precise of a puncher to lose to Foreman, but it doesn't mean he will dominate. If Foreman catches Tyson clean he can surely put him out. I remember Tyson fighting a super hard puncher in Frank Bruno and he was actually stunned momentarily. If Bruno did that then I know Foreman would do more damage, but I see Tyson as having the talent to defeating foreman if he can avoid most of his punches.

[Mega Lamps]

Foreman beats him. A more interesting fight would be the 'comeback' Foreman vs Tyson.

[C. M. Clay II]

This is a fight that I would not bet on. Both fighters have attributes that would trouble the other.:good

[Holmes' Jab]

I'm alone in the world in picking Tyson. I think Foreman is to wide and slow to do anything but get stopped by Tyson. For me it was always Tyson's speed that set him apart rather than his power, and here it would kill.

However fast Foreman could possibly be KO'd is what would happen here for me, maybe 3 or 4.

Mate, I totally agree (see some of my past posts for proof). Tyson has the fast hands, evasiveness, skill, speed and power to beat Foreman and if he providing he makes it past the mid-rounds and avoids a ******* he'd prevail. I think he would. :good

[godking]

After watching the first round again of the second Frazier-Foreman fight, it seems Foreman would have over-powered any version of Tyson. Foreman was always in tip top shape for Frazier and that
Foreman would be too much for Tyson. Any comments??Tyson is not Frazier .

Tyson unlike Frazier is a combination puncher and has vastly better defense. Tyson is also a vastly superior counterpuncher to Frazier.

What happened in the Frazier fights is not a good indicator of what would happen in a Foreman vs Tyson fight.

Frazier and Tyson are two different fighters .

Foreman's tendency to throw wild looping punches would play into Tyson's counterpunching abilities

[Holmes' Jab]

Incidently I'd make mid-late 80's Tyson a favourite, post-prision '96 version probably 50/50.

[McGrain]

Mate, I totally agree (see some of my past posts for proof). Tyson has the fast hands, evasiveness, skill, speed and power to beat Foreman and if he providing he makes it past the mid-rounds and avoids a ******* he'd prevail. I think he would. :good

Yeah, there are a couple of us after all.

The thing is there are two Foreman's - devastating puncher and clumsy fanny that pushes. The puncher is "Force of Nature" though, although I think he is more acurate than generally given credit. The point is, he has poor handspeed and serious width to a lot of his best work. Slow+width = vulnerable. As a composite puncher Tyson is shaded by Louis and that's it in this division - give that type of composite puncher this type of split second and he's landing bombs in swift combinations that will be followed by more swift combinations that will land because Tyson is an accurat puncher - he is also, along with Louis and maybe Dempsey, the greatest finisher in the history of the sport.

I know a lot of people see this as a mis-match in favour of George. I know what Cus said about it. But a mistake has been made here. I think that it is quite possible that Mike would have ended this one in the first round by TKO. I'm not trying to run down George or push Mike, nothing like that, it's just that George Foreman is to slow to beat Mike Tyson. And this "Get him eventually" thing doesn't wash when you are in with one of the most complete offensive packages that has ever walked and have limited defence.

[Holmes' Jab]

Yeah, Foreman's defensive vunerability is what seals the deal in Tyson's favour IMO. Also his vunerability to the left hook and counterpunches, Tysons underrated jab could also be a good weapon to set Foreman off balance and create openings on the inside (should he bother to employ it).

Mike is the only 'swarmer' in history I'd give a good, even very good chance of beating Foreman. The fact he has a very good chin as well helps here. You can never count as great a puncher as Foreman out, though.

[heerko koois]

Tyson by second round ko.......1985-1989 tyson has much more handspeed than Foreman, very hard fight for foreman i think ...

[Carr]

I think Tyson takes it by unanimous decision, rocking Foreman at various intervals throughout. People, i think, tend to forget how difficult it was to hit Tyson cleanly with more than one punch at a time when he was at his best. While it's not impossible for Foreman to achieve the KO here with one of his sledgehammers, I think it's very unlikely. With Tyson's speed and elusiveness, he'd be landing quite regularly along the way, hence the likely unanimous decision in his favour.

[Sonny's jab]

Check out Tyson in the Bruno, Smith, Ruddock fights. None of those guys were in Foreman's league.

Those guys were "big and slow", Smith didn't even want to fight - scared to death -but he stunned Tyson when he actually opened up.

An old Larry Holmes caught Tyson flush with an uppercut, but Tyson walked right through it because Larry's punches are creampuff punches.

If Razor Ruddock knew how to throw more than one or two punches at a time he would have beat Tyson.

Shit, even Jose Ribalta caught Tyson with uppercuts, again piss-weak ones.
Tyson was open to uppercuts.

Tyson had good defense but he wasn't unhittable. He got hit by a lot of guys, most of them weren't punchers at all, and many of them were too in awe to committ to their punches.
You cant expect a guy Tyson's size and style to not get hit. He got hit by the guys who came to fight.

