Could Mike Tyson really beat Joe Frazier?

He was 19 years of age and had good body/head movement. This was a post Cus Tyson to add on top of that; a 20 fight Tyson is a reasonable measuring stick.

So what if they were bigger? Frazier fought larger men and was throwing bombs in the late rounds; Tyson in the late rounds was incredibly slow and his explosiveness was gone. He used up most of his energy for the early rounds. He wasn't good at conserving energy.

Tyson's stamina was comparable to a young George Foreman. Tyson might have an edge in stamina but it's very clear that both young Foreman and Tyson were throwing bombs in the early rounds and were much slower in the later rounds.

There's no way Tyson could knock out 71-75 Ali; this guy ate bombs from Foreman and Lyle. And he managed to wear down Foreman and knock him out, Foreman has a granite chin; better than Tyson's. Tyson would also get frustrated in Ali's clinch.

How would Tyson beat 71-75 Ali if he cannot even KO him? His best bet is a decision and there's no way Ali would be weak in the late rounds. This version of Ali beat amazing competition; in contrast Tyson's competition looks like tomato cans. Who has Tyson fought that was better than Foreman or Norton? Smith? Bruno?

Ali WAS fast enough to dodge them; the reason why Frazier landed them is because Frazier was a late rounds fighter. He worked Ali's body for rounds until Ali got tired. Foreman hit Ali because of his long reach. Tyson bull-rushing Ali in the early rounds would result in Ali clinching him tight and restricting his tools.

And why should I not talk about Douglas? The ''Tyson had bad management!'' excuse is ****. Ali had problems outside the ring. Frazier had problems. Hell even Mayweather has problems. That doesn't stop them from going to war and trying their best when it comes to fight night. Mike Tyson shouldn't be molly-coddled like a baby.

He is the only fighter who people try to cook up excuses for. The notion of a 23 year old 42-1 favorite being ''past his best'' is nonsense and the excuse of him having outside problems is even stupider given that other great heavyweights have had to deal with it.

That's the difference between Tyson and Frazier. Frazier doesn't give a ****, he's coming for a fight.

Why can he not last long enough? Tyson has struggled to knock out lesser fighters even in his so-called prime; whereas nobody other than Foreman has knocked out Frazier except maybe Ali, and that was in the 14th round of their third fight, to which Ali was close to quitting.

Another point I should make is why would Tyson be landing so cleanly? Frazier was able to make Ali miss his shots with his upper body movement/constant pressure fighting. Ali from 71 was very fast, arguably faster than Tyson and Frazier was able to restrict his speed.

You're selling Joe short.

That's not ''periodic'' rests - that's tactics. It frustrates and tires the opponent. Tillis did this exact thing with Tyson, he held his head and reduced the power by leaning on the ropes. Ali didn't ''need'' to do this but doing it anyway works better. Foreman didn't ''need'' to constantly push Frazier but he got away with it and it gave him an easier victory.

And Douglas DID lean against the ropes; we see this clearly in the mid rounds.

Why is Tyson referred to as diminished every time he loses?

The Ali who fought Young/Shavers/Spinks was post-1975. He was physically torn. I'd agree Norton beat Ali 2 out of 3 times, but that was because styles make fights. Norton had a very awkward style. See his fight against Holmes for proof.

Names = credibility

A Prime Tyson was good, but don't expect other people to marvel at him if a 32 year old Ali beat far better competition.

 

Ali was bigger and faster than Frazier too; and Frazier was able to deal with his speed.

 

Exactly, he was a hype job. It's an utter joke to compare him to Joe Frazier.

Bruno was just a weight-lifter with OK boxing skills and cherry picked opposition. Whenever he stepped up the competition, he got exposed.

 

Because we're looking at Tyson's opposition. It wasn't very stellar and whenever he did fight someone worth of note, he lost. It's as simple as that.

When Tyson lost to Douglas, excuses were made; yet these same excuses aren't made for Frazier, despite the fact that Frazier fought much, much better competition (Ali) with personal problems in his life.

 

Actually they did have something in common; all of them beat Tyson in the late rounds. Aside from the Tyson that stopped trying after Lewis, Tyson got worn down and beaten; and with every single opponent, an excuse is made.

''Tyson had personal problems when Douglas beat him!'' - so did every other heavyweight champion.

''Tyson was past his prime against Holyfield!'' - despite the fact that Tyson was the favorite, in addition to being the betting favorite and coming off 2 wins against world champions

Excuses, excuses, excuses....

No, that's not my only reason; but I am using him to put things into perspective. Any fighter can look good trashing tomato cans. Deontay Wilder's first 20-25 opponents are roughly of the same caliber that Tyson's first 25 opponents were.

Frazier's first 10 opponents were also low quality, and surprise surprise, they were trashed in the early rounds.

I'm using Douglas to ascertain two things:

- Tyson is very vulnerable and weak in the late rounds

- Tyson's heart is weak; if ''outside management'' is the reason he lost then he is one of the worst champions in recent times

What I'm saying is that Frazier already dealt with the Douglas type boxer; Ali. I shouldn't need to even explain why Ali is better than Douglas, but Frazier was capable of beating a larger, faster opponent.

When you actually compare Frazier with Tyson, we see that the latter fighter fought much worse competition, has convenient excuses for whenever a ***** in his armor is seen and had awful stamina.

Tyson has lost to average punchers; Holyfield is one of them, Douglas is one of them. What these two have in common with Frazier is that they don't need natural power to take Tyson out, all they have to do is wear him down and take him out late.

I cannot name one great fighter who Tyson really beat that was in good condition. I mean...1988 Larry Holmes? That's the upper limit.

 

I actually acknowledged Frazier fought bums, that was my point - whenever he fought bums, he knocked them out early. Hell Frazier's first 10 wins are all bums.

But when Frazier was tested against the peak standard (Ali) - he was very much a match for him. He would fight to the death if need be, Tyson didn't.

You could make the argument that Tyson was past his prime, but so was Frazier by the 2nd and 3rd Ali fights. That didn't stop him from going to war with Ali. Tyson never really achieved on that test.

 

Source? I'm generally interested in reading that.