Stan ward about mike tyson in the foreman,Ali and frazier era

I am neither a nostalgia nerd who overly praises old fighters, nor am i a modernist who thinks even B level guys today would demolish Louis in 1 round. I try to be objective and realistic.

However, one thing modernists often overlook or downplay is just how fat some of these modern guys are. Takam is 6'1, he has no business being 240+. It'd be one thing if he was shredded or bulky, but hes clearly chubby with a saggy chest and flabs. On the flip side, its the same thing with guys like povetkin who are clearly on PEDs and gain huge muscular frames despite being nearly 40 and only 6'2 with improved cardio and power. And then you havr lumbering lardos like the Fury brothers or Jarrel Miller who are CLEARLY carrying more weight than their natural frame should but do it anyway either out of lazyness or to bully smaller fighters.

If one guy is built like a tank at 210 (like say, george chuvalo) without using weights and has phenomenal cardio, why would he suddenly get pushed around and bullied by a similarly sized guy like say Buster Mathis Jr or Carlos Takam? Is the 20-30 lbs of FAT gonna be an advantage? Thats gonna help them punch harder than Chuvalo? Its gonna make them more durable?

The other funny thing is, some modernists will not allow for a discussion of past heavtweights using modern equipment to gain functional weight. Its common knowledge back then they thought lifting too much would make u slow, stiff, and gasping for air. Holyfield was a scrawny light heavyweight as an amateur and became a sculpted he-man going to war with bowe, lewis, etc who outweighrd him by 20 lbs or more. Why is it ridiculous for Joe Louis (who actually fought and beat men that size in his own era) who has the same natural build and height as holyfield to add functional weight? Why is that a dumb discussion? Joe Louis functioned just fine and was in great shape at 205 able to go 15 and keep his power and workrate, so why couldnt he add maybe 15 lbs to be a rock solid functional 220. Its not like were talking about making 160 pound Marvin Hagler into a buff cruiserweight tank, but thats how some people honesly see it.

 

Bloody good post mate.

 

Its the other way around.

Foreman turned down 3 offers against Tyson.

This is once of them:

"After Tyson's win over Razor Ruddock in their June 28 rematch, King set out to land a bout with Foreman. It was a power move that could well have left Holyfield with his crown, but with little opportunity to parlay it into another megabucks fight. However, the 42-year-old Foreman, whose gallant loss to Holyfield in April left him the heavyweight division's most popular figure, reportedly turned down a $20 million offer from King. Big George, it seemed, wanted a Holyfield rematch."

https://www.si.com/vault/1991/07/22...wheeling-and-dealing-thats-what-both-men-want

 

George didnt care who had the belt, he just wanted the payday and to redeem himself after his shocking losses in the 70's.

He woult tell reporters and talk show hosts out loud that he came back "to fight mike tyson". On the david letterman show he even predicted a 2 round knockout like he did with cooney. When tyson lost and holyfield became #1, he campaigned to fight holyfild and he did.

The fact he wanted another shot at holyfield (who was champ) rather than fight tyson who had lost to underdog nobody buster douglas is no surprise. He was never afraid of mike, it was the wiser business and professional decision. Had he lost to mile, another title shot would be out out of the question for a 40 year opd man with 2 losses. Look at Luis Ortiz!

 

George seemed to care who had a belt because every single challenge that he faced for his comeback was for a belt.

Holyfield, Morrison and Moorer are the 3 best fighters he's faced during his comeback. Each of it was for the title. He never took any unnecessary risks; it says quite a bit that he preferred a $15 million payday for a rematch with Holyfield, as opposed to a $20 million dollar payday for a fight with Tyson who was fresh from his Ruddock wins.

 

Dude what r u talking about? I just broke this down for u.

1-foreman didnt care WHO had the belt as evidenced by the fact he fought 3 different dangerous fighters.

2-holyfield had all the belts. His only option to become champ was by beating holyfield or whoever beats holyfield. Again, foreman's #1 priority was the belt AND money. If he gets the belt, that guarrantees big paydays in the future. Taking a 1 time big day against tyson would make him look dumb if he lost because again, if he lost then hes a 40 year old man with 2 losses and then he can forget about a title shot.