Frank Bruno was no badass at all, he rocked Tyson in the 1st round. He was strong and made Tyson look scruffy. Pushing, holding, and rough stuff made Tyson look a bit ordinary.

If a big guy as crude and lacking in desire as Bonecrusher Smith could catch hold of Tyson about 90% of the time Tyson attempted to attack, then I dont see why Foreman wouldn't just be able to catch Tyson with his forearms and push Tyson back - Foreman would be coming forward too. Pushing, throwing bombs, spinning and throwing Tyson towards a corner so he can bomb him with clubbing blows. He's not gonna be backing up all desperate and anxious like a Bruno.

Tyson's feet were all square on when he closed with an opponent, his balance was poor, he could be pushed back. He showed no real strength in the clinches against big heavyweights.

Foreman would murder him.

[McGrain]

Check out Tyson in the Bruno, Smith, Ruddock fights. None of those guys were in Foreman's league.

Those guys were "big and slow", Smith didn't even want to fight - scared to death -but he stunned Tyson when he actually opened up.

An old Larry Holmes caught Tyson flush with an uppercut, but Tyson walked right through it because Larry's punches are creampuff punches.

Your points here seem to be limited to "Tyson beat some guys who aren't as good as Foreman, but in the course of the boxing match this pure offence fighter was hit." None of this is surprising.


Frank Bruno was no badass at all, he rocked Tyson in the 1st round. He was strong and made Tyson look scruffy. Pushing, holding, and rough stuff made Tyson look a bit ordinary.

Bruno had enough power to hurt anyone. Don't know if he was "badass" or not, but I do know he hit.

If a big guy as crude and lacking in desire as Bonecrusher Smith could catch hold of Tyson about 90% of the time Tyson attempted to attack,

Smith fought the perfect fight against Tyson from the point of view of not getting hurt. Rythym breaking and mauling. The blueprint for the Hollyfield plan is to be found here for sure. However...

then I dont see why Foreman wouldn't just be able to catch Tyson with his forearms and push Tyson back

This is a little naive. Why would Foreman fight this way against Tyson when he didn't fight this way against Lyle or Frazier? And if he did, why is he fast enough to "catch Tyson with his forearms" when he is not fast enough to just out and out punch with Tyson?

- Foreman would be coming forward too. Pushing, throwing bombs, spinning and throwing Tyson towards a corner so he can bomb him with clubbing blows.

And whilst Foreman is doing this Tyson is going to be...

[godking]

Check out Tyson in the Bruno, Smith, Ruddock fights. None of those guys were in Foreman's league.

Those guys were "big and slow", Smith didn't even want to fight - scared to death -but he stunned Tyson when he actually opened up.

An old Larry Holmes caught Tyson flush with an uppercut, but Tyson walked right through it because Larry's punches are creampuff punches.

If Razor Ruddock knew how to throw more than one or two punches at a time he would have beat Tyson.

Shit, even Jose Ribalta caught Tyson with uppercuts, again piss-weak ones.
Tyson was open to uppercuts.

Tyson had good defense but he wasn't unhittable. He got hit by a lot of guys, most of them weren't punchers at all, and many of them were too in awe to committ to their punches.
You cant expect a guy Tyson's size and style to not get hit. He got hit by the guys who came to fight.

Frank Bruno was no badass at all, he rocked Tyson in the 1st round. He was strong and made Tyson look scruffy. Pushing, holding, and rough stuff made Tyson look a bit ordinary.

If a big guy as crude and lacking in desire as Bonecrusher Smith could catch hold of Tyson about 90% of the time Tyson attempted to attack, then I dont see why Foreman wouldn't just be able to catch Tyson with his forearms and push Tyson back - Foreman would be coming forward too. Pushing, throwing bombs, spinning and throwing Tyson towards a corner so he can bomb him with clubbing blows. He's not gonna be backing up all desperate and anxious like a Bruno.

Tyson's feet were all square on when he closed with an opponent, his balance was poor, he could be pushed back. He showed no real strength in the clinches against big heavyweights.

Foreman would murder him.Foreman with his crude looping punches does'nt land enough on Tyson to ''murder'' him.

And the more crude punches Foreman throws the more chances he gives a good counterpuncher like Tyson.

Guys stopped throwing punches at Tyson because of Tysons countering abilities not because they where pissing themselves.

Ruddock got his ass kicked because he was a crude puncher with strength his only asset guys like that are not going to beat Tyson because everytime they throw a punch they give Tyson counterpunching openings.

The myth thate Foreman was some unstoppable machine who would easily beat any swarmer or that every guy Tyson fought was piss scared is BULLSHIT.

[Sonny's jab]

Your points here seem to be limited to "Tyson beat some guys who aren't as good as Foreman, but in the course of the boxing match this pure offence fighter was hit." None of this is surprising.


Yes, and when Foreman hits him he'll look vulnerable.


