Tyson vs Foreman. What would the first few rounds look like?!

I think it would be a mistake for Tyson to go straight at George, but I also think he doesn't know how to anything else. If he used his head he could undoubtedly beat George, but if it gets into a slugging match, which is the most likely scenario, it's anybodies guess. Tyson was faster and could throw combinations, but Foreman was stronger and punched considerably harder, at least his is my opinion. If Tyson could get George out of there in the first 3-5 rounds he'd win, if not I think George would win a long drawn out battle. Some might say George would tire out in this situation but he never really lost against those going straight at him, he was more likely to be out smarted than out punched.

 

Prime Tyson wasnt just a staight forward slugger. Rooney put as much emphasis on defense as he did offense. Watch some of Tyson's early fights, he was very difficult to hit cleanly, and he was always the shorter man so he had to come forward, so there was a technique for him to get inside. To me, George was always easy to hit to the body, because he was so stationary, and Tyson was very effective at going to the body and finishing up top.
Heres a good fight that showcases Tysons excellent defense, infighting, and countering skills. Obviously Gross is no Foreman, but you can see what he did with a guy with fairly quick hands. [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckZ0uekS-AM[/url]

 

I'm well aware that Tyson has great defense, but main point is that about the only way George could win is to have Tyson right in front of him. Tyson's got a good style for George, his defensive abilities not withstanding. George seemed to be pretty good at going to the body where moving your head isn't as effective. I think they would both go to the body, Tyson more so with combo's to the head, Both would try uppercuts. Big difference in this fight compared to the Gross fight is no way Tyson is backing Foreman up. He might knock him out, but he's not backing him up.

 

Tyson too quick to counter off of Georges big looping body punches, just my opinion though. Prime George was only 215-220 pounds same as Mike during his.

 

You got that right. Mike Tyson was no Joe Frazier.

Neither Mike Tyson or George Foreman would beat the Joe Frazier from the late 60's prior to the FOTC. Again, the obvious misconception here is the comparisons to the 1973 title fight against Foreman. I'd put my money on prime Frazier to survive the early attacks of both Tyson and Foreman with Joe grinding both fighters down. Prime Frazier stops Foreman quicker than Tyson due to the endurance and stamina factor.

George never faced the prime 205.5 lb Frazier that gave Ali problems and made him miss a lot of punches. Sure, George whupped Joe inside 2 rounds, but that version of Frazier was far from his best.

Nobody talks about the fact that Frazier got up six times against Foreman, who had considerable help from Mercante. George took advantage of every situation in that fight, especially in the second round when Archie Moore stood on the apron, waving at Mercante. I don't know if Frazier turned his back to George with the respect of not hitting him illegally during this slight break in the action. George certainly took advantage of Frazier turning his back while Moore was on the apron.

Tyson and Foreman would be a good fight for the first couple of rounds. I could see them trading big shots while their pace slows down towards the middle rounds, if one of them isn't knocked out by the other. If George gets up off the canvas with the heart and determination he showed against Ron Lyle, he stops Tyson probably in the middle rounds. Mike get's frustrated and loses focus when the opponent stands up and ignores his bullying tactics.

 

I don't subscribe to the view that Tyson was a devastating one punch knockout fighter.

He threw combinations of shockingly fast punches but rarely KOd anyone with one punch.

He knew how to jump on fighters and finshed them when he had them hurt.

Watch the Pinklon Thomas fight again and see how many flush punches Tyson has to land before Thomas goes down, its 15 or 16.

Same in many of his KOs though maybe not as high as 16.

Foreman would have respect for the impact of Tysons blows but in the end Tyson would fall from Foremans bombs first.

 

Botha, Mathis, Savarese (I think, or at least a few shots), nearly KO'd Buster Douglas with one uppercut, KO'd plenty of his early opponents with one punch and Trevor Berbick.

Now, the challenge: apart from Michael Moorer, name a one punch KO by George Foreman.

Does this mean that Tyson was better than Foreman? No. A series of waves over many years can destroy a mountain; a big dynamite explosion can only knock a hole in it. Foreman was all about an accumulation of heavy shots, and it worked well almost every time.

