As I said, I change my answers quite a lot. You seem to ignore this. How about posting An answer of mine that wasn't EIGHT YEARS AGO? Don't worry, I'll save you the trouble. :good https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20121210134557AAUiPMd
I think Tyson's heart and mind come into play like never before here. I think Tyson won fights before the first bell by smelling fear and seeing his opponents look scared. Against Frazier he looks across and sees someone who shows no fear whatsoever, who he knows is coming for him and who he knows he will probably have to knock down multiple times to win. Tyson is scared going into this fight, he doesn't have the heart to beat Frazier.
Frazier will be fast asleep before Tysons heart comes into play. Tyson only ever got frustrated in fights with opponents he couldn't land anything on. With Frazier, as Liston said 'It will be like shoot crabs in a barrel'.
Frazier's right hand was probably a lot more hurtful than you credit. But your point has some validity of course. Even so, Frazier managed to throw plenty of power lefts, of varying distance, to make up for any lack of a right hand. He never lacked for powerful output. If Frazier had landed his best left hook on a 38-year-old Holmes there would have been similar spectacle to when Tyson landed his right. "concussion" isn't a sound. Again, the sound of a punch landing isn't directly correlated to the force of the punch. In fact, some of the weakest punchers made the loadest noise when they landed. The proof of power is in the effects and results. Tyson and Frazier hurt, stopped or KO'd similar level of opponent with a similar number of punches, in most cases. The evidence is in the results, on paper and on film.
Tyson destroys Frazier. He really does. I'd be mega shocked if this went beyond two rounds. Tyson has the advantage in hand speed, power and durability. He also has a far superior jab. Frazier leaping into a left hook from Tyson. Makes me wince just thinking about it.
I almost doubt some of you have watched Frazier. He's comparable or equal in most of these departments some are saying Tyson's so superior in. Tyson seems to have mythical properties attributed to him, while most of Frazier's attrributes are ignored. Ignorance is bliss, I suppose. If Frazier had half the weaknesses some think he had, he wouldn't have had such a great career.
Being slower and lighter punching than Tyson doesn't mean someone can't have a great career. Having an inferior jab is fine as long as you don't rely on attacks behind it. Being less durable is an issue if you face bigger puncher's. For what it's worth. I think Tyson beats Frazier Frazier beats Ali Ali beats Tyson. Like a game of rock paper scissors.
But Frazier wasn't lighter punching ... nor was his less durable ... nor did he have a far inferior jab. These are just things getting repeated in sheep-like fashion with no evidence behind them. Tyson did have faster hands, and was also a fast starter. The fast starting is perhaps his key chance to victory. But Frazier was fast too, and wasn't a slow starter by any means. When Frazier fought the same level of opponent as Reggie Gross or Peter McNeeley, or blown-up light-heavyweights, he had similar effect as Tyson, sometimes needed an extra couple of rounds to find his range (Tyson being exceptionally quick to do so). When both of them stepped up to a better level they had mixed and comparable results. And at the highest level Frazier proved superior and endured more punishment against better opponents. The proof is right there on the films.
Well if I'm the sheep then who is the shepherd? Because the place I get my info from is the films. I think it's patently obvious watching that Tyson has better power and a better jab.
I don't think you've watched much of Frazier then. Tyson hit Jose Ribalta and Tyrell Biggs with everything but the kitchen sink before they wilted for good. If that was Frazier in there, it would be "See, he's a wear-'em-down type of puncher, lots of volume". When Frazier takes Dave Zyclewicz and Bob Foster out in 1 or 2 rounds, it's "oh, those bums ..." When Tyson destroys Reggie Gross and Michael Spinks, it's "great superior POWER". You have to view with an equal, fair-handed, neutral mind. I think Tyson's jab was a little harder than Frazier's, but Frazier's hard and was often doubled up, sometimes tripled.
First Frazier was a slow starter. This is well known by EVERYONE at that time. It's not an arguable point it's THAT well known. Joe would warm up twice as long as typical fighters prior to a bought in an effort to minimize his issues with starting so slow. I am no Tyson fan but the truth is the truth. Skill wise Frazier was a less skilled fighter than Tyson.....Tydon had a great jab which allowed him to outjab continually much larger opponents, he was much quicker than Joe, his ability to change up as he came forward giving angles to avoid punches and gaining openings for his punches again exceeded Frazier by a mile or more. If you watched them both in the ring live as I have you would clearly understand their respective punching power was not very comparable. Tyson had a dynamite right hand and could throw it with ko power to head or body and had complete coordination to use it in combination with his left. Joe lacked this capability. Joe had a great left hook but Tysons was shorter, as quick or quicker and carried more ko power. The only areas Joe was superior to Tyson was his heart and will to win and he was head and shoulders better in these regards. Fraziers only chance here would be to somehow survive early and take Tyson into deep water. In deep water, a long battle, Tyson has little chance as he would give up mentally and Joe would not.
Foreman hit Frazier with his best shots and he kept getting up. No way in hell is the lighter punching Tyson putting him to sleep.
You do talk rubbish, Frazier was a better body puncher than Tyson. How many did Tyson stop with body shots? Their left hook was about equal, the difference is Frazier threw it a hell of a lot more and carried big power late.