Bruno had enough power to hurt anyone. Don't know if he was "badass" or not, but I do know he hit.

Bruno could hit hard, but he was nothing like Foreman. Foreman was a "natural fighter", beating the shit out of people was something that came natural to him.



This is a little naive. Why would Foreman fight this way against Tyson when he didn't fight this way against Lyle or Frazier?


Foreman DID push Frazier back with his forearms. He got hold of Frazier's shoulders and shoved him back, something he'd easily do to Tyson too.


And if he did, why is he fast enough to "catch Tyson with his forearms" when he is not fast enough to just out and out punch with Tyson?


He's fast enough. He's as fast has a lot of lesser guys who gave Tyson a decent fight. But Foreman shoved everyone around, especially shorter fighters. That's how he fought. Of course he'd be punching with Tyson. He'd be clubbing little Mikey all over the ring.


And whilst Foreman is doing this Tyson is going to be..



..... getting his ass kicked.

[McGrain]

Yes, and when Foreman hits him he'll look vulnerable.

This is indisuputable of course. But you seem less interested in the opposite than you should be, if you see what I mean.



Bruno could hit hard, but he was nothing like Foreman. Foreman was a "natural fighter", beating the shit out of people was something that came natural to him.[./quote]

I understand. But Bruno was bigger and there will be no real diffference between Foreman and Bruno relative to Tyson's position. Bruno might not be the natural that Foreman is, but he hits pretty hard.


[quote]Foreman DID push Frazier back with his forearms. He got hold of Frazier's shoulders and shoved him back, something he'd easily do to Tyson too.

Tyson is a hundred times more mobile than Frazier on the way in. His rythym is much less pronounced. I don't agree that Foreman would be able to do this to Tyson. But it certainly wouldn't be "easy".


..... getting his ass kicked.

:lol:

[Sonny's jab]

Foreman with his crude looping punches does'nt land enough on Tyson to ''murder'' him.

And the more crude punches Foreman throws the more chances he gives a good counterpuncher like Tyson.

Guys stopped throwing punches at Tyson because of Tysons countering abilities not because they where pissing themselves.

Ruddock got his ass kicked because he was a crude puncher with strength his only asset guys like that are not going to beat Tyson because everytime they throw a punch they give Tyson counterpunching openings.


So Foreman's gonna stop throwing punches ??
I dont think so.

Why would a good fighter ever stop throwing punches ? You cant win a fight if you stop throwing punches !
Guys like Foreman and Frazier dont stop throwing punches because they're getting hit back.
That's for gutless guys like Smith, and "nice guys" like Frank Bruno.
Razor Ruddock was a one-punch hitter, got stopped by other guys because he failed to punch back.


If you really think Foreman would go into a shell because he's being countered (and frankly, I dont think the fight lasts long enough), then you need to watch his fights again.


The myth thate Foreman was some unstoppable machine who would easily beat any swarmer or that every guy Tyson fought was piss scared is BULLSHIT

I agree.

Foreman wasn't unstoppable. (But it took a great fighter to stop him.)

Not every fighter Tyson fought was scared, in fact most of them probably did their best - but they simply weren't that good.
Guys who stop punching aren't that good.

[Sonny's jab]

This is indisuputable of course. But you seem less interested in the opposite than you should be, if you see what I mean.


I have confidence in Foreman in this particular match-up. Really, even if Tyson manages to floor him or hurt him or whatever, I've seen enough of Foreman to have faith in his charcter. He's not going out without landing a ton of his own shots, and to be honest, I think Tyson's the timid one here when he's getting hit.

Tyson's not as slick as the invisible man, or as fast as the speed of light, as some seem to think, so a hell-bent 70s Foreman is landing his shots, enough of them to break Tyson whatever Tyson brings to the fight.

[ChrisPontius]

Frazier was awefully slow, overweight and had no snap on his punches at all. I don't see how the slowest starting champion in history with little one-punch KO power when unfocused and past his best compares to the fastest in history starting heavyweight with tremendous handspeed, as good one-punch KO power as any and an excellent chin.

Tyson lacks in the heart department, but he wasn't THAT bad. He kept fighting till the end against Douglas when he got the shit out of him beaten for 10 rounds by someone bigger than Foreman.


The only puncher that Foreman faced who landed on him was Lyle. And Foreman was an inch away from being knocked out. Credit to him for pulling out the win, but outside of glass chinned Shavers, Lyle always went the distance with decent fighters; his punching credibilities are often exaggerated to maintain "Ali and the 70's are the best ever" picture.

Tyson had slugfests with Berbick (who was more durable than Lyle) and Ruddock, twice. He was never in trouble in either fight. Foreman was nearly KO'd by Lyle, the only puncher who landed on him, KO'd by Ali and knocked down by powerpuff girl punching Young. It took Douglas, a 6'4 235lbs man 10 rounds of pounding to finally stop Tyson. Tyson has a definite edge in chin here.

