I don't get why people think a 70's Foreman beats a prime Tyson

I assure you that pensioner Foreman lasted the full distance with a fighter that had Tyson staggering around the ring like an old drunk. No if's or but's but pure FACTS!!!!

 

Show me proof of Foreman turning down 30 million.

 

You're right it can't be taken as gospel, but there's a catch. Cus isn't the only one who thinks Foreman knocks Tyson out, the vast majority of fighters, trainers, fans think Foreman destroys Tyson. Most of all Tyson believed it too........

 

Here you go again with your assumptions, you judge fighters after their careers have ended.

It's funny that because Foreman stated he was offered a mere $5 million dollars only, nice way to get out of a mega-fight i guess. Let's just agree that Tyson wanted no part of Big George.

 

You mean you choose to believe the neutral and unbiased Don King...... HAHAHAHA.

The facts are most fighters, trainers, fans all pick Foreman to knock out Tyson. It's you who's doing the speculating when you move the goalposts and assume the answers would be different in the 80's.

 

Totally disagree with the statement that the punches that Dougles felled Tyson with would've KO'd Foreman sooner. Couldn't disagree more with that statement

 

Foremans defense was alot wprse than even tokyo tysons. He just held his arms out and pawed and it wouldmt qork against someone as fast as douglas with 5 inch longer reach and real snap on his punches. Foreman also tired badly. Douglas would pick him off and finish him. Douglas's shpts werent just faster but also straighter and longer. Douglas shots were also visibly heavier than ali's

 

I find each of the extremes to be held by six of one, half-dozen of the other. I very much agree there should be ongoing debate but, the very statement in the title of thread and the content of the OP invites a defence of Foreman. This, in turn, promotes replies in favor of Foreman over Tyson. There does not, however, appear to be any intention of giving reasonable replies a fair hearing and a rational response; with more and more absurd theories, designed to diminish Foreman, being put forth, even now.

Yes, some viewpoints in the replies given may well be in keeping with fabled Foreman accounts. However, not all of them are and, in any event, one has to start somewhere. The Tyson legend is no less ubiquitous; no more veracious and yet it is used continuously as a sandwich board to simply block out the need to consider views, which are not pro-Tyson.

As you suggest, this speculative contest has a more credible judgement, within the midst of these extremes. The devil is somewhere in the details. But, there are few prepared to pick through the very fine lines between these two leviathans of boxing's heavyweight history - especially, when there are reinforced narratives at hand, cultivated in fandom, media sloganism and the endlessly retold folklore, conveyed thereafter. And this, despite both of the Boxers in question having left more than enough behind on film for impartial onlookers to have an objective say and perhaps find a suitable middle ground.

It seems, instead, the very topic itself has a hair trigger that sees The Man who shot Liberty Valance ride again and again, whichever bullet one might believe actually did the job.

 

No.

You have to wait for all the information to come in. In the mid 80s nobody had seen Tyson get his butt beat yet. We couldn't even imagine it. Then we saw him get dominated.

 

Yep. Many fighters have been considered nigh well unbeatable at some point including Foreman, Liston and Tyson. We all know what happened.

 

Because its a stupid ass argument.

Foreman was hit by guys who punch harder than young but didnt go down. Young slipped, dodged, and countered foreman all day in the sweltering hear of puerto rico. Foreman had never gone 12 before and admitted he wanted to be macho and prove he overcame this weakness. That, plus the fact he basically repeated his mistake in zaire is what led to the knockdown, he blew all his energy in the 9th trying to take out young. Styles make fights.

Foreman wasnt knocked out, and he got right back up, and it was the 12th round. Every time foreman was dropped he got back up and it was always due to him overexerting himself and eating tons of shots.

Tyson.

NEVER.

Got of the floor to win.

Make all the excuses you want.

If u put tyson down, he stayed down. He was stopped 5x, foreman was stopped once by the greatest heavyweight of all time and he bareltymissed the count. Tyson was stopped by a 42-1 underdog journeyman and was stopped 4 more times by guys who didnt hit nearly as hard as foreman (except lewis). You cant give him credit for taking sustained beatings when he was past his prime if you want to ignore his past prime shortcomings!

There is NO comparison.

Its a fact foreman could take a punch better. Tyson, even when he got out of prison, was better at slipping punches, always had better head movement and could make himself a smaller target, correct? Yet he was koed far more times than foreman. Foreman also faced a far greater number of power punchers with a comparatively leaky defense. THE MATH DOESNT ADD UP.