Could Mike Tyson really beat Joe Frazier?

And that is relevant because?

 

Tyson was not prime for Holyfield , and any results he had against him do not indicate how he would do against Frazier , especially since Frazier and Holyfield's styles were totally dissimilar.

 

Oh, we can simplify it very easily. Tyson was good at knocking over C level fighters, old men, junkies, and guys with booze problems, plus a scared sh itless Spinks.

The reality is even when the " bums " and old men turned up to have a fight, ( which was the only way Frazier knew how ) he got beaten up and stopped. All the apologists can wriggle and squirm as much as they like but the facts and stats PROVE them to be nothing more than fools, and fantasists.

I find it hilariously ironic that these same so called fans would have people believe this freak was the greatest thing since chewing gum, but then claim it all went tits up in the Douglas fight because he didn't have Rooney in the corner. Which one, Kevin or Wayne? Either way it's a joke.:rofl:rofl

So basically, what they are actually saying is he was merely a half wit incapable of thinking for himself, unless Rooney told him EXACTLY what to do, and how and when to do it. Some ATG that.:roll::roll:

 

And Holyfield was " prime " for Tyson?atsch

The highly pertinent fact is Frazier like Holyfield possessed great heart and desire, and no fear. Against someone with the mental fortitude of Tyson these things become very important.

 

Well for once mcnut is right,your points hold no real value in the actual time they fought and who was relevant,Holyfields style still thrived ,not so much Tysons.No evidence that Holyfield in 91 and definatly in 88 would hold Up to a better skilled Tyson.


The title post should actually say 'could Frazier really beat Tyson",its also such nonsense comparing a granite Holyfeild chin to a weak frazier one ,imagine if Foreman at 260 hit Frazier then?

 

If Fraziers chin is so weak how do u expain him getting up every single time despite the fact that he was lifted of his feet twice and hit in the back of the head one.
Yet u claim Tyson had the better chin??? Yea that Kevin McBride was a real killer LOL

 

Lol, wow! So people really think this? I can't tell whether it's because Tyson is being overrated or it's because Frazier is underrated, but I suspect it's the latter? Frazier was a BEAST. Give the man some[i/] respect.

If Tyson wins (and I honestly think that the fight could go either way in way that has them fighting competitively for more than one round easily), he's not taking Frazier out in the first round. Stop it.

 

It's not a question of "respect"; it's about recognizing the likely outcome given their particular styles and physical attributes, their strengths and weaknesses.

 

we first saw that when douglas was motivated and unwavering, fearless (and tyson traded on fear, a certain art learned from cus d'amato) against tyson after the death of his, douglas', mother.

 

Perhaps you should take a look at George Foreman's record prior to him destroying Frazier...

As for fighting C level fighters, I'll match Tyson's opposition in his first ten title fights against the first ten of any other heavyweight champ.

 

Those are valid points, but you forget a key one: having success against Ali means, to many fans, that "styles make fights" doesn't apply anymore. It doesnt matter if the actual history itself contradicts it. Case in point, a man describing a situation that actually happened to a T saying it's not possible.

It's easy to forget that, once Ali retired, Cruiserweights and Heavyweights just plum forgot how to fight. It's simply a massive coincidence that the only few people in history capable of landing a punch on him happened to be fighting at the exact same time.