He also has a huge edge in defense, because he actually had one. Foreman's consisted of sticking his glove out. Tyson would come in, bob beneath it and dig in a hard left hook.


Power would be about equal, although it should be noted that Tyson scored many one-punch KO's whereas Foreman has only one.

Stamina goes to Tyson and heart goes to Foreman.



One other thing i'd like to point out is that people say "Foreman has the style to beat Tyson, because Tyson comes right at him". Whose to say it's not the other way around? Look at Tyson's career, is there any pattern of fighters who slugged it out with him that had a lot of success? I can't think of one.


I may have exaggerated a bit in my post here, but i think it's such an over-simple and wrong analysis to say "Well, Foreman beat Frazier so he beats Tyson", while Tyson and Frazier are worlds apart; Tyson scores early/mid KO's, Frazier scores mid/late TKO's. Frazier's defence is based on taking some but not all punches that works for the full 15. Tyson's defence is based on getting inside early, past the jab but slows down in effectiveness past the mid rounds. Tyson has a very strong chin, Frazier has a somewhat lesser chin. Frazier had one of the best hearts/mental fortitude in history, Tyson was questionable in that department. Etc, etc. The only thing they have in common is that they're short and come forward, but in different ways.

[JohnThomas1]

One other thing i'd like to point out is that people say "Foreman has the style to beat Tyson, because Tyson comes right at him". Whose to say it's not the other way around? Look at Tyson's career, is there any pattern of fighters who slugged it out with him that had a lot of success? I can't think of one.


My opinion of the match is built almost entirely on Foreman backing him up or at least stopping his forward progress much of the time. Berbick and could not stop Tyson's forward progress or back him up with any consistency. I believe Foreman does. Holyfield did a reasonable job in this regard, certainly better than others, tho it's noted Tyson wasn't peak of course.

Good to see someone giving some deep pro Tyson analysis like you guys tho.

[godking]

So Foreman's gonna stop throwing punches ??
I dont think so.

Why would a good fighter ever stop throwing punches ? You cant win a fight if you stop throwing punches !
Guys like Foreman and Frazier dont stop throwing punches because they're getting hit back.
That's for gutless guys like Smith, and "nice guys" like Frank Bruno.
Razor Ruddock was a one-punch hitter, got stopped by other guys because he failed to punch back.


If you really think Foreman would go into a shell because he's being countered (and frankly, I dont think the fight lasts long enough), then you need to watch his fights again.



I agree.

Foreman wasn't unstoppable. (But it took a great fighter to stop him.)

Not every fighter Tyson fought was scared, in fact most of them probably did their best - but they simply weren't that good.
Guys who stop punching aren't that good.Everytime Foreman throw against Tyson he would get countered . A crude guy like foreman was in the 70s would give Tyson countering abilities everytime he opened up . The more he throws the more he gets hurt eventually he would start throwing less trying to pick his spots.

Trying to smother Tyson with punches is a bad idea.

Douglas and Holyfield beat a still good Tyson by TIMING him and clinching at the right moment not by trying to smother him with punches. Foreman fought differently



The idea that you can just overpower Tyson and smother him is frankly ridiculous Tyson is to fast and is to good a counterpuncher for that tactic to work.

[teeto]

I'm alone in the world in picking Tyson. I think Foreman is to wide and slow to do anything but get stopped by Tyson. For me it was always Tyson's speed that set him apart rather than his power, and here it would kill.

However fast Foreman could possibly be KO'd is what would happen here for me, maybe 3 or 4.
McGrain , im with you !! Tyson H2H against Foreman ? Tyson moves his head well , charges him and unleashes the most rapid powerful combo to body and head that wins it for him at some point in this

[Bad_Intentions]

George has reach, power, jab, smarts over mike tysonplease, tyson has speed, agility, and power, george foreman doesn't have any speed in his punches.

Tyson TKO.

[UpWithEvil]

Foreman by early KO. Every time Tyson wanted to get in close to avoid Foreman's long-range artillery, George would plant two gloves on his chest and shove him back into range - just like Evander Holyfield did. There's always a chance that Foreman won't be able to score the knockout, though - when Tyson realizes he's overmatched he'll be looking for a way out and Foreman's ears are too high for Iron Jaw Mike to sink his teeth in. I'd look more for a headbutt or knee to the groin.

[Unforgiven]

Foreman DESTROYS overrated Tyson.

