Tyson would have beaten George Foreman and heres why!

Even old fat Foreman would KO prime Tyson in 4 or less. Bottom like is Tyson was taylor made for Foreman.

 

Foreman vs Tyson would go similar to Foreman vs Frazier

 

This mummy is going to be beat Tyson :rofl:rofl:roflatschatschatsch

This content is protected

GIFSoup

 

Realistically you needed the style that James Douglas used to beat the prime version of Tyson and I dont think Douglas could beat Tyson at his peak, but you needed quick hands, a good jab, chin and the ability to fight inside and put multiple punches together. Douglas fought like Ali that night and thats the style that needed to defeat Tyson but I dont think Tyson at his best would have allowed Douglas to fight the way he did, you would see a more defensive Douglas who eventually would get stopped.
The only fighters I see able to offset Tyson and fight the course are probably Ali and maybe Bowe at his peak, and its still a tough fight to call.

Foreman didnt have much of any of that. He was just too one dimensional wide punching and not quick enough with his hands to beat Tyson. Tyson would have been too fast for any version of Foreman.

 

Tyson and Frazier have nothing in common, aaprt from being Black and having a good left hook

Frazier was taylor made for Foreman, Tyson wasnt.

Fraziers style was gung ho, full steam ahead, stop at nothing and that worked in Foremans favour

Tyson (at least at his best) had a more patient style which invovled awaiting for openings and being patiently aggressive. Because of his height, or lack of, he had to pick his openings. This is why Cus said once Tyson becomes easier to hit hed become easier to beat. Thats why Post Rooney Tysons fights became more competitive because he was no longer an elusive missile, he was now a stand straight slugger.

Tyson would have an easier time with Foreman than Frazier did, yes i said it. However hed have an harder time with Ali than Frazier did.

Also, im not sure but who was the hardest puncher Foreman ever faced? Frazier, Lyle?

 

:yep

Calling it an analysis is being really kind.

 

Foreman was too slow to beat Tyson. Tyson in his prime was great at slipping punches and countering. Foreman left himself open to counters and was susceptible to getting caught with flush bombs. Tyson would land many combinations and counters and would stop Foreman in the middle rounds. Just my opinion.

 

Thank you. The Frazier-Tyson comparison is inapt. Also, consider that Frazier was on a quick downward slide when he met Foreman. He never beat an elite heavy again.

 

On Letterman, Foreman said the 3 hardest punchers he ever fought were Cleveland Williams (sparring), Cooney (harder puncher than Frazier by his own admission) and Lyle.

 

I don't know if that mummy can ''be beat'' Tyson, but I think the mummy can beat Tyson.

 

This match-up comes down to Foreman having virtually nothing to keep Tyson from teeing off on him, and Tyson having a good defense. Foreman would get knocked out.

(And the same thing would happen if Foreman fought Vitali, Lennox, or Liston.)

 

I won't even pick a winner between a 1974 Foreman and a 1988 Tyson.. But I will say this.. If I could see any match I chose between any two fighters, this would probably do it for me.

 

Same man but not the same weight or style. He beat Foreman at 208 using angles but still being eager to brawl. Against Tyson it was 5 yrs later and 10 pds heavier. He was able to muscle Tyson while being heavier and was more comfortable with finding openings to counter punch Tyson getting him off balance. This is a head hunting Tyson that ignored his defense even though he was "young" yet was not prime.

Dont get me wrong, great win for Holy but Holy had more weight on him and less hair in '96-beyond than in late 80s-92. The one who beat Foreman would not enjoy the same advantages and brawling with Mike prime or not wouldn't go too well even with Holy's great chin. Gets irritating when people just assume Holy would always beat Mike the same way as when they fought without studying these facts.

Agreed. Yes Tyson was still prime when Douglas beat him unmotivated or not. Even then he almost knocked him out. Back to what Azzer said, Tyson would be much easier to beat when he became basically a head hunter and ignored the head movement that brought him the glory he got in his peak.

The only time we run into each other is on a Tyson-based thread? Why?

That said, great post.

And TBH no two guys fight identically alike. Frazier was a workhorse starting slow but always in front of his opponent. Tyson was a counter-puncher at his best. Yes they came forward but sure that Tyson wouldn't be pushed around as easily as Frazier was if at a significance at all. Only problem for facing Foreman is both came forward but that still favors Mike as he's more durable and less likely to get hit at his best than Frazier.

Lets be fair. It was still a great win for Foreman and that Frazier was still a great fighter. I think his drive was not nearly as bright anymore. Just passed his peak after Ali 1 and just couldn't get motivated the same way as Ali got him to be. Believe he thought Foreman would be an easy fight but that was his fault if so.

 

Michael Moorer had Foreman's number throughout the whole fight until the knockout

Foreman beating Tyson :rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

Foreman couldn't even beat Tommy Morrison and was probably one of the worst champions in the 90s