 

In addition to those, Tony Tubbs, Carl Williams and Henry Tillman went out by one punch. One could include Spinks; even if he was already hurt, you will rarely see a boxer go down for the full 10 count even when he's hurt already but not on shaky legs.

Mathis was taken out by a combination by the way.

Thing is, one-punch KO's are extremely rare. Tyson has 5 or 6 of them over high-profile opponents and that's one the highest in gloved boxing history. Marciano has 4 (i believe), Lewis and several others have 3, etc.

 

I might have been mixing Tony Tubbs with Buster Mathis: two fat heavyweight who could have done better. I forgot about the Williams and Tillman fights though.

Etienne was taken out by one right hand and over time I've come to think that that was a legitimate KO.

One thing is for sure: Tyson was NOT just a comination KO artist.

 

I thought but about Ettiene, but from what i remember he quit, although the knockdown was legit.

Like you say, Tyson has all kinds of knockouts, from brutal combinations (i.e. Thomas) to the one punch KO's earlier mentioned. The only thing that stops him from making a complete puncher is late KO's. He nearly did it against Douglas, but he doesn't have a Louis vs Conn type of late stoppage. Then again, neither did Foreman, Liston or Lewis.

 

He didnt quit, he didnt make the count. Tyson lifted him to his feet after the count.

 

Tysons would land and rock Foreman early because of his speed and power..... But, if Tyson fails to stop Foreman inside of 3 rds, Tyson is dead meat by round 4 or 5..........
:rasta

MR.BILL:bbb

 

Donovan Razor Ruddock, and Bone Crusher Smith has better punching power than Evander Holyfield and Buster Douglas but it didnt seem to matter

Find me a 19 year old HW past or present that would have beaten Tillis more impressively.

Mike was a student of the game and he paid homage to old fighters all the time. Ali once said that he coudln't beat Tyson. Something tells me that you don't put much stock in that either.

Styles make fights. This has no relevance especially since Tyson beat fighters that are far better than Douglas.

I don't think anyone was comparing this version of Foreman with Mike Tyson in his prime. And if they were, you should probably include Alex Stewart for good measure.

Fighters age differently. Tyson's style was never designed for longevity. Neither was Ali, neither was Frazier.

See previous comment.

Fact was hit by punch after punch by a 32 year old past his prime Ali and he went down. Jimmy Young hit him a few times and he also went down. Ron Lyle didnt have to hit him that much to get Foreman on the canvas.

This is simply called a business decision. Tyson Holyfield was more marketable than Tyson Lewis in 1996. The PPV Sales and Live Gate Prove that.

You forgot to mention Young. Ron Lyle doesnt have to be afraid, he'd get knocked out all the same.

It took alot to get Tyson down, because he had a great chin. By the way Did Foreman get up and win when he fought Jimmy Young?

Holyfield also favoured Tyson over Lewis in thier 2002 bout. Even he he feels Foreman was stronger, that does not have much place in what is being argued.

Chuck Wepner and George Chuvalo aren't really good examples. But when you assess Tyson's body of work vs. Foreman's you will see that Tyson had far more depth.

Foreman has some great trademark wins in a sea of subpar victories on his resume. Tyson was more consistent. Does Tyson have the same thundrous buzz when assesing the scalps on his resume? Probably not. But there are far more quality fighters on his resume under the W column. Disagree?

Take Tyson's top 20 wins then take Foreman's 20 wins and one of two things will happen. You'll acknowledge that Tyson has the better resume or you'll find yourself aggrandizing Foreman's victories to prove a point.

The trouble is when you come off on a tangent with Anti-Tyson rhetoric including his outside the ring activies/allegations/convictions it's no different than a Tyson fan with rose colored glasses. Your objectivity and credibility on the subject diminishes in the eyes of more serious posters.

 

tyson would have to have hit foreman with an actual sledgehammer to even see a reaction from george. but it would not even come to that because tyson has never been hit as hard as foreman could dish out therefore tyson quits in his corner in the 4th .

 

How did i miss this jewel?