Early 90s Tyson would wreck Liston in a slug fest

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by InMemoryofJakeLamotta, Aug 2, 2020.



  1. Glass City Cobra

    Glass City Cobra H2H Burger King Full Member

    9,163
    15,096
    Jan 6, 2017
    Is that why 9 people liked my post in the original thread and agreed with it?

    Not trying to appeal to popularity but maybe you simply didn't get my break down? Because other people did. And it wouldn't be the first or second time I've had to break things down for you. Other posters in that thread also pointed out the many flaws in how he reached his conclusion.

    I don't feel like explaining things again. Read it again. Agree or disagree, I don't care either way. But don't say I never explained why I found his reasoning wrong or the flaws in the video because I did. In very explicit detail.

    We are way, way off topic. Like I said
    , either discuss Tyson vs Liston or stop responding to me.
     
    swagdelfadeel likes this.
  2. InMemoryofJakeLamotta

    InMemoryofJakeLamotta I have defeated the great Seamus Full Member

    12,193
    8,037
    Sep 21, 2017
    They probably like it because it agrees with their belief that Foreman was a gargantuan puncher compared to Tyson. If you study psychology, we tend to put more weight on things that agree with our deeply held beliefs while being very critical or ignoring those things that may disconfirm those beliefs.
     
    Sangria likes this.
  3. Glass City Cobra

    Glass City Cobra H2H Burger King Full Member

    9,163
    15,096
    Jan 6, 2017
    It has nothing to do with confirmation bias or thinking one boxer is better than the other. You have had literally 10 posters, 3 authors, and like 8 different fighters who actually boxed all telling you the same thing: that Foreman and Tyson are DIFFERENT KINDS OF PUNCHERS.

    Do You think Tyson and Foreman are even remotely similar in their physical builds, their technique, how they deliver a punch, or the effects that their blows have on their opponents?

    This is all stuff you can notice just watching their fights for more than 2 minutes. You are a very hard headed individual and yet you wonder why Im tired of responding to you.
     
  4. InMemoryofJakeLamotta

    InMemoryofJakeLamotta I have defeated the great Seamus Full Member

    12,193
    8,037
    Sep 21, 2017
    They are different kinds of punchers. So then let's leave it at that. Why say Foreman hits harder if at the end of the day, you just say they are 2 different punchers?
     
  5. Glass City Cobra

    Glass City Cobra H2H Burger King Full Member

    9,163
    15,096
    Jan 6, 2017
    Because he did hit harder. An expert martial artist swinging a wooden nun chuck at high velocity at your face will be excruciating, but a getting hit by a big slow moving 2x4 will have more force and do more internal damage to you because of the thicker material and the 2x4 having more mass.

    Just like the styles of foreman and Tyson, like a nun chuck Tyson can land multiple lightning fast but less powerful blows that add up for major damage. With foreman a single swing of that big 2x4 will probably instantly give you a concussion and make whatever area that gets hit go numb.

    Heavy clubbing punchers often hurt more than explosive punchers when it comes to 1 shot at a time. You wouldn't be asking me that if you ever boxed.

    There's levels to it. Foreman was the pinnacle of heavy handed sledgehammer power. Every guy who fought or sparred him said his punches had the most sheer force and weight behind them.

    Tyson obviously had incredible power as far as explosiveness goes but you'd think there'd be more common opponents listing him as being the hardest hitter they faced. Frank Bruno, Pinklon Thomas, James Tillis, Lennox Lewis Larry Holmes, have all mentioned different fighters with very logical reasoning as to why they think other guys hit harder than Tyson. Then there's Holyfield who put a nail in the coffin when he emphatically mentions a fat 42 year old Foreman as being the hardest hitter he faced. Considering the sheer number of hard hitters he faced you can't gloss over that, and he mentions it on 3 separate occasions without hesitating.

    You can see that Foreman hurts people with glancing blows and arm punchers that barely have any speed or snap. The Moore KO punch looked like it had as much effort behind it as a dad in a lazy boy recliner tossing a newspaper at his son but Moore's face was covered in blood and his eyes were glossy. He hit the ground immediately and couldn't beat the count the moment Foreman threw with bad intentions.

