Would a prime foreman defeat tyson as easily as holyfield did?

Bruno held like his life depended on it. Foreman swings for the fences and gets tagged imo. I think Cus has got into people's heads as much as he got into Tysons, I really do !

 

Watch Foreman when he gets tagged and hurt. Every fight he got hurt he kept getting hit and doesn't know how to tie his man up. Even Ruddock for how crude he was knew how to clinch. Foreman just doesn't do it. Not sure he even knows how to, really.

Lyle, Cooney, Holyfield, Stewart...they kept tagging George when he got hurt. Dude just doesn't tie his opponent up. It doesn't bode well against a better, faster technician like Mike Tyson.

 

fergy, I don't think cus was as good to Tyson as a father figure would be. He had an agenda, and nothing would derail his dream. Tyson could've been the biggest ******* going and cus would've turned a blind eye imo...There was a fighter from the uk years ago, might have been Scottish if my memory serves me right. He travelled and stayed with cus and he mentioned in the documentary that cus was all about money and glory. Do you know the documentary I'm on about ? its a long shot that you do...

 

if Tyson stuns him like Lyle did, he aint gonna get the chance to throw anything worthy back. Hes getting took out. I don't think Foreman gets mike out of there unless hes fatigued and even then Foremans tiring first

 

I also think Cus and Tysons relationship would've evaporated or ended in hate if cus would've lived longer....

 

I don't know how to properly do the formatting to a response in order to make it easy to follow, so I apologize if this is hard to follow.

I actually think I did address most of what you bring up, but you raise a few points that I failed to.

In my first paragraph I acknowledged the stylistic problem that Foreman presents to Tyson by comparing his fights with Frazier to the occasions that Tyson got hit with those same manner of uppercuts and shovel hooks by opponents lesser than Foreman. I alluded to the issue again when I specifically noted how badly Tucker rocked Tyson with an uppercut and noted in particular that Foreman would have hurt him a lot more than Tucker did.

I don't think that I was at all unfair to George with respect to his ability to hurt Tyson. In particular, I noted in the first paragraph that the clash of styles would make for a "painful evening" for Tyson. I also was clear that Foreman could hurt Tyson a lot more than Tucker did, and that Tucker hurt Tyson. Finally, I noted in my concluding summary that Tyson would "eat a lot" of Foreman's shots that would "stagger him and break his rhythm" (breaking his rhythm being perhaps the single best thing that an opponent could do to Tyson).

Regarding Foreman's jab and ability to keep shorter swarmers at bay in order to control range: I assumed that Foreman would deploy all the tools he used so well against Frazier, including his jab (particularly pawing and posting), shoving, and other control maneuvers. I didn't consider Chuvalo because I didn't see that fight as adding anything to the analysis of either Foreman or Tyson.

With respect to the knockouts suffered by each man, I should have specified that I see a TKO by Tyson based on numerous KDs, not on George being counted out. I attribute this prediction primarily to the Lyle fight. I take your point regarding Tyson's losses by KO to be that Tyson *could* be KO'd. I won't offer the usual riposte to the ways and times Tyson was KO'd as it would apply to the quality of his chin, but rather will just admit that Tyson could indeed be KO'd.

It is less clear to me what you mean in pointing out George's KO loss to Ali. I can't imagine that you mean to say that George could *only* be KO'd by a slick boxer and not by a power puncher like Tyson. At any rate, I did not rely on the Ali fight to make any point about Tyson's ability to TKO Foreman because I didn't see it as analogous for a number of reasons.

In general, with respect to Foreman's losses and Tyson's losses, unless specifically asked to do otherwise, I try to imagine these hypothetical match-ups as between each man at his absolute best, not at his worst. Nor do I try to imagine a kind of "average performance during his prime" for either fighter. Of course, their bad nights can tell us important things that are not always revealed in their best performances, and we need to take those things into account.

That being said, I envisioned Foreman not at his nadir but at his brutal best against Frazier (x2), Norton, and Lyle (which revealed not only his predilection for flash KDs by a big puncher but also his ability to keep getting up and keep fighting back). Similarly, I pitted George against not the Tyson of the first Bruno fight and afterward but of the half-dozen or so fights that preceded it, i.e., Tyson at his quickest, most determined, most elusive, most motivated, most inclined to throw combinations, punch while closing the distance, move after punching, etc.

Assuming we're forced to make a choice -- which I presumed to be the fundamental task laid out by these hypothetical fight questions -- I made mine based on the following theory:

(1) In the Frazier fights, Foreman was utterly destructive of a man who shared certain relevant but not definitive physical and stylistic characteristics with Mike Tyson, and, therefore, Foreman would hurt Tyson often and seriously and would frequently derail Tyson's sustained attacks, but;

(2) Frazier was able to hit Foreman squarely, and;

(3) Tyson was faster than Frazier of hand and foot; he closed the distance better and quicker, was more elusive while attempting to get into range of a taller opponent, and threw punches and took evasive maneuvers simultaneously while closing; he threw a variety of punches in rapid combination from numerous angles that far eclipsed Joe Frazier's arsenal; he started quicker than Frazier; he hit harder than Frazier; he was less prone to flash KDs than Frazier, therefore;

(4) Tyson would hit Foreman more than Frazier did and harder while getting hit less by Foreman than Frazier did and not as cleanly nor with equal effect, and;

(5) In the ensuing violence, Tyson would likely suffer plenty of brain damage but would not go down until he was KOd or very near it, and he meanwhile would be hitting back well enough to send George down for a number of quick KDs that, in aggregate, would result in a TKO.

Could I see it going the other way? I had better, if I want to continue to pretend to have a brain. I just didn't think shrugging my shoulders and saying, "Meh, 50/50" would be worth taking up anyone's time.