Both had insane power and granite chin, but they had some stamina issues. How would you rate their stamina in a scale of 1-10?
Easily Tyson, he unleashed on Ribalta with his speed and combinations for 10 rounds not really slowing down much, prime Tyson stamina 9/10 This content is protected
90's Foreman>80's Tyson>70's Foreman>90's Tyson. 90's Foreman: 8/10 80's Tyson: 7/10 70's Foreman: 6/10 90's Tyson: 5/10 What made Foreman so successful in the 90's was that he learned how to relax while fighting, which is a huge benefit. He paced himself better, picked his punches more carefully, and allowed himself time to recover staying inside his cross armed fortress blocking carefully.
I don't see any problem with Tyson's stamina in his heyday. He went hard at Tucker early, eased back and outpointed him all night while still having heaps in reserve to keep him negative. Same with Smith really and some of his other early distance fights. Actually just look at the Ruddock fights. Big tough guy having a good go and Tyson held up physically with aplomb. Tyson had more stamina than first incarnation George. In all serious tho, taking the conditions into account and his workrate as well as how hard he was throwing Foreman's stamina wasn't bad at all in Zaire. Many heavyweights would have been just as tired at the same points. Tyson was also busier than comeback Foreman who was extremely mindful of his pacing. So it's Tyson for me prime for prime and probably prime over comeback Foreman too. Workrate has to be factored in otherwise we could claim some guy that threw 3 punches a round and was fresh late had great stamina when he was a rumper really.