3-unnecesary risks? Dude, holyfield was an undefeated, undisputed, prime fighter. Morrison was a young scary puncher with a vicious hook. Moore was an undefeated skilled southpaw and a lineal champion. Alex Stewart had a 90% ko rate when foreman fought him. Briggs was a big, strong, hard punching 6'4 heavy who set a record for 1st round knockouts. Does that sound like a list of "safe" opponents?

If youre implying he was "afraid" of tyson youre full of it and obviously cant objectively assess a fighters career. Why the hell would the reason he didnt fight Mike be fear when Mike was destroyed by buster freaking douglas and looked sloppy as hell against the 1-dimensional doofus Ruddock? His aura of invincibility was GONE, look at the articles and interviews at that time period. People still respected mike as a fighter but gone were the days where people would be quaking in their boots just hearing his name. And for more context, douglas subsequently got his ass kicked by holyfield who foreman had no problems getting in the ring with. Only a fanboy would look at this info and come to the conclusion foreman wanted nothing to do with tyson.

4-15 mill and the belt+avenging his lost is obviously >>> 20 mill for fighting a guy who just lost to a 42-1 underdog with no belt.

 

I guess this one will be a controversy forever...

Foreman believes Tyson's original trainer, Cus D'Amato warned him with stories of Foreman's power from when Big George was blasting out guys like Joe Frazier.

"There were a couple of times, serious negotiations were going on with the Mike Tyson fight. Mike Tyson just didn’t want to fight me. Not to say he couldn’t have beaten me. I mean, this guy could punch. The bigger they are the harder they’d fall as far as Mike Tyson was concerned," Foreman told On The Ropes Boxing Radio.

"I guess that I have a feeling, his first original trainer and manager, Cus D’Amato, must have told him about George Foreman’s punching power as though I would never comeback. So sometimes when you come back and a guy remembers those stories, he says to himself, ‘Look, leave that guy alone’. But I don’t think I would have been that much problems to him. I had a good left jab and I’d always do better when guys come to me, but Tyson was pretty smart with his footwork and hand speed. That would have been a tough fight for me. "

https://www.*******.com/foreman-we-serious-talks-mike-tyson-want-fight--108954

 

Chuvalo is completely right. Tyson was very explosive and powerful, but one of his main weaknesses was that he wasn't the physically strongest on the inside. Fighters at the top level were able to push him around. Maybe Chuvalo could've taught him how to be more sturdy on the inside, but at the same time it's tough to push back someone who's naturally bigger and stronger than you and knows how to use their strength.

No matter what type of training Tyson had, I think a guy like Foreman would've pushed him back. Foreman was just a beast that would manhandle guys like Tyson, Frazier, or Marciano. Foreman was a freak. Bottom line. No amount of training can prepare you to face a guy who had the God given talents and strengths of certain fighters. Some guys you either figure out how to overcome on the night of the fight or end up a victim.

 

1) What you're saying makes sense except it was Foreman who turned down 3 different offers from the Tyson camp in 1990, 1991 and 1995. It clearly wasn't a one off thing.

2) Tyson was fresh from beating Ruddock in a fight that was being billed as the unofficial heavyweight title. His star had risen since the Douglas loss.

3) In all probability, Foreman probably saw it as an unnecessary risk fighting Tyson when there was no belt on the line.

 

1) what r your sources? In the example u gave...for the 3rd time now...the difference was 15 million+a belt vs 20 million. Choice was obvious. Only an idiot would have fought tyson at that time if it was only a 5 million difference and no belt up for grabs.

You keep saying it "makes sense" but youre still implying foreman "ducked" him. That doesnt make sense, especially because tyson went to PRISON shortly after the rudock fights. Kinda hard to make the fight happen even if he wanted to...???