KO1

[ripcity]

From the video footage I have seen of Foreman vs Ali and Frazier. I beleve he would not have done very well aganst a prime Tyson. While Foreman was a great puncher I think he was also a bit crude. I know ther is a tendency to compare Tyson Frazier who Foreman easly beat twice. If they are alike Tyson was bige stronger and faster. Tyson's speed and defense are often over looked. That tends to happen when you can hit like he could. Foreman has a punchers chance in this but if both men are still standing after 4 rounds I like Tyson. I can also see Tyson geting a ko within the first four rounds.
In Shape '70's Foreman vs Post Spinks/pre prison.
After the Spinks fight we start to see less and less use of the head movement that made Tyson difcult to hit and more and more useing his punching power that would eventuly lead to his downfall at the hands of Douglas.
If Foreman could land he could get a ko. I think he could land on Tyson but I also think Tyson could land on him. The question hear is who has the stronger chin? Foreman was stoped in 8 rounds by Ali who posesed every thing a great boxer should except power. Tyson was stoped in 10 rounds by Douglas who fought the fight of his life against Tyson.
I think Tyson's chin would hold up slightly better than Foreman's
Tyson by late round ko.
vs. Post Prison Tyson.
Tyson was allready on the decline before prison.
I think we would see something that looked a lot like Foreman's two victories over Frazier.
Foreman by early ko.
I also think Old Foreman would beat this version of Tyson.

[BUDW]

Tyson quit any time he was pressed.

[elTerrible]

Foreman is insanely terrible to the extent that picking him over any top 15 heavyweight with a chin strikes me as the most disgusting action any boxing fan can do. Tyson ices foreman in a single round.

In a battle of the punchers, I would go for the one that's unfathomably faster, harder hitting and punches with better technique in additon to having a better chin and lightyears better stamina as well has being heavier.

Frazier was a top 15 heavyweight with a chin.


No way Tyson takes foreman out in 1. He took 4 rounds to take out a old Larry Holmes.

[elTerrible]

Tyson quit any time he was pressed.


It is true to an extent. When has Tyson ever went to war and came out on top?

Foreman atleast showed he can survive a beating and come back and win in the Lyle fight.

[elTerrible]

Frazier faced 1 big puncher in his career and got bounced around the ring like a rag doll.

his chin is D+ at best.

He wouldnt have made it to the 14th in the absolute war that was Ali-Frazier 3 if his chin was that bad:blood

[Sweet Pea]

Foreman beats him. A more interesting fight would be the 'comeback' Foreman vs Tyson.Tyson would obliterate that version.

A prime Foreman I have also picked Tyson to beat. Foreman had arguably more raw power, but I'm going against the cliche "puncher beats a swarmer" in this one. I think Tyson's speed and power of his own is enough to hurt Foreman often, especially if someone like Ron Lyle could hurt him by going forward, taking Foreman off his "walk you down" game. Foreman also didn't display nearly as good a chin in his younger days as he did his older days, though he showed a lot better everything else. Tyson would catch him too often, and I don't think Foreman's punches would land clean enough on the quick, bob and weave style of Tyson.

Tyson by KO against a prime Foreman. TKO against a 90's Foreman, no matter what nonsense Cus or his trainers seem to think of that version of Foreman.

[Sweet Pea]

It is true to an extent. When has Tyson ever went to war and came out on top?Ruddock.

[elTerrible]

Ali isn't exactly a big time banger by any stretch.

:lol::lol:

I knew you would say that. It doesnt matter, he went 14 hard rounds in an absolute war. He wouldnt have lasted that long if his chin was a "D+" as you say.

[anut]

foreman wins:smoke:smoke:smoke:smoke:smoke

[AlonzoGreene]

He certainly is smarter than Tyson,look where the two of them are now.

Foreman easily KO's Tyson.

One of Tyson's biggest drawbacks was that he was a relatively short heavyweight, and this would kill him against Foreman.

People are saying that Tyson can easily counter Foreman, but I don't think its that simply.

In his career, Tyson could counter, but he wasn't what you would call a counterpuncher. Tyson got by on imposing his will own opponents and breaking them down. If Tyson had to adapt or got throw in with an intimating force like Foreman, I think Tyson would breakdown.

Athletically Tyson was a monster, but he was extremely weak mentality. He would crumble against Foreman or any other bigger elite heavyweight in history.

[godking]

Tyson quit any time he was pressed.In other words you have never actually seen Tyson fight but you have heard the myth about if you you have heart Tyson will quit right ?:roll: :roll: .

[Sonny's jab]

The overrating of Tyson here is worse than I thought.

[BUDW]

In other words you have never actually seen Tyson fight but you have heard the myth about if you you have heart Tyson will quit right ?:roll: :roll: .

Seen tyson fight many times,also seen George fight which you apparently havent ,Tyson is a bully who is a quitter, tyson is made to order for George, Buster Douglas beat down tyson George would break his will and is face in short order.tyson the most over rated Heavy of All Time!

[godking]

Seen tyson fight many times,also seen George fight which you apparently havent ,Tyson is a bully who is a quitter, tyson is made to order for George, Buster Douglas beat down tyson George would break his will and is face in short order.tyson the most over rated Heavy of All Time!evidently you did'nt see the Ruddock fights otherwise you would not have made the ridiculous claim that if you are not afraid of Tyson you can break his will.

When someone is dumb enough to claim that was just a bully that tells me all i need to know.

You probably never saw any of Tyson 80s fights and you probably heard some guys claim that Tyson will quit if you stand up to him right ? . Then you just repeated that mantra.

