Who is greater? George Foreman or Mike Tyson

Two points perhaps bear mention:

a) George Foreman was just power.
b) George Foreman was born again.

a) Historically, it is laudable that George Foreman was able to parlay unique punching power into a heavyweight championship. Make no mistake: Foreman had respectable skills such as a jab and ring movement. But when discussing greatness, Mike Tyson in my view must be ranked higher, as Tyson was top power along with unique speed and a larger array of boxing skills such as a jab, ring movement, fluid combinations, upper-body movement, counterpunching.

Skills-wise, it is mysterious to me how Foreman can be considered greater.

b) Strategy-wise, tactics-wise, I don't see how Foreman is any better than Tyson. As befits unique powerpunchers, neither had much of a Plan B. Tyson had much better stamina, though. Tyson lost his crown to an extraordinary fighter that night, though, Apollo-Creed-like, he came within one second of turning back his determined foe. Foreman, too, lost to an extraordinary fighter, of course. But we must enter the realm of speculation when considering how Ali's unique toughness deprived Foreman of victory. Ali was never even staggered while Douglas was on the canvas. When both have their backs to the wall, the edge must go to Tyson.

Foreman's newfound second-coming patience and intelligence are those of literally a different man by virtue of his spiritual conversion. But this new mind-set cannot be inserted into a prime George Foreman. He never had it! You want to believe Foreman was tougher than Tyson? You must pit the old version Foreman against prime Tyson then and forget peak George.

I doubt even Frank Lotierzo can believably argue that old Foreman would beat Mike Tyson at his best.

The only reason Foreman regained the title is because of his unique power joined to the mentality of a mature, middle-aged man on fire to achieve his destiny.

But you cannot join both qualities together to compare them to Tyson any more than you can have the bloom of your youth and the rock-solid stability of age.

 

I agree with most of what you said there Prime. Funny thing is there are still numerous people on this site who think Foreman would beat any version of Tyson at anytime, even after he got his butt kicked by the likes of Tommy Morrison and Axel Shultz.

 

I'd say it's the handiwork of myths:

a) "Mike Tyson was a coward." FALSE: You don't rise from abject misery and poverty to become the undisputed world heavyweight champion if you are a coward.

b) "Mike Tyson was a bully." FALSE: In the ring, he had a job to do and had no qualms about knocking his opponent out. He had a gentlemanly, humane side as well, which is hardly ever highlighted.

c) "Mike Tyson would fold as soon as someone stood up to him." FALSE: As soon as someone actually fought him, that someone got knocked out.

d) "Big George Foreman would intimidate Tyson from the staredown and proceed to pound him into quick submission." FALSE: Though much shorter, Tyson was heavier --bigger-- than "Big" George Foreman. And Foreman would never have Tyson simply standing in front of him as Frazier was. He would have to beat a man who was heavier, much faster, much more elusive than he, with very similar power and a better delivery system.

e) "Tyson was afraid of old Foreman." FALSE: When Tyson was champion, old Foreman hadn't fought anyone --save perhaps the leftovers of Gerry Cooney a month prior to Tokyo-- to deserve a shot at the title. He was demanding a shot on the strength of noisemaking.

And so forth.

 

Alex Stewart exchanged bombs in a brutal slugfest with Foreman, making his face look as if it'd been through a meat-tenderizer. :!:
He only lost because his chin (vulnerable to power) allowed him to be dropped by two single punches, however another two rounds & the decision would've been his.

This content is protected

 

:thumbsupthe more i read this thread, the easier the answer is for me. tyson uppercuuuuuut!

 

They ran or boxed? You dont need to run you only need to step to the side.

 

Are you calling me Tyson Uppercut?

This is Tyson uppercut:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcgsRIekwO4[/ame]

 

Foreman is a LEGEND

Tyson is a Hall Of Famer

thats the difference

FOREMAN is Greater

 

foreman is a grill

mcguigan is a hall of famer

TYSON UPPERCUUUUUUUT!!

 

spread the uppercut nation (s) wide!

 

Do you see Tyson doing that much worse to a better Holmes? The moment Larry starts his offense is the moment he gets into serious trouble. Tyson beat every one of the same opposition, Witherspoon has 3 losses whether they were close or not. It's not just who you beat but how you beat them. Tyson demolished his opposition.

 

1)Foreman did lose to morrison. are people supposed to pretend it didn't happen?

2)the douglas that showed up that night was better than any morrison. but tyson lost, fair and square

3)foreman was competent for sure. was he dominant? not even close

4)Foreman did fight some solid punchers. The only two punchers he MAY have avoided were quarry and shavers (quarry not being a true puncher and I don't think foreman really avoided him)

5)tyson only has 2 HOFs on his way true but he completely dominated his time period and cleared out the division. foreman never did that. never dominated and never cleared **** out. oh, and tyson at least fought holmes. foreman wouldn't fight holmes today with a bat and 3 of his sons backing him up

6)just cause people disagree doesn't mean they're haters. might just be they disagree with you (and look at the facts)

7)stewart stood in foreman's wheelhouse and turned his face to ****. no one watching that fight thinks it was a dominant, clear win for george, he scrapped it

and why the **** would tyson fight foreman? it was a money fight at best and tyson went to jail when it was relevant

 

i cant see how tyson comes close to foreman , and we all know that foreman would have pulvarised tyson if they ever fought