    You can see the effects Foreman's punches have on opponents and on the heavy bag. I have been watching boxing, UFC, karate matches, and muy Thai for more than 15 years and not 1 fighter has that kind of raw clubbing power shot for shot. Guys like Tyson, Joe Louis, Roy Jones, David Haye generate power with their blazing hand speed, great technique, athleticism, and hitting people when they least expect it. Foreman didn't have the luxury of those natural gifts or tricks. If Force=mass x acceleration, it's absurd that Foreman produced such a high number of brutal KO's despite sorely lacking in the acceleration part of the equation. It doesn't even make sense mathematically.

    Chuvalo said it best:

    "George Foreman was very heavy handed and there was a different feel to his shots. The best analogy would be Joe Frazier and Jerry Quarry hitting you was equivalent to being struck by a car at 100 mph, but when George landed it was like being hit by a mac truck at 50 mph. There was more weight in his punches."
     
  6. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,661
    14,689
    Jul 30, 2014
    I watched the video. Their was nothing objective about it. Also, Foreman stopped some common oppenents faster than Tyson, including Mike Jameson, and David Jaco. In any event neither that nor any of the other statistics listed (or any statistics in general) are "objective measures".
     
  7. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,661
    14,689
    Jul 30, 2014
    Obviously the way you quoted my post makes it difficult to reply @InMemoryofJakeLamotta

    "But at one point in his career, he would have spelled real problems for Ali, because at his height as a puncher, Cleveland Williams hit harder than Liston. Before he got shot, the man was awesome But afterwards, he wasn't much of a fighter.. " Source: https://books.google.com/books?id=DfcPAQAAQBAJ&pg=PT134&lpg=PT134&dq="williams+hit+harder+than+liston"&source=bl&ots=U_vhYf34f8&sig=ACfU3U0-9tFME4JqtaE-xx34tjfj1d-8XA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiqlYTguIHqAhUeRDABHQPoDhYQ6AEwAXoECAMQAQ

    Marciano's best wins were over old men and washed up has-beens. He never faced anyone with the combination youth, power, youth, speed, boxing ability, did I mention youth? Sorry Williams has 30 pounds over Marciano, around 6 inches of height on him, is stronger, faster and has superior boxing ability. Forgive me for thinking it wouldn't be a walk in the park for Marciano.
    Fighters, particularily heavyweights are not a finished product at 20 years old. The fact that you resorted to using the youngest heavyweight champion in history to argue otherwise makes that point better than any contemporary newspaper clippings I could pull up.

    Ali was also in his mid 20s when he fought Williams and had been fighting since he was 12 years old, over half of his life at that point while Williams had no amateur career to speak of and had turn pro a mere 2 something years earlier and had been fighting club fighters, who'd done nothing to test him and help him improve and move up to the next level. Not quite the same thing.

    I don't think Bruno was a better boxer nor did he hit harder. Strength is debatable as well. I also believe Bruno was a monster puncher but not on the level of Liston, Foreman, Shavers, Baer, etc.
     
  8. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,547
    9,451
    May 30, 2019
    Don't you think that washed up has-beens like Walcott or Moore would have beaten Williams?
     
  9. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,661
    14,689
    Jul 30, 2014
    Maybe. I'd give Williams a fair chance against those respective versions however.
     
    70sFan865 likes this.
  10. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,547
    9,451
    May 30, 2019
    Fair enough, I'd definitely pick Moore over him though.
     
    swagdelfadeel likes this.
  11. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,661
    14,689
    Jul 30, 2014
    I'd favor a prime Moore over him but not sure about the 38 year old version who had went life and death with Valdez who was inferior to The Big Cat imo.
     
  12. Knights107

    Knights107 Member Full Member

    450
    210
    Aug 13, 2015
    This content is protected


    For illustration.
    In this video size is not big difference

    Liston vs tyson.
     
  13. Knights107

    Knights107 Member Full Member

    450
    210
    Aug 13, 2015
    Here's another video

    This content is protected
     
  14. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,547
    9,451
    May 30, 2019
    As you know, I view Valdes comparably to Williams. You may be right that Moore was a bit old by then, but I'd still give him edge.
     
  15. Knights107

    Knights107 Member Full Member

    450
    210
    Aug 13, 2015
    To make perspective here's foreman vs Tyson.

    Sorry for spam. Hope this useful to us & make inspiration.

    This content is protected