What if George Foreman and Mike Tyson had swapped eras..?

That sounds about right to me, except for Norton. I think he'd do significantly better against Tyson than faded Pinklon Thomas.

 

How so?

 

I have to agree. I don't know why but I see Norton giving Tyson fits.

 

If you're stipulating that he declines in the seventies just as he did in the nineties (and for the same reasons) then he'd *definitely* lose to Holmes and probably to Lyle.
Without this stipulation, things get interesting...

 

Oh gee, I don't know.

How about the fact that both Lyle and Quarry were average contenders who literally played right into Tysons hands stylistically. Or how about the fact that Norton literally could not fight off the backfoot for a prolonged amount of time and got smoked by every big puncher he ever faced? A crude, unskilled Shavers bulled him into the ropes and knocked him senseless but Norton will give a prime Tyson "fits". Sure buddy.

 

Lyle was a very hard boxer-puncher. Just the right kind of style to give Tyson fits. Imo, a (very) poor man's Lewis and a glorified Buster Douglas who beat a prime Tyson. Norton was very past prime, when he faced Shavers. I feel like Quarry's counterpunching would trouble Tyson a lot.

 

Lyle was a puncher with some skills. Out of Tysons opponents he's the most comparable to Trevor Berbick.

How exactly is he similar to Douglas, aside from his physical dimensions and a half decent jab? He had none of the footwork or handspeed, none of the feints and lead right hands which troubled Tyson to a great extent. Lyle didn't have a boxing brain like Douglas. The guy excelled at slugging and that's simply not a game you're going to win against a prime Tyson, especially if you have subpar stamina like Lyle had.

Norton just put up one of his best performances against a prime Holmes over 15, so let's not act like he was some relic. He couldn't take the power, just like he couldn't take Foremans, or wouldn't be able to take Tysons.

Quarry for all his skills was a sub 200 pound cruiserweight and you're not beating Tyson if you're smaller than him period. And let's not even mention the one-punch KO loss to Chuvalo. He'd get devoured.

 

I disagree.

Same styles. Lyle was just better at well everything.

You really wanna mention subpar stamina in A tyson thread?

Norton was still past prime. Their's no debating it. I'm not saying he beats Tyson. I just think he'll trouble him more than expected.

That's certainly debatable.

You know as well as I do, that stop was BS!

 

Mike Tyson would never beat Muhammed Ali, ever. Tyson I think could beat Frazier and Norton .Lyle would be interesting with Tyson a favorite. A young Holmes beats up Tyson.

 

Tyson would have had a tougher time in Foreman's era.

The division was stronger, then.

 

I am not confident about '74 Ali beating prime Tyson.

Tyson was faster than Foreman and could have punished Ali on the ropes instead of hitting arms and gassing out.

Prime for prime, I'd pick Ali, though.

 

if tyson was in foremans era, then givens and washington etc wouldnt be around right? maybe we would see a much more mentally stable tyson, along with damato being younger and havin more time to guide him. Or are we taking givens washington etc with him to the 70s?

 

No we are taking Tyson's behaviour to the 70's, he might have been jailed for bestiality......

 

Thomas though, had a real solid chin. While not exactly glassed jawed, it’s hard to not to think of Norton’s crushing knockouts suffered against punchers like Foreman, Shavers and Cooney when matching him up against Tyson.

 

Yeah, there were no women in 1970s. None to marry. None to r@pe..