Tyson statistically proven to punch harder than Foreman

All logic is flawed. There are just too many determining factors. Personally, I feel Foreman is stronger as in weight lifting and Tyson is the more explosive and sharper powerpuncher. Another way at determining power is how well they did against similar opposition. But then again those opponents might've gotten hit with different shots. I could go on but I'll stop.

ESPN or Fox Sports has this early morning show where they have one of those speed bag punching power machines. They're flawed as well. Check this out...

This content is protected

 

What did Alex Stewart say? Or Lou Savarese? You see, unless they both said Foreman hit harder, your logic is flawed as well.

 

LOL, did not read, mindless drivel as usual.....

Is that you Teddy ? Still sore you could not cash out on the Tyson train ?

 

Tyson wasn`t at his best v Holy.

 

Stewart couldn`t keep Tyson off him and was swarmed early on while Foreman was too old and just plodded towards his landing less, plus he threw a lot of jabs while all of Mike`s punches were power punches against Stewart, he came out flying, Foreman started slower, the young Foreman would have blew Stewart out just like Frazier and Norton were blown out.

 

Better opposition? Norton and Frazier? Who did Tyson knock out that was on Frazier`s level or as tough?

 

What about AJ and Wilder`s KO ratio`s?

 

Can you name any other fighters that were better than Tyson's overall competition that Foreman destroyed? Didn't think so. Next time, Mark. Maybe next time.

 

Yeah bro, I watched the fights LIVE back in the 90's. No need for spoiler alerts. And I believe Tyson would've destroyed Norton and Frazier as fast if not faster than Foreman could. ANything else Mark?

 

Atlas didn`t train Tyson the peek a boo style Cus did, Atlas never trained any of his fighters to fight like Tyson, Rooney got Tyson to adapt mid fight.

 

Also, the fights were 5-6 years apart. Foreman fought a smaller Holyfield who chose to brawl while Tyson fought a bigger Holyfield who chose a game plan to minimize Tyson's offense. There were a few times where Tyson got Holyfield's attention but didn't follow up as Holyfield nullified and held, outmaneuvered a stationary Tyson and countered by picking his shots. Foreman would wing solid bombs and connect on occasion but Holyfield almost chose to brawl out of the situation. And yes, Holy did this with Tyson at times but thwarted Tyson's countering. Yes, both fights were different.

 

Mindless drivel? How long did it take you to come up with that response?

All I've gotten is "excellent post" or "good read". I can only assume you and the coward Sangria lack the intellectual capacity to respond and refute my points so all you can do is attempt to insult me. That is a game you will not win, I assure you, so I suggest you stick to the topic at hand.

 

I'm going to throw my hat in the ring here. I don't share your opinion on how George and Mike stack up, Glass, but I'll vouch for your post as well. It could not have been further removed from being 'mindless drivel'. It was so well written and argued, I almost agreed with you.

But not quite .

 

Foreman was the better chin hunter of the two but Tyson definitely had more snap imo.

 

They're active fighters, so their ratios can change