[UpWithEvil]

evidently you did'nt see the Ruddock fights otherwise you would not have made the ridiculous claim that if you are not afraid of Tyson you can break his will.

That's Tyson's great defese - Donovan Ruddock didn't kick his ass? Who the heck did Ruddock ever beat? "Broadaxe" Broad?

When someone is dumb enough to claim that was just a bully that tells me all i need to know.

Tyson most assuredly WAS a bully. He thrived on intimidation but didn't cotton to being bullied himself. That's why Tyson liked to do things like get himself disqualified intentionally when the going got rough.

[UpWithEvil]

The overrating of Tyson here is worse than I thought.

It about exactly what I thought. But it's the lack of respect offered to the great Buster Douglas that really gets my goat.

[Sonny's jab]

It's just not true that Tyson gets beat EVERY time someone stood up to him. Lots of guys tried fighting back but just wern't good enough.
He got beat when Buster Douglas stood up to him though, and Douglas was ordinary.
He got beaten up when Holyfield stood up to him.
Tyson's problem is he couldn't adapt in those fights, he became a lesser fighter when he was losing.
Sure, the Ruddock fights were wars, but Tyson was never actually losing. It was Ruddock who was taking all the trips to the canvas, and being driven back.

[Sonny's jab]

It about exactly what I thought. But it's the lack of respect offered to the great Buster Douglas that really gets my goat.

Douglas went out there and took the title in convincing fashion, beat the shit out of Tyson. He didn't leave it in the hands of the judges - who were actually trying their hardest to score the fight for Tyson !

I wouln't call Douglas "great" though, seriously. He was kind of ordinary. But he put together a proper effort for the championship, and we should see more of that from heavyweights. Some of these guys get a title shot and dont even try - like Akinwande, for extreme example.

[Bokaj]

It's just not true that Tyson gets beat EVERY time someone stood up to him. Lots of guys tried fighting back but just wern't good enough.
He got beat when Buster Douglas stood up to him though, and Douglas was ordinary.
He got beaten up when Holyfield stood up to him.
Tyson's problem is he couldn't adapt in those fights, he became a lesser fighter when he was losing.
Sure, the Ruddock fights were wars, but Tyson was never actually losing. It was Ruddock who was taking all the trips to the canvas, and being driven back.

I can't think of one example when he looked really good against someone who stood up to him, though. I suppose that's my main objection against Tyson, because he really was such a gifted fighter in many ways.

[Sonny's jab]

I can't think of one example when he looked really good against someone who stood up to him, though. I suppose that's my main objection against Tyson, because he really was such a gifted fighter in many ways.

Well, Berbick tried. Pinklon tried. Bruno tried to some extent, (but held too much). Tillis tried and did a good job, he just needed to be a bit bigger and a better hitter IMO.

I cant accuse any of those guys of just trying to survive though. Tyson looked pretty good in those fight (esp. against Berbick) and got the job done.

His physical talent was tremendous.
He's tremendously overrated as a fighter though.
But he was very good still.

[Bokaj]

His physical talent was tremendous.
He's tremendously overrated as a fighter though.
But he was very good still.

It's funny. There seems to be very little moderation in how Tyson is viewed. He really is tremedously overrated by some in this forum, but I think some underestimate him as well. Maybe that's just a reaction against the udulation some express towards him, I don't know.

Maybe you can say the same thing about Ali, but I'm such a fan of him myself that it takes a lot for me to think that he gets overrated. Always a quite enjoyable discussion, though.

[ironchamp]

Frazier was awefully slow, overweight and had no snap on his punches at all. I don't see how the slowest starting champion in history with little one-punch KO power when unfocused and past his best compares to the fastest in history starting heavyweight with tremendous handspeed, as good one-punch KO power as any and an excellent chin.

Tyson lacks in the heart department, but he wasn't THAT bad. He kept fighting till the end against Douglas when he got the shit out of him beaten for 10 rounds by someone bigger than Foreman.

The only puncher that Foreman faced who landed on him was Lyle. And Foreman was an inch away from being knocked out. Credit to him for pulling out the win, but outside of glass chinned Shavers, Lyle always went the distance with decent fighters; his punching credibilities are often exaggerated to maintain "Ali and the 70's are the best ever" picture.

Tyson had slugfests with Berbick (who was more durable than Lyle) and Ruddock, twice. He was never in trouble in either fight. Foreman was nearly KO'd by Lyle, the only puncher who landed on him, KO'd by Ali and knocked down by powerpuff girl punching Young. It took Douglas, a 6'4 235lbs man 10 rounds of pounding to finally stop Tyson. Tyson has a definite edge in chin here.

He also has a huge edge in defense, because he actually had one. Foreman's consisted of sticking his glove out. Tyson would come in, bob beneath it and dig in a hard left hook.

Power would be about equal, although it should be noted that Tyson scored many one-punch KO's whereas Foreman has only one.

