Tyson vs Foreman early 90's?

Foreman beat 1 top 10 ranked fighter in his comeback and he was a mile behind on points in that fight aswell.

Tyson never struggled or feared big imposing punchers.

He beat Bonecrusher, Ruddock, Bruno, who weighed more than Foreman did in the 70s.

Foreman was going life and death with Alex Stewart who made his face look like roswell.

In comparison Tyson wiped out Alex Stewart in 60 seconds.

Foreman was far too slow to beat Tyson at that stage in his career and he would get lit up like a Christmas tree.

Holyfield landed 60 percent of his punches on Foreman can you imagine the damage Tyson would do to Foreman landing at that type of percentage ?

Finally why would Tyson be scared of an old Foreman ? Which notable top 10 contenders was Foreman beating that would put the fear of god in Tyson ?

 

I swear to God, Foreman's second career is so overhyped. All these legends, myths, numbers. Mainly based on a good promotion by a fat, likeable old man, his gift of a gab and media loving it.

 

After his loss to Douglas, Tyson only beat Ruddock before going off to prison.

None of them had foreman’s skill or toughness.

Ali went life and death with Joe Frazier and Ken Norton. Foreman wiped them out in two rounds. Guess how his fight with Ali went.

Bruno wasn’t much faster and he was able to land on Tyson in their first fight.

Not only was Holyfield much more skilled at this point in their careers because of Tyson’s decline, He also had a better stylistic much up against foreman. He has 5 inches of reach on Tyson, a much better back foot game and footwork in general, significantly better combinations and defense by this point, and a better chin. Not only will Tyson not land as often as Holyfield, he’ll be hit more often and be more affected.

 

Tyson beat 3 ranked fighters after his loss to Douglas.

Ruddock
Seldon
Bruno

They were all ranked in the top 10 when Tyson beat them.

But this has 0 relevance we're talking about a 90's Foreman.

And 90's Foreman isn't some mythical H2H beast he got his face turned into roswell by Alex Stewart.

And made glass chinned Tommy Morrison look like a boxing wizard.

The 1991 version of Tyson who beat up Ruddock twice has more than enough to beat old Foreman.

 

I thought we were only comparing their early 90s versions but that’s fine, I concede the point.

it has relevance to do with your argument. Just because Tyson had an easier time with Alex doesn’t mean he’d beat foreman. Styles make fights.

the same Morrison who knocked out ruddock. Tommy fought on the back foot to beat foreman, same that Tyson never displayed. Just like Frazier, Mike fights going forward, George won’t have to chase him.

Ruddock has a worse chin and a worse defence than George and Mike couldn’t legitimately knockout him in two fights. Foreman has better distance management, accuracy, punch selection, set better traps, and had more strength than Ruddock. About the only thing Donovan had in common with George is power, and that’s only with one punch.

 

Well why would i bring up Foreman only beating 1 top 10 ranked fighter if we're only on about the early 90s ?

It doesn't have relevance at all.

Tyson thrived against big imposing punchers he never struggled against that style, so there's 0 evidence that Tyson would lose to old Foreman based on styles.

The fighters who beat Tyson were able to fight him at range behind the jab aka Douglas, Lewis.

Or tie Tyson up on the inside consistently disrupting his rhythm aka Holyfield.

Not by standing toe to toe eating punches from Tyson. And let's be real Foreman got hit alot whenever he stepped up in competition.

Stewart, Morrison, Holyfield, all hit Foreman easily and consistently with over 50 percent of their punches.

Tyson hitting Foreman that often and cleanly he would be in a world of trouble.

Ruddock had 1 fight in 3 years coming into the Morrison fight. It's not quite the same version of Ruddock who was considered one of the most dangerous upcoming contenders of the late 80s/early 90s.

Morrison never showed he could fight on the backfoot for 12 rounds either prior to the Foreman fight it was out of character for him yet he still managed it.

Regardless Morrison still got plenty by Foreman he got hit over 200 times and never one looked in trouble in the entire fight. And even Morrison stated the reason why Foreman never got him in trouble because he was slow and couldn't land the follow up punches.

And that was the issue with old Foreman against better opposition he could be accurate with jabs and the occasional straight right hand. But he struggled to put punches together and land the follow up punches to get better opponents in trouble.

That's why fighters not known for their durability were able to survive 12 rounds with old Foreman aka Grimsley, Savarese, Morrison.

Lastly Tyson wouldn't need to use Morrison tactics he hasn't got a suspect chin like Morrison and Tyson has a history of beating big imposing punchers. Tyson would simply out speed Foreman in the exchanges and beat him up it's as simple as that.

Ruddock was done in the 1st fight vs Tyson he'd only won 1 round and was starting to slow down. The referee did Ruddock a favour stopping the fight early as clearly Ruddock was about to be stopped and it gave Ruddock an opportunity for a rematch.

