George Foreman vs. Ray Mercer in 1995

I am not maintaining that foreman would have "beaten" Tyson at any point during his comeback. In fact, I am not even sold on the idea that he would have beaten him in his prime either. But by 1991, Tyson was not using as much movement or throwing the kinds of combinations that he was in the 80's and with Kevin Rooney in his corner. He was doing a lot of head hunting and looking for that one big punch, which is dangerous against a guy like George Foreman. Razor Ruddock was certainly tagging him with a lot of shots and while Tyson still showed some fluidity and defense, it was hardly what I'd call stellar. There's no question that Foreman was slow and a big target. But he had a vastly improved defense, tied guys up pretty well, worked the body, still had power in both hands and a pretty good beard. Men like Morrison, Schultz and Stewart had success by boxing Foreman and not trading with him. Holyfield went back and forth between boxing and trading, and the result was a win, but he took some hard shots in the process and still had to settle for a decision. There's no way that Mike is going to get within close to mid range of Foreman and make him miss every punch by ducking and countering. He'll land his devastating blows to be sure, but he'll take some as well, and I can certainly see Foreman tying him up and neutralizing some of those attacks while giving Tyson that nasty gut check in the clinches. My prediction is Tyson winning by either a decision or by corner retirement on Foreman's part. But predicting a one sided beat down that ends in five rounds is wishful thinking.

So in conclusion, we at least agree on one thing. Tyson wins.

 

Of course he looked better in 1997 than he did in 1987. In 1987, he was returning from a 10 year layoff and loaded with rust. But just because he was sharper in 1997 doesn't mean that it was the high point of his comeback. For me it was somewhere in between. In 1997 he looked good for a guy who was almost 50.. But that's about the extent of it.. In the Savarese fight Foreman landed 296 of 540 punches. Savarese landed 336 of 870. The punches that Foreman landed were a bit more effective, but for all practical purposes, he was outgunned. A few months later, Lou was KO'd by the mediocre David Izon. Against Shannon Briggs he showed up weighing 260 lbs, which was the most he had weighed in 7 years, yet I agree he outlanded Briggs and narrowly deserved the decision. But frankly I think if this had been the Foreman of 1989 to 1991, he would have knocked out both of those guys.

 

Foreman was getting bombed by Holyfield but George was never on ***** street. Those shots Foreman took would have ko'd anyone else. To George, Holyfield's punches were like an annoying fly.

 

I wouldn't go so far as to stay "***** street" or "annoying fly", he was certainly rocked a few times in the 7th when Holyfield opened up finally after getting hurt by that clip shot. Holyfiled's KO power is kind of iffy anyway, he's more likely to drop his opponent with a well timed counter than from wailing on them.

 

But Holyfield was definitely landing some hard clean shots on Foreman.

 

Holyfield landed on Foreman with regularity due to his skill, speed, and precision punching. He was also one of these guys who was willing to take a punch to land a punch. In addition, it helped that he was closer to Foreman's height and reach than Tyson would have been. Evander didn't hit like Tyson, Foreman, Shavers, Ike, Tua, etc, but he was accurate, precise, and busy. He certainly wasn't feather fisted either and possessed a fair amount of power in his prime, which I gauge up until about age 31. The fact that Foreman took his best over 12 rounds, and fired back with meaningful shots, while all the previous heavyweight contenders Evander had faced were dispatched, is a testimony to me that his comeback was no farce as God King and a few others have stated in the past.

 

No doubt, and they did some damage. Foreman got rocked a few times in the 7th during the big flurry and a right hand appeared to put him in trouble at the end of the 9th I think it was. Evander was more than an annoying fly.

 

Interestingly enough, a 42 year old Foreman lasted almost as many rounds in one evening against a prime Holyfield as Tyson did in two evenings against a past prime one...Yet many are concerned with Evander "rocking" Foreman.

 

:huh I didn't misread anything! I'm picking Mercer based on his battles with superior competition which was levels above the competition Foreman was struggling against. Just one reason why I pick Mercer at this particular time.

 

Eh, I guess this is addressed to me but I really don't understand what you are trying to say here. :blood

I simply don't agree with the observation that Holyfield's punches were a pesky fly to Foreman.

 

Nothing.. I'm making an observation and it was addressed to several others including, but not limited to yourself.

 

Umm. I think you did.. Because THIS was the response of yours I was referring to. See below.

By you feeling the need to tell me that Foreman would have gotten " willy lump lumped" against Mercer ( whatever that means), then asking me to stop pretending Foreman was better than he really was in 1995, then you clearly "misread" my post which indicated that I picked Mercer to win on the grounds that Foreman had deteriorated by 1995. Anything else that I need to clear up?

 

Well, you lost me completely. :huh

 

Then skip that and let me respond to this:

I for one never said that Foreman was impervious to Holyfield's punches. But if they proved to be more than a pesky fly to him, then they must have felt like African killer bee stings to Tyson..

 

:good