Stamina goes to Tyson and heart goes to Foreman.

One other thing i'd like to point out is that people say "Foreman has the style to beat Tyson, because Tyson comes right at him". Whose to say it's not the other way around? Look at Tyson's career, is there any pattern of fighters who slugged it out with him that had a lot of success? I can't think of one.

I may have exaggerated a bit in my post here, but i think it's such an over-simple and wrong analysis to say "Well, Foreman beat Frazier so he beats Tyson", while Tyson and Frazier are worlds apart; Tyson scores early/mid KO's, Frazier scores mid/late TKO's. Frazier's defence is based on taking some but not all punches that works for the full 15. Tyson's defence is based on getting inside early, past the jab but slows down in effectiveness past the mid rounds. Tyson has a very strong chin, Frazier has a somewhat lesser chin. Frazier had one of the best hearts/mental fortitude in history, Tyson was questionable in that department. Etc, etc. The only thing they have in common is that they're short and come forward, but in different ways.

As usual another solid post.

I should add however that most people when assesing this match up that seem to lean towards Foreman with thier mind set on what Foreman is going to do to Tyson and unfortunately not the other way around. Part of the reason Tyson's opponents didnt throw many punches was because they had a fear of getting countered. They felt it early and in trying to time Tyson they end up taking a quick and powerful counter. Look at Ali vs. Williams- Big Cat wasnt throwing many punches because he knew that anything he threw would only be wasteful and he'd be countered.

Anyway Tyson having the better delivery system and more proven chin than George has to considered here. This is probably one of the rare moments where Tyson is the better fighter after the mid rounds as his stamina was always superior to Foreman's. Mike also has an underrated heart; Nobody seems to question the fact that Foreman accepted defeat against Ali and was mentally beaten in his prime. He got up at the count of 9 against Ali and walked to his corner a beaten man. IMO Douglas dished out alot more to Tyson than Ali did to Foreman but Tyson faltered because physically he was beaten. Look at how they were at the end of the fights; Tyson had to be told that he was knocked out whereas Foreman knew. So I think their heart rates equal. For those who use the Lyle fight as a basis point, I should mention that Foreman getting off the floor to win has more to do with his chin than his heart. Yes he showed fortitude and resiliance against Lyle but Tyson's ability to take a punch means that unlike Foreman he is likely to go down far less in a fight than Foreman was. Had his Chin been lesser he may have tasted the Canvas against Bruno or Ruddock and got up to win.

This match up will be pretty close but IMO the favorite here should be Tyson on the basis of a better delivery system, chin

[UpWithEvil]

I should add however that most people when assesing this match up that seem to lean towards Foreman with thier mind set on what Foreman is going to do to Tyson and unfortunately not the other way around.

Clearly you aren't paying attention. I broached the possibility of Tyson both headbutting Foreman AND kneeing him in the groin, once Tyson realized the fight wasn't going to go his way.

[prime]

First, Tyson is no small, chin-out, uselessly-hooking, 1973-Frazier.

Second, Tyson was as much a warrior of the ring as anyone else.

If a lion and tiger were to fight, the winner would be the first to mortally wound the other. That means power and speed, the "delivery system" Ironchamp mentions. This is why I believe Tyson wins, and nobody should be ashamed of picking him against Foreman.

Tyson was always used to fighting bigger and taller men and would approach Foreman as he did Berbick: fast on his feet, circling, leading with the jab, looking to smash Foreman cleanly on the head and then follow up devastatingly.

Foreman's best bet would be to try and smother and uppercut Tyson at close quarters, because his good, slow jab would not be effective against the fast-moving Tyson, his right cross is too poor and slow and his left hook would never get there at mid-range, either. He would have to try and disrupt Tyson's rhythm with clinches and hammer him then.

So even though Foreman has the reach advantage, it is of little avail because he is too slow and inaccurate on the outside to hit the flitting Tyson with great head movement cleanly. This should not be underestimated because, again, Foreman's hook and cross are relatively slow and/or poor; his best long-range punch is the jab but it alone cannot do the job. Foreman needs Tyson in front of him and Tyson will not pose for him.

Tyson has the mid-range advantage and can come with the left hook or overhand right; Foreman has the inside advantage with the uppercut. But mid-range trumps close range and greater variety trumps one sole trick.

Foreman was not much more durable than Berbick, if at all. Tyson strikes first and brutalizes Foreman early.

[UpWithEvil]

Second, Tyson was as much a warrior of the ring as anyone else

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

If a lion and tiger were to fight, the winner would be the first to mortally wound the other.

Interestingly, they would both be trying to bite their opponents to death as well.

