Say Tyson knocks out Douglas in the 8th round, and decides to fight the returning Foreman. Who would have won? Personally, I think Foreman would have won by stoppage. Tyson's head movement was gone by the Bruno fight, and Foreman was a lot bigger and stronger.
After seeing Tyson struggle against Buster even thou he won in the end ,Foreman would be confident .But Tyson was still deadly fast .He'd come out like a bullet in the first ,to prove a point, that he wasn't finished . Tyson would have George in trouble early , getting through with blistering combos. Foreman would be shaken to his boots and stumbling , but he wouldn't go down. More of the same in the next two rounds , and his face is starting to swell . By 4 its debatable if George can take much more ..but Tyson s slowing down and just firing off one or two shots now then holding. The break through for George comes in the sixth , he connects with a sickening upper cut that rocks Tyson back. Foreman , through a eye shut tight marches forward and gets Mike again .Suddenly its all Foreman , throwing slow but hard punches at Tyson who looks shaken now . The Bell goes , Tyson walks unsteady to his corner while George is actually grinning. Round seven , Tyson comes out fast again but lands nothing of consequence on George , i n fact its his heavy hands doing the damage .Half way in the round and as Tyson is walking in , George throws a Almighty right straight through Tyson s gloves . Mike goes down like he's been shot. He tries to rise but fall's in to the rope's. Fight over and Foreman has done the impossible !
The 90s Foreman did NOT hit harder than Ruddock, that's absurd! I can't see the case for a 90s Foreman beating Mike. 70s Foreman, sure... that's a close call. But 90s George was too slow and ponderous.
first of all complete ******ed you call it "90s foreman" like if he was equal during all the decade. NO ****ING ******ED. THERE ARE A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 88-91 Foreman and 94-97 Foreman. In the late 80s an early 90s he was more dinamic he was 40-41 not 45. Second point. Of course that old foreman did hit harder than ruddock.read about the test of the hw punchers in the late 80s. Foreman and frank bruno did hit the hardest , then ruddock and then tyson. Jesus You are a complete simpleton you know **** about nothing
Where does that conclusion come from?? From hitting a bag-sesnsor? Do these bags move their heads also? I bet Bonecrusher Smith hit like a steelhammer, but couldn´t knockout Marvis Frazier. Having power is about APPLIED Power on spots. Ruddock knocking out Smith, Broad and Dokes is on pair with Cooney and Coetzer, the only names George knocked out before winning the title. Ruddock applying that power quicker. I don´t think it makes sense to say Foremen was more dangerous than Ruddock at the time before 92.
What makes you think Foreman wouldn't knock out Smith, Broad and Dokes as well? Holyfield, who fought Tyson, Bowe, Foreman and Lewis, said Foreman was the hardest puncher he faced.
Tyson UD. At least old foreman wouldn't punch himself out. He'd just take a beating. Check out the Moorer fight. Moorer isn't doing anything that Tyson couldn't do better and Tyson had a way better chin. Gonna take more than a lucky punch to take Tyson out.
You spent a lot of letters for absolutely nothing. Hitting harder is hitting harder and everything you said is a bunch of crap irrelevant and incoherent.here the question was who did hit harder and the answer is OLD foreman. PERIOD
Moorer did not face 90-91 foreman. Again the same ****... Old foreman was not a single fighter. 89-91foreman was not even similar to 97 foreman for example it is like saying that 71 Ali was equal to 77 Ali
Pick'em fight. In their best i pick foreman. No doubt. I see similarity like tyson vs ruddock fight. But foreman is better than ruddock. Obviously Tyson on points Or Foreman by KO. Foreman never KO'ed except by the greatest. I pick big george. Maybe tyson can prove me wrong. Wonder why this fight never happened ini 90's ? Anyone can Explain please ?? This prove holyfield is warrior stand up in front of foreman.
Alright, what was so different between 90-91 Foreman and 97 Foreman? In my opinion they are still both slow and hardly capable of pulling the trigger compared to 70s Foreman. Both were bad at cutting off the ring and both were easy to hit. 90 Foreman only survives this fight because of his chin because Mike sure as hell wouldn't have a problem landing his own.
From WHAT are you measuring 90-91 Foremens "punching power"? From knocking out junky Cooney? Just tell me a single name. Foremen did just not fight ANYBODY until he lost to Holyfield. Yet you are dumb enough to open a new thread, wondering why people talking about post-Holyfield Foremen Jesus, maybe because started beating SOMEBODY at that point....? Once he did, he stopped having quick knockouts with "punching power", SURPRISE SURPRISE