2) that isnt even the point. It was a very brief resurgance of his career...and he went to prison almost immediately after. Holyfield was "the man" to beat and everybody on the face of the earth (except fanboys) thought it was more important to fight an undefeated, undisputed champion...who beat the guy who beat tyson...than fighting tyson.

This is like people who accuse floyd mayweather of ducking antonio margarito. Margarito got his ass kicked by mosley and cotto and floyd beat mosley and cotto. Why the hell would he be afraid of margarito? And would that have really added so much more to his legacy at the time vs beating the guys who destroyed margarito?

I repeat: foreman didnt care who had the belt. Getting the belt was the #1 priority. Once u have that, bigger and bigger paydays are available. Short term vs long term moneym if tyson beat douglas then holyfield, do u think he would have simply retired?

3) finally u get it. Foreman wouldnt tell every reporter he ran into "i want mike tyson!" Only to refuse the fight if there was no other option to become champ. He would have verified peoples suspicions that he was simply a novelty or side show old fighter looking for a payday and self promotion.

I could easily write dozens of paragraphs pointing out all the guys tyson didnt fight and ignore all historical context to make him look like a ducker.

 

That's what you got out of that article?

Holyfield and Tyson were negotiating with EACH OTHER and used Foreman as a fallback to squeeze the other into caving to their demands. (As in "if you don't accept my terms I'll fight Foreman instead.")

Tyson's team ended up caving to Holyfield's demands.

You left out this important quote from the article you cited:
Though squeezed out, Foreman was philosophical. "I think they both used me to negotiate," he said last Friday from his ranch in Marshall, Texas. "I don't think either guy intended to fight me."

Doesn't matter, anyway. Tyson celebrated his title shot by flying to Indiana and raping Desiree Washington. And that was essentially the end of all that.

 

When did Mike Tyson make an offer to George Foreman in 1990 or 1995? I don't have any recollection of that.

Foreman had a signed contract with Holyfield BEFORE Holyfield fought Buster Douglas in 1990. (Foreman excitedly telling everyone he was next because he had a signed contract with Evander was a part of the whole ESPN Holyfield-Douglas postfight coverage.)

And Tyson fought freaking Peter McNeeley in 1995! He wasn't coming out of prison and fighting George Foreman. In fact, Tyson is the only guy Foreman wanted to fight in 1995. That's why Foreman didn't want to fight a rematch with Schulz or fight Tony Tucker, like the WBA wanted him to do. Foreman was killing time waiting for Tyson to get out of jail. That was going to be his last big payday. But when Tyson did get out, he said he needed tuneups.

 

"I offered George Foreman blank paper (a contract) in December, and it was for $5 million against 30%," King said.

"This was before he knocked out (Gerry) Cooney. If he beats a ranked heavyweight and sets up a title fight with Mike, George Foreman is very promotable. He's a former champion. He's got two generations of fans. If he takes the 30% and the fight goes through the roof, he's lookin' at $30 million.

"So, when George turns that down, what he's tellin' you is, he doesn't want to fight Mike Tyson, and we're gonna accommodate him."

http://articles.latimes.com/1990-02-08/sports/sp-573_1_george-foreman

^ that was 1990.

But Foreman also added this sobering thought, "I can't fight Mike Tyson while Don King is with him."

Foreman has never forgotten that King refused to return his phone calls after he lost his title to Ali. And that was in 1973. And even if King and Foreman kissed and made up, a Tyson-Foreman matchup would be difficult to arrange.

https://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/02/...tyson-bout-just-a-heavyweight-pipe-dream.html

^ This was in 1995.

Perhaps it doesn't fit your narrative but Foreman seemed to be the major impediment to the fight, not Tyson. Frankly speaking, it could have been for good reason but the fact remains that it was Foreman, not Tyson, who found a way out.

 

You make some solid points. George had a very uneven career. He is hard to rate in general. The comeback was amazing though.

I think all in all Tyson got underated and Foreman overated. I wouldn't argue with someone who put Tyson ahead.

 

Lewis would pummel Shavers and Lyle. And if he had a better chin, I'd be resolute in picking him to pummel Foreman.