Could Mike Tyson really beat Joe Frazier?

Getting knocked down in the first place doesn't show a strong chin unless you are completely battered near the end of the fight....its also an indication you weren't hit hard enough.Tyson hitting Frazier? He would not get back up ,he would be hit with something fast and powerful ,that he would think he got hit with a bat from behind.If you want to compare chins lets do it.....

Tyson walked through a 6'3 240 pound Ruddock for 19 rounds in two fights ...Tyson ate punch after punch for 10 rounds to a 6'4 230 pounder while in half azz shape ,he then went 8 rounds and ate 200 punches from a monster of 6'5 250 pounder in lewis before going down...Now that's a strong chin!


Only a fool is comparing any version after Lewis,whats the point unless you lost the argument and are desperately looking for an angle to look smart? :-(

 

No not trying to look like anything tough guy.I'm stating 3 facts from the Foreman fight. Every time Joe went down he got up. Now how many times did Tyson quit when the going got tough. I'll tell u..too many times tough guy

 

I agree with Foxy and Slash; Tyson was a great frontrunner, who stalled when things didn't go to plan. We first saw this in the Tillis fight, when Tillis wasn't cowed and fought back, Tyson didn't have a plan B.

Yes, he has a chance early with Frazier, who started slowly, but with every passing minute his chances diminish. Prime Frazier grew into fights and was never discouraged, and don't think Tyson takes Joe's shots without flinching, either.

Tyson had better get to Joe within 3 rounds or he is getting worn down over the long haul.

 

When a teenage Tyson couldn't KO Tillis, he comfortably out-pointed him instead. If that's not a plan B then I don't know what is.

 

You first have to know what you are talking about to even come at me with anything,you don't for one Tyson was never knocked down by former light heavyweights..frazier was never hit with power the likes of Ruddock or Lewis.certainly not over a long period ..go look and see who was knocked down more vs the lighter punchers and educate yourself.Bonevena nearly stopped Frazier in two rounds?

 

He was green as grass. 19 years of age with no names of note and had never been beyond 6 rounds.

Seriously? You ever spar or box someone who had 6 inches and 20 lbs on you? Its freakin' exhausting. Tyson did it and dominated those over 12 rounds on 3 occasions. This expels the myth about your claim that his stamina was poor.

No it wasn't... Tyson was beating the shlt out of Jose Ribalta in that 10th round like a it was a heavy bag session. He was dominated Tony Tucker. And he made Ruddock's face look like a basketball.. Frazier's only outing against significantly larger men were Bugner and Mathis - two guys who were relatively passive and played it safe..

Foreman never showed in first career that he could do much beyond the 7th round. Tyson went 12 on three occasions and 10 on three occasions pre prison and won all of them.

yes but this applies more to Foreman than it does Tyson.

Why not? Norton broke his Jaw.. Frazier and Wepner had him down. Lyle wasn't the puncher that Tyson was and neither Foreman OR Lyle had the hand speed or combination punching ability that Tyson had.. Hell tried leaning on the ropes against Tyson the way he did with Foreman it might very well prove to be the biggest mistake of his career.

 

Tyson had better stamina than Foreman plus a totally different style. Slipping the jab then unloading with the left was his game.. Not Foreman's.

Again what's to say that he couldn't? And why the hell would Tyson HAVE to knock him out?

Most of the Boxing world felt that he lost at least two out of the three Norton fights and some felt he lost all of them.. The Shavers and Young fights are commonly deemed as Robberies.. We already talked about Foreman and why its an irrelevant comparison. And contrary to your claim Ali was EXHAUSTED in the later rounds of many of his fight during the 70's.. Hell he almost threw in the towel himself against frazier in Manilla. But regardless I don't see how Tyson beating or losing to Ali helps Frazier is it your opinion that because Frazier beat Ali one time after a four year layoff and that Tyson MIGHT not be able to do the same that this is an automatic win for Joe?

I'd give both of those last two guys a real chance at knocking out Norton.. And I can think of a few Tyson opponents who would give a 70's George problems.

Ali was getting hit left and right in the 70's and not even necessarily by top flight fighters either... You think he's going to just dance circles around a man who had faster hands, threw better combinations and the right style for beating him more so than practically anyone he fought during that period..

1. Because Tyson losing to Douglas does nothing for Frazier.. This has been explained at nauseam.

2. Did any of those guys lose there ENTIRE management team within such a short time the way Tyson did? Tyson lost his mother, Cus, Jim Jacobs and his sister within about a 3 year period. he went through an ugly divorce, had a nasty car wreck that might well have been a suicide attempt, fights outside the ring and influences that aren't exactly the best for a 22 year old kid to have around.. Getting floored against Greg Page was a tell tale sign that he was slipping.. Anyone who knows anything about the man could see it..

Ummmm. No... Plenty of concessions have been made for Frazier ranging from blind eyes to spending more time singing in his band than training..

Do you paint every person with the same brush often?? How the hell do you know how bad those other guys problems were or Tysons? How do you know to what degree they affected them or him... And I don't personally don't care how why Tyson lost to Douglas because in this particular debate it doesn't help the person you're defending... A 6'4" 230 lbs rangy boxer with a great jab and powerful upper cut has NOTHING and I mean absolutely freakin' NOTHING in common with a 5'11", 205 lbs Swarmer who's strength came from bobbing, weaving and relying off the left hook... The very fact that you keep repeating the Douglas fight is verification in my book that you have nothing else to work with... Wanna here a comparison that ACTUALLY works??? Ok how about Oscar Bonavena to Tyson? Now that's something we can use.. He was short cagey fighter who could punch and smothered his opponents. He took Frazier the distance twice and had him down on some two or three occasions.. Granted Joe won, but Tyson was probaly FIVE times the fighter Oscar was..

