Could a prime Frazier defeat a prime Tyson ?

There is no way that Tyson is more durable than Frazier. Tyson never went 15 rounds if I'm not mistaken and has nowhere near the stamina as Joe. As much as many think Tyson was a fast fighter, his pressure is nowhere near as quick attacking the oppoent as Frazier was. Tyson kept his hands high in very good guard position, but he never moved his head a frequently as Frazier to attack the opponent and make the opponent miss.

I will agree with you such that Frazier could be hit because he ate lots of jabs and some right hands in order to get inside and work the body. Yeah, Ali wasn't near his prime speed of his first title reign, but I'll conceed that Ali was a different fighter, tougher and stronger after his exile.

Yes McGrain, I am a Frazier fan, but most on this forum including yourself base most of your conclusions about Frazier losing to the majority of big punchers from the result of one fight, George Foreman 1973 which is wrong.

 

Tyson's chin is proven against BIG heavyweight bangers, Fraziers decidedly was NOT .Tyson never went 15rds because the distance was 12rds,that does not suggest he couldnt.
I base my concusions on Frazier on watching him from his early pro fights against the likes of Doyle,Bruce, Machen,Davis,Jones ,Wipperman ,Johnson,Chuvalo.Up to ,and through his top liner days.You assume too much.
I watched most of Frazier's fights and his wins over Mathis ,Bonavena ,Ellis , Foster,Quarry, are fresh in my memory,and not coloured by hindsight I saw them as they happened.
And in most cases bought the films of them on super 8mm.
I happen to think I am more qualified to talk on Frazier than you are.
By the way ,I am McVey.McGrain will not be very flattered by your mistake.

 

Sorry mate, you probably are a little more versed about Joe than I am, but I base my conclusions on what I've seen fight wise, who I talked to as fighters and what they have said about each other in interviews. How does this make you more versed about Frazier than myself or anyone else on this forum?

Who's the better fighter, you McGrain or you McVey, no disrespect to either of you, honest mistakes do happen in mid-thought.

 

Im just telling you where my conclusions are drawn from,so you won't assume again, my opinion is based solely on Fraziers blow out by Foreman.
I don't consider myself superior to anyone on here [well maybe one].
McGrain is a fine poster I have no problem with you mixing us up, he might be a bit miffed however.:yep

 

I am not saying Joe would win but if he let Tyson feel his power it may make him reluctant...What happens if Joe hurts Mike early, what would Mike do? The tide could change...I never thought Holyfield had a shot vs Mike, especially after watching him against Bobby Cyz in the fight before. It was not until the day of the fight and Evanders confidence that I said "I wonder"...This guy has faith that he will win". I wont count Joe out.

 

Holyfield had a better chin than Frazier and was able to match Tyson physically .I dont think Frazier could take Tyson's power for more than half a fight and I think Tyson is stronger hit harder ,was more durable ,and had better two fisted power ,and hand speed,That forces me to conclude that Tyson stops him.Frazier's undoubted heart and stamina would not be a factor because he would be stopped before they could be utilised.imo.Tyson took shots from bigger punchers than Frazier and still kept coming .Frazier was not really a one punch banger ,two lefts from him had no visible effect on Foreman,and he needed a ton of them to stop Mathis and others.Contrast that with Tysons one punch blow out of Tubbs.

 

mcvey
were do you rate holyfield among the top heavies

 

Gee===that's something you don't see very often; someone using a 1989 version of Tubbs as a reference. Perhaps the most important aspect of that fight was Don King offering another $50k for Tubbs to show up in shape. That's an excellent reference for all the out of shape guys to get some additional purse money.

Regarding the original post, anyone can be beaten on a given night, let alone against a terrific fighter. All a guy has to do is show up with his B game and all fighters do. And Tyson with his B game is a beatable fighter. So is Frazier.

 

1988 not 1989. And Tubbs was always chubby. But that left was impressive, as was the left againts Berbick, as Rooney said ˙˙he knocked him out 3 times with one punch˙˙. lol. And in the Tubbs fight Mike showed some good infighting. Tubbs was a very good top contender.

 

Around the 11 /12 mark but I think you could probably make a case for no 10 if you were so inclined.

 

Anyone who picks Frazier either doesn't know boxing or has rose tinted wishfull glasses on. Tyson is outboxing, outspeeding and outpowering Joe and Frazier isnt going to pull his eat 2 shots to land 2 trick against Tyson he's getting knocked out

 

the pro tyson movement will grow over the next 20 years .he just isn't appreciated at the moment.he was a scary ****er along the lines of liston and foreman.if you remember him when he burst on the scene with that lateral and head movement plus the right hand to the body and right uppercut/hook he was sensational.

 

Gee! Fancy attempting to correct my post and getting the year of the fight wrong?
The Tubbs Tyson fight was the 21st of March 1988.
Now ,to address your point ,if you have one.
I used the analogy between Tyson and Tubbs ,and Frazier and Mathis to illustrate the difference in one shot power between them.

Mathis, when he fought Frazier was unbeaten he had fought NOBODY,was not ranked and had no business fighting for any version of a title.
It took Frazier 11 rds of constant bombardment to wear Buster down enough to get the stoppage.

Tubbs when he fought Tyson was a ranked contender he had ,had 25 fights losing only one a split dec to another contender Tim Witherspoon.,among his wins were victories over contenders ,like.
Bonecrusher Smith,who held a version of the title at one stage.
Greg Page , ditto
Jimmy Young a long time contender.
Tubbs ,was kod with one shot,in a two round blow out,that lifted him off his feet and deposited him sideways.
Tubbs went another four years being stopped again and as late as 93 was still good enough to go the distance with Champion in waiting Riddick Bowe ,in fact many thought he won that fight
.Tubbs was still beating fringe contenders five years after Tyson destroyed him.
My summary is this ,that Tyson had the following advantages over Frazier.

Faster hands.
Quicker at closing the distance
More power
Two fisted power
Better chin [tried and tested]
Stronger
Bigger
Much more versatile with his punch choices and placement.

This means to me Tyson wins it and by stoppage.

I dont like Tyson as a man ,I think he is a **** ,just for the record.

By the way the Japanese put the cash incentive up for Tubbs, not King

This thread is not about fighters showing up with" their B games", it's about matching two men up in their prime.

Gee? Do people still say that in the States?

Gee Whitakers, thats an old Pat Boone song.
Are you a fan of the Walton's?
Only joking

 

mcvey, what are your thoughts on Tyson past the 6th round in a give-and-take affaire generally speaking?