Old Foreman also wasn't as fast or explosive as Ruddock.

Foreman's defence wasn't good otherwise he wouldn't be getting hit with over 50 percent of punches anytime he stepped up in competition. Did you see Foreman's face against Stewart ? he literally looked like an alien and you're talking about defence ?

I really don't understand the hype for old Foreman in regards to his H2H ability.

Old Foreman's career was carefully handpicked for the most part and he really only has 1 relevant win in his comeback.

The Tyson of the Tillman, Stewart, Ruddock 1 & 2, fights. Would beat old Foreman like a drum like he did to every other big imposing puncher he fought.

 

I assumed so since it was the title of the thread. It’s fine, my mistake.

None of them had foreman’s skill or toughness. Bruno lost all his fights by KO. Smith was more interested in hugging Tyson than fighting him. Ruddock was nearly knocked out by a washed up smith.

Foreman had one of the best jabs in the division. He consistently landed it on Holyfield.

you mean like foreman using frames and wrestling tactics to disrupt his opponent’s rhythm?

If Tyson stands toe to toe with foreman, he’ll be hit too. Do you think Mike can take George’s punches better than George can take his?

all of them had 5 or 7 inches of reach on Tyson. All of them were consistently throwing combinations, which Tyson didn’t really do in the 90s. What Tyson did was walk forward, not regularly jabbing or moving his head, loading up on punches and trying to bomb foreman out. That is not a good strategy.

If we’re comparing who was more past it, it was definitely Tommy. After his loss to Michael bentt, his next 7 seven were against complete nobodies aside from Ross purrity, who he had a split decision draw against. After he beat ruddock, he had 2 more fights before retiring.

Based on nearly getting knocked out by James smith in a back and forth, and knocking out a horribly out of shape Michael dokes. In hindsight, he was a little overrated.

he still showed he can when he has too. Did Tyson?

yes, that was the point of him constantly moving.

they were not short heavyweights trying to force their way forward against foreman.

47 and 48 years old for these fights. Even a couple years are a lot for a man in his mid 40s. He was losing his power by then.

he would get hit more often and more cleanly than Morrison fighting like this. Foreman will be catching Tyson with jabs and upper cuts whenever he tries to walk forward into range and push him back out before he could get any serious work in. Even Holyfield had to take a step back whenever foreman caught him with a big shot, Tyson won’t won a slugfest against foreman.

it was a premature stoppage. Any guess as to what would’ve happened is speculation.

he was much less telegraphed, more accurate, and more varied in his punches. Ruddock didn’t utilise his speed well at all.

it wasn’t as reliable against combination punchers, but how often did Tyson throw those anymore?

he had one of the best chins of all time, was the hardest puncher Holyfield faced, and was smart and skilled veteran who did the best with what he had left. He had clear stylistic weaknesses, but he’s better than someone like David tua or ray mercer and their highly thought of as 90s heavyweights.

that’s the problem. You’re putting guys like Bruno and smith on the same level as foreman when they’re just not.

 

Young Foreman may beat young Tyson
40+ Foreman definitely would beat 40+ Tyson
But in the early 1990 I think Tyson get him

 

seems like if you ask mike, he goes with he was scared. mike grew all the way up. he has class. regardless of some of the heinous **** he did as a misinformed, angry boy. he has gained a massive amount of wisdom and benevolence. this is the more valuable part of his rise. the money was nothing.

george was much the same. no?

i don't want to know who loses.

why do i love this sport?

 

Tyson is too fast.

 

But he wouldn't have to ? as i keep saying ?

Morrison was known to have a weak chin so he had to fight like that.

And despite Morrison's tactics he still got hit 200 times yet he never come close to visiting the canvas against a hard puncher despite having a weak chin.

That's why i keep saying it's because old Foreman was too slow to consistently land follow up punches on better opponents.

Tyson could fight aggressively vs Foreman and beat him in exchanges with his massive speed advantage and better defence.

And Tyson's chin is proven that he can take big punches from big hitters so i don't see Foreman's single punches stopping Tyson.

Especially if Foreman couldn't stop the likes of Stewart, Morrison, Savarese, after hitting them 200+ times with single punches.

The point is old Foreman is not some H2H beast boogeyman.

He beat 1 ranked fighter in his comeback a fight he was a mile behind on points in and needed a miracle come from behind KO.

And let's be real Moorer lucked out winning the title against a sick Holyfield who was well under par. Not to mention the judge made a huge scoring error in the 2nd round scoring it 10-10. A round in which Holyfield floored Moorer in hence gifting him the belt.

Had the judge rightly scored the round 10-9 to Holyfield the fight would've been a draw.

Now i'm not saying Moorer wasn't a credible Heavyweight but he was also very chinny at Heavyweight.