Tyson showed he that he came to fight and win on 50 occasions in his career.. Frazier only did it on 32.

Here's why... And we could have saved ourselves the better part of day debating had we just agreed on this in the first place.... Because slow starting fighter who stands at close range and has a shaky chin is a horribly match up for a guy who is a fast starter with ATG power, fast hands and loves to have his man right in front of him... I've acknowledged that Frazier COULD win but I would not favor him to do it, while you steadfastly argue that Joe takes this hands down and for reasons that are either flawed, moot or irrelevant. Hell if I were to take the opposite end of the argument and defend Frazier, I wouldn't even use some of the tactics that you're employing...

Because he was fighting a guy who was using his reach and extending at him from a distance which is the best possible scenario for a guy who "slips" jabs and bobs and weaves and was rusty besides.. Little bit different when you're fighting a guy who closes the gap and hammers the livin' sht out of you with a ferocious two fisted attack..

Yeah he was fast.. But fast footwork was the way to make short work of Joe Frazier... Going in and clobbering him to death with a two fisted attack, fast hands and lots of power was... Tyson could do just that.

Not really. There are other great fighters that I'd pick him to beat.. But there are some men who for stylistic reasons I think he does very poorly against.

Regardless of whatever spin you want to put on Tyson's fights with Tillis and Douglas and how he'd do against 70's Ali, it doesn't explain Jack for why he'd falter against Frazier... Sorry but it doesn't.. And mentioning those fights only delays us from getting down to the more finer points.

Because he was.. Plain and simple.. He had a very short prime and a career that was mismanaged.. Granted some of his decline was his own fault.. But what happened to him from 1990 onward shouldn't have bearing on what he did in the years prior.. believe me I've gotten frustrated with Tyson lovers too ( which incidentally I'm not. ) but I don't like Frazier's chances against him....

Fair enough.

And Styles make fights..

That would be a fine comment if this thread were about Ali vs Tyson.. But it isn't..

 

Other than showing your adulation of Tyson, what is this post actually trying to claim? It is rubbish.

Evidence abounds of Tyson having the mental strength of a gnat, and quitting fighting when the other guy decides to take the fight straight to him. Whether you and other Tyson fanboys choose to believe or dispute this is of no consequence to me at all. It is there on film for ALL to see.

Similarly I have less than zero interest in " personal problems " "trainer issues " whether or not he was " prime " or any other feeble excuses his apologists can think up.

It has been shown quite clearly that Tyson was only ever a 6 round fighter anyway, fading quite noticeably after that, all that happened to him after his prison sentence was the 6 rounds became 3 of EXACTLY the same modus operandi.

If any fighter had the tools and the attitude to make Tyson quit fighting, or try to foul his way out of a fight it was Frazier. You can rest assured of that.

 

Using your own criteria, and points of argument, wtf has a stumpy little fighter with a 71" reach got to do with 3 guys well over 6 feet tall with at least 78" reaches fighting EACH OTHER?:roll:

 

How the **** was Tyson bigger than Holyfield?

Holyfield, 6'3, 78" reach.
Tyson, 5'10, 71" reach.

 

I read it in the battle of the legends section of ring magazine sometime between 1990 to 1992. You'll have to look for it.

 

So was Frazier, we saw his plan b vs George Foreman.

He didnt knock Tillis out, but outpointed him, if thats not plan b, i dont know what is.

Secondly, Tyson was still a green prospect at the time facing an experienced journeyman. A journeyman whod been in the ring with Weaver, Shavers, Thomas, Page, Witherspoon, Williams, Frazier, Coetzee and Biggs. Can you see the difference between an experienced fighter and a green prospect?

Foreman did, he walked through Fraziers left hook without flinching and outbombed him.

Frazier 'grew' into fights because he had opponents in front of him who allowed that. Tyson would be on Frazier like a dog in heat and wouldnt let up on him. Tyson is the best finisher in the business, alongside Louis. Theres not going to be any miraculous turnarounds or 'weathering the storm' Tyson will beat on Frazier until the fight is stopped or until Frazier is sleeping

Because Tyson never stopped anyone after round 3 right?

This is what would happen to Frazier, and this was in round 6 vs a guy whod never been stopped before.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvQ89GqYz-U

Tysons own comments on his fight with Marvis Frazier.

'With Frazier, when you jab, he bows, down like this, when he bows to avoid my jab im going to catch him with my uppercut'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jc2phQYGq2g

Rewind back to Kingston, at the beginning of the first or second round, Foreman throws a jab, to which Frazier starts bobbing, then Foreman immediately throws a right uppercut....the rest is history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS57YsAxmhk

(around the 0.10 second mark)

 

This cr*p about Tyson having no stamina and not being able to win fights that lasted beyond 5 rounds isn't really being backed up here. At only 20 years of age and with less than two years of pro experience, he was already taking men the 12 round distance in championship fights and winning.

 

Ask these people when Tyson first showed any signs of stamina problems, which fight?

Ill be surprised if you get an answer.

(Hint: 09/11/1996)

 

I don't think he ever showed stamina problems at all frankly. The defeats he suffered were from sustained beatings that he took over many rounds, most of which took place when he was no longer at his best. Gassing wasn't something he was known for.