Well let's compare: MIKE TYSON 1. Youngest heavyweight champion in the history of the sport 2. Two time titlist 3. 9 title defences 4. Best wins - Michael Spinks, Pinklon Thomas, Trevor Berbick, Tony Tucker, Razor Ruddock, Frank Bruno. 5. Final record - 50-6-44 GEORGE FOREMAN 1. Olympic Gold Medalist 2. Two time heavyweight champ 3. Oldest man to ever win the heavyweight title 4. Highest win/ko ratio of any lineal champion 5. Best wins, Joe Frazier, Ken Norton, Ron Lyle, Michael Moorer. 6. Final record - 76-5-68 Conclusion: I would probably rate Tyson a tad higher due to his more dominant performance as a champion and more victories over rated opposition earlier in his career. Foreman however, would have my vote to beat him head to head due to stylistic reasons. CONCLUSION
Any Foreman beats any Tyson. But young Foreman (say, on the day he beat Norton) annihilates any Tyson. I'm thinking second row. First round, but second row.
If it's prime Foreman vs prime Tyson, I give the decision to Tyson. Remember, in his prime, Tyson was extremely defensive. He would get in close, bobbing and weaving, throwing rapid body shots, stalking first the body to bring the guard down, and then, when the time was right, throw a head shot. Prime Tyson would be too quick and smart for Prime Foreman.
IMO, prime Tyson beats prime Foreman H2H. Career wise, Foreman probably acomplished a tad more. Although both are ATG and incredible talents, both underachieved, if you'd ask me.
Bull****. Foreman fought a handful of great/tough fighters in part 1 of his career surrounded by an assload of guys who didn't even have winning records or had just a handful of fights. Tyson fought more good fighters, even though George has the better names at the top.
In terms of skill? Yes, Tyson was far superior. Head to head though I think Foreman would bully and batter him.
Prime for prime? Yes despite of what Cus D'Matio might have placed in Tyson's head. Tyson would have won a prime for prime match up. Foreman might have hit harder than Tyson but he left him self wide open to be hit. Tyson while simmiler to Frazier and Marchino was bigger stronger and faster. He also had a defense that would allow him to avoide Foreman's punches while landing shots of his own. In the mid 90's when their bout might have taken place Tyson had become less of the defensive talant that along with his power made him "The Baddest Man On the Planet". And Foreman's defense had improved. Both could still hit. I slightly favor Tyson but it could go either way.
The youngest HW champion vs. the oldest. Very interesting matchup head to head. Tough call right there, I mean when exactly was Forman's "prime"? Was it the early Forman or the later Forman? In terms of accomplishments I'd have to go with Big George, but head to head is a tougher call.
tyson wins i think easily...foreman had more power but ali exposed that power as coming from wide looping shots..something a prime cus d'amato coached tyson would have easily dismantled..that being said i think this fight is over early either way..the older george foreman i dont think stands a chance..only if your as dumb as micheal moorer and you wanna stand right in front of him.
You can't even call it a ringwalk. Tyson was a guy that just wanted to get in the ring asap & get it on. He was not one for the bright lights, razmatazz & all that. Butch Lewis thought he was being smart when he tried to wind Mike up in the dressing room prior to the bout. However, Lewis soon knew his guy was bang in trouble when Tyson punched holes in the wall! Lewis knew it was bang on his guy from that point on!
As far as who was "better", I'd say Big George had an overall better career. I think it would be a helluva fight H2H with both in their primes. This one's not going the distance no matter who wins.