[DEMGrinder]

Just Look at what a 38 yr old 2+ years retired Larry Holmes was able to do to Tyson with his jab in the first few rounds of there fight, a good hard jab always gave tyson problems from Holmes to Pinklon, to even Tony Tubbs for the 1st rd. w the culminatation being Buster destroying him w the jab......Big George had one of the heaviest jabs Ive seen from any heavyweight besides Sonny Liston....Tyson w head movement it would be closer for a few rounds until Foreman started catching him w 1,2's and TKO'd him in the later rds....Tyson after Douglass I think would have been reminscent of the first Foreman Frazier fight, a total blowout w Tyson just trying to bull his way in.

[AnthonyJ74]

Just Look at what a 38 yr old 2+ years retired Larry Holmes was able to do to Tyson with his jab in the first few rounds of there fight, a good hard jab always gave tyson problems from Holmes to Pinklon, to even Tony Tubbs for the 1st rd. w the culminatation being Buster destroying him w the jab......Big George had one of the heaviest jabs Ive seen from any heavyweight besides Sonny Liston....Tyson w head movement it would be closer for a few rounds until Foreman started catching him w 1,2's and TKO'd him in the later rds....Tyson after Douglass I think would have been reminscent of the first Foreman Frazier fight, a total blowout w Tyson just trying to bull his way in.

Holmes fought a survival fight. He wasn't there to win. And, Holmes' jab rarely landed cleanly. He'd flick it out, but most of the time he caught air with it. He was more interested in clinching, grabbing and holding. Any fighter that fights like that is going to last longer than a guy who opens up and fights!

[JohnBKelly]

George could fight mike never could. It would be fun while it lasted but the Brownsville Boy would end up bloodied, bruised and counting his brain cells. Other than Ali nobody put Foreman down for the 10 count in 30 years of boxing.

[Sonny's jab]

From a technical standpoint I can see why people want to pick Tyson.

His "delivery system" and ability to counter with speed, versus Foreman's brutish strength and crude clubbing haymakers - you can IMAGINE the guy who resembles a technical attacking machine besting the guy who just looks raw and reckless.

But that's ignoring everything we know about these guys as FLESH AND BLOOD FIGHTERS, as human beings. And it's ignoring everything we see in heavyweight boxing all the time.

Brutal, strong, rough monstrous guys can make a mockery of better "technical" fighters, esp. when they have size advantages.

Tyson was bothered by men who held, strong guys who leaned on him, guys who pushed him, walked him back in the clinches, even some of the crude slow guys. These tactics weren't technical, they were basic and desperate but they interrupt what he's trying to do. No degree of technical superiority will prevent a Frank Bruno or a Lennox Lewis pushing down on your head, if that's what they want to do.

Foreman brings his own messy tactics to the ring, and it's not holding or pushing around to survive, he's coming out to brutalize his man, by fair or foul means, and if Tyson brings enough to shake and hurt Foreman we have SEEN how much of a natural fighter Foreman is. This guy doesn't give up, he doesn't back down, he doesn't acknowledge pain, and he's strong to the last drop. Foreman was some kind of animal. His quality as a great fighter isn't as easily analysed, his quality is intangible, he's of proven character.

Under a certain analysis, Tyson might be "technically superior" but Tyson got beaten by guys who didn't have his "delivery system", guys who didn't even hit as hard as him, guys who didn't hit as fast as him, guys who had more analysable flaws in defense and technique. Tyson got beaten up badly and knocked out by these "inferior fighters". People forget that.

The only man who KO'd Foreman was Ali, and he would've KO'd Tyson too, believe it.

[round15]

Everyone must stop using Joe Frazier as the measuring stick when making an assessment of a Tyson vs Foreman, prime vs prime matchup.

Need I remind everyone that Foreman never fought the best Frazier and KO'd an overweight, out of shape fighter that was a far cry from the 1967 - 1971 FOTC version. Frazier in shape, determined, and at his prime weight between 203lbs - 205lbs, would give prime Tyson and prime Foreman probably the roughest fights of their careers. Frazier was one of the best pressure fighters of all time and was known for punching off the angles and working the body early. He showed no angles, had no speed, showed very little pressure and showed no head movement against Foreman and foolishly tried to out-muscle him.

As for Tyson vs Foreman, prime vs prime, this is a hard fight to judge. First of all, what are considered the prime years of Mike Tyson? He was arguably robbed of the prime years of his career just like Ali when he spent time in jail. I think he was at his best when he won the heavyweight title but still a little green. He came back strong at 217lbs and fought two tough fights against Ruddock. In those fights, Tyson was the closest I saw to the champion that was dominant before losing to Buster Douglas. 1972 - 1973 George Foreman was a knockout specialist and harder hitter than the old George Foreman, 1990's, but I think the old George was a smarter boxer.

Both men have the ability to knock out the other man, and young Tyson could probably knock George out between rounds 7 and 9. I can see Foreman taking Tyson out around the same time and if he paces himself using his jab, he could win via decision. Young Foreman didn't have the jab that old Foreman developed in his second title reign and this could probably give him trouble trying to keep Tyson on the outide.

[sthomas]

After reading the posts, Foreman KO's Tyson early to mid. round KO.