Mike Tyson ''88 vs Foreman ''73 I know most us,including me pick George, but

The amount of times you've brought up Foreman in non Foreman threads

 

Guess who's back

Because Tyson needs to go forward at all times to set up his offense, even when he is countering at range, that's what being 5'10 at HW causes. And Foreman is not gonna just stand there and let Tyson regroup and come back again, he'll keep walking him down behind his jab and frame him off and come forward with a cross or an uppercut whenever Tyson tries to return the favour.

Tyson had similar balance issues as well, that's actually why he was so easy to control in the clinch, he constantly squared up and made himself easy to move. And Frazier didn't have him on the back foot, Foreman just didn't engage in an inside war, he interrupted Frazier's offense and forced him to reset whenever he came at him with his shoving, not ever letting him mount any kind of meaningful offense.

Those tactics of Larry actually worked though. He also kept his left hand out and it actually allowed him to bait Tyson into slipping the jab and walk right into a well-timed right hand (Foreman used similar baits with his lead hand when he was running Frazier into his uppercuts), and him extending his arms out allowed him to block and negate most of the damage from Tyson's hooks (something you can see Foreman doing a ton of times against Frazier's left hooks). Larry had Tyson pretty frustrated until he randomly decided to dance around, he was just too old and (at the time) weak to actually do any damage.

Frazier missed a ton of hooks on Foreman, that was probably one of the best defensive performances Foreman ever had, he completely smothered Frazier's offense. Young, Ali and Peralta mostly had success with straight punches, Foreman's long guard made it really hard to defend against a 1-2 from a faster-handed fighter but it was perfect for hooks from shorter fighters.

I think it was less the shoving and more the fact that Foreman was 43 years old and moved as fast as a concussed tortoise. 70s Foreman either intercepted or at least killed his opponent's forward momentum with his arms before they were actually close enough to go for the body. Somebody like Fury could still take advantage of this but 5'10 Tyson with reach even less than Frazier won't.

Yes but the plan fails completely if he cannot come forward, which is why Foreman walking him down and not letting him come forward is gonna be a big issue.

Methods were different but the overall idea was pretty similar.

He didn't seem that much faster than me, practically the same foot speed and better combinations on the inside by Douglas but that's not where Foreman fights anyway.

What exactly did he do different than Foreman? Foreman arguably out-did Ali against Frazier when it came to jabbing.

 

What does Foreman's 70s career high have to do when OP is specifically referencing Foreman in '73?

He was 217.5 lbs against Frazier. I'd say 21 lbs is significant between two men who stand the same height, especially when I was responding to a comment which claimed Foreman was bigger than Ruddock.

 

It defuses everything because

1) The Lyle fight took place several years after 1973.

2) 73 Foreman was quite different stylistically from Gil Clancy Foreman (who was also rusty and had less confidence/slower reflexes from inactivity and different training), so you're building a case off of a false premise.

3) Old Foreman stated that Lyle was the hardest he'd ever been hit, so this wouldn't be an indictment against 73 Foreman's chin if Lyle apparently hit him harder than the big hitters from the 90's. This isn't the "gotcha" you think it is.

4) Tyson was getting his brain rattled and eventually KO'd by Douglas who was never known for being some tremendous puncher if that's the route you want to go.

 

And all we need to do to confirm Tyson has a worse chin is turning on the Douglas fight to see an Undisputed Tyson getting knocked out in his prime.

 

Hardly. He took a lot of punishment in that fight. I agree with you that Foreman quit against Ali rather than truly being knocked out though.

 

Well Ruddock isn't part of this thread. I get using 73 Foreman since the thread is about that version, but IDK why you're picking one of the highest weights for Ruddock ignoring everything else.

 

Whether he took a little bit of punishment or a lot, he got knocked out in his prime. Don't throw stones in a glass house.

 

One time when we agree

 

I know this is what you meant

 

His prime was over by Tubbs.

 

Shame we don't have time travel to find these out.

 

I don't pick George at all .. I feel Tyson was way too fast for him and would stop him.

 

Said every fanboy who thinks Tyson had the shortest prime of any athlete in human history.

 

The only reason Tyson never fell from 1 punch is he never fought Jess Willard