They were tough Ruddock suffered broken ribs and a broken jaw vs Tyson you have to be tough to endure that.

Bonecrusher took 300+ punches off of a big puncher like Witherspoon in their 1st meeting, how many Heavyweight fights can you name where a fighter took 300+ punches from a noted hitter ?

Bonecrusher is/was durable.

Yes and as i said Foreman was accurate with the jab and the occasion straight right hands. The issue was he was far too slow to land consecutive punches against better opposition. Why do you think chinny Tommy Morrison took 200+ punches without ever coming close to being floored ?

I told you earlier it's because Morrison said Foreman was too slow and couldn't land the follow up punches that was the issue with old Foreman.

Holyfield still beat Foreman like a drum at most Foreman won 3 rounds.

No it isn't the same Holyfield fought primarily on the inside clinching Tyson consistently to nullify his attack.

Foreman is not an inside fighter he fights at range and he pushes off his opponents.

There's a difference old Foreman was on average getting hit with 50 percent of punches against his most notable opponents meaning he was nigh on a punching bag.

Tyson is far quicker than old Foreman with a considerably better defence.

So Tyson wouldn't be getting hit as often as Foreman plus Tyson has a good chin and takes a single punch better than most.

All of Tyson's stoppages are from taking alot of punishment over an extended period.

So unless Foreman is beating up Tyson round after round. I see no reason why Tyson couldn't take some single shots from Foreman, Tyson has taken big punches from KO artists without being floored.

I think there's a difference between early 90s Tyson and the Tyson that come out of prison.

Tyson's 4 wins after the Douglas loss and before he went to prison was still an elite fighter and well capable of beating old Foreman.

They were both past it but Ruddock had been inactive which is a big difference.

The fight could've gone either way if they fought 10 times it could be a different result each time. Ruddock had Morrison in trouble before Morrison landed a hail mary left hook out of no nowhere.

Another time Morrison could walk into the "The Smash" and be knocked out fine margins against two big hitters.

Yes Ruddock was a bit overrated but he was still an explosive very hard puncher and Tyson took his punches without ever really looking troubled.

Qawi did fairly well with that approach and he was a former Light Heavyweight totally past his prime and fat being only 5'6 aswell.

Yet Foreman had trouble consistently landing on Qawi.

Now imagine Tyson in that situation.

I disagree Stewart basically won a slugfest vs Foreman after a torrid start.

He had Foreman in big trouble in the later rounds and had that been 12 rounds, Foreman possibly gets stopped with the way his face looked.

Would Tyson get hit more than Morrison ? Tyson is an elite fighter where as Morrison isn't.

Tyson is known to have one of the best defences for a Heavyweight where as Morrison isn't.

It was premature but Ruddock was reeling at the time of the stoppage and had lost every round convincingly outside of 1 round.

More than likely Tyson finishes Ruddock off who was slowing down.

The referee did Ruddock a favour as it allowed him to have a rematch with the controversy.

Ruddock then bulked up 10 pounds in the rematch and was able to withstand the punches a bit better and made a name for himself going 12 rounds with Tyson.

Foreman was more accurate but he was slower that's why chinny Tommy Morrison was able to take so many punches from Foreman because he could anticipate his punches.

Ruddock is more wild but his power in his left hand comes from an unorthodox angle and is explosive and fast.

 

Foreman stops him. Tyson never felt power like that. Foreman is throwing a nasty but nasty uppercut. And a lot of those Tyson punches would kind of bounce off of George (like they did off Holyfield). GOOD CHIN+GREAT POWER.. that was 1991 Foreman, peak comeback years. All downhill from there, of course, at his age.. IT'S NOT LIKE HE WAS GOING TO SHOW SIGNS OF IMPROVEMENT AFTER '91 (even though he bagged Moorer in '94, I think it was.. but even then, he had lost his form from '91). Foreman batters guys less than six feet tall all over the ring.. that uppercut that he was conditioned to throw.. Tyson would not like that one bit, not one time.

Douglas stopped Tyson. Holyfield stopped Tyson.

 

It wasn't just a case of him handling it better—it was a world of difference. Against Foreman, Stewart fought to a draw; he lost only because he got caught early on and ran out of time to make up the deficit—he was just a round or two short. Against Tyson, he looked like a man who had simply stepped in front of a speeding train; you could hardly call it a fight, let alone say he "handled it better."

This content is protected

Some of George's fans believe in him much more than he believed in himself.

 

I think I mostly agree, but Bruno was not faster than '90 Foreman (before the Holyfield fight). That Foreman was surprisingly fast, just like he was in the 70's.

 

I don't think anyone avoided 90s Foreman as he brought money to the table
I mean Tyson had earned loads already so maybe didn't need the risk but anyone looking for a big pay day would be looking to fight this version of George