Foreman (1994) vs Tyson (1996)

Read a piece by Don King and his camp saying Tyson wanted no part of old George,with Tyson telling King "if you want a fight with that f-n animal,you fight him".As far as George saying he wanted no part of Lewis or Tyson,George is very polite and complimentary about every fighter you ask him about.

 

The Bruno that fought Tyson in 96 was scared shitless. I don't think Mike's Don King organised title wins post prison hold too much water. Bruno and Seldon performed abjectly against Tyson. I really don't see Foreman being anything like as weak as those two.

 

Tyson could win but he'd have to box and use variety. If he just storms in hoping to slug Foreman out quick he'd be in danger of taking a battering.

Tyson can be pushed back by someone as big and strong and brutish as Foreman, and he's probably more susceptible to the uppercut than to any other punch. He can avoid Foreman's jab, and he wants to.
If Tyson is complacent at all here, Foreman manhandles him and places him in line for an uppercut or two that could possibly spell the end for the Tyson of '96.

By most likely, Tyson would outbox him for a few rounds, hurt him and probably KO or TKO him within 7 or 8 rounds.

 

The 2nd version of Foreman was nowhere as good as the first one.

A lot of people tend to remember only that he won the title at 45, so they just assume it means he was amongst the best fighters of 90's. That is not true - his matchmakers were quite careful and he still needed a lot of luck to achieve his goal.

And I don't mean only his lucky punch against Moorer. He was already lucky enough that soft-chinned Moorer was the champ at this time (after somewhat strange MD over Holyfield) as I simply don't see him winning with any other top fighter of 90's. He tried already with Holyfield - and lost clear UD, with some moments when it looked more like target practice for Evander. I really like Foreman - but if he was not able to win with Morrison and it took him 10 rounds to land something on Moorer (none of them known for strong chin), his chances against Iron Mike are next to none. No matter if Tyson wanted this fight or not.

 

I'm actual doubtful as to whether Tyson could avoid being caught up in an early slugging match with Foreman and being KO'd.

Tyson had the skills to box him, but his style always put him in positions where he was closed and stood square-on and in range. A man like Foreman, who's just there to BULLY Tyson, would be allowed to boss him, shove him and land that uppercut.
Tyson needs to be moving all the time, and I'm not sure he can do that for the 7 or 8 rounds he needs to, esp. the Tyson of '96. He lost a lot of his variety, pace, creativity and concentration as fights progressed. Foreman was the ever-dangerous stalker.
Foreman was so damn ponderous and slow though ........

It's a hard fight to gauge.

 

Except Tyson himself. George referred to Tyson as an animal who should be caged, and let out to jump through hoops every so often.

 

Foreman couldn't catch up to Morrison, how would he catch Tyson? And the few times that George tagged china-chinned Morrison, Morrison didn't fall. Remember how Morrison hit the deck when a rusty Razor Ruddock popped him with an uppercut? I think ol' George's punching power was a bit overrated during his comeback. I think his best punch was his left jab. Tyson had a better chin than Morrison, he had better boxing skills, and he didn't gas as quickly. Foreman definately had the brute strength to shove Tyson around and to disrupt his rhythm, but I see George being to slow of hand and foot to seriously threaten or hurt Tyson. But I would have definately paid to see that fight!

 

I'd go with Foreman on this one.

 

The trouble with your arguements is that your analogies are off and you apparent bias against Tyson has produced a pretty weak argument.

Foreman being knocked down by Ali has nothing to do with how a Tyson Foreman fight would play out in the 90s.

What it comes down to is styles and actually watching fights. Foreman in 1990-1994 was not a fighter who had the style and workrate to beat Tyson. Tyson's handspeed, chin power and physicalities would make this a very difficult task.

I know its a mytical match up but the answer should be pretty academic. Tyson via midrounds TKO.

 

Cus D'amato himself told Tyson he had to avoid fighters like George Foreman at all costs. If anything, it would have been interesting to see if it messed with Mike's head. I also believe D'amato, and would pick a peak Foreman over a peak Tyson. Foreman never backed up, and he had the strength to simply push off Mike and force him temporarily to fight on the back foot as the bigger man stepped in.

That said, Tyson knocks out an old Foreman. He didn't have the wind or defense to cope even with '96 Mikey. I love the man, but he was old with a capital O, and not even his chin would stand up to multiple flush hits from Tyson.

 

[/quote]

Possibly but not necessarily.

George during his comeback years had defensive skills that were very finely improved. He was very difficult to get a flush shot on. What's more, is he had a solid chin, the ability to pace himself into the later rounds, a sharp jab, and incredible power. Although Tyson and Frazier had their differences, they were still very similiar in size, stature and fighting style. In fact, Joe had a lot more upper body movement than Mike, theoretically making him arguably more difficult to tag. Even though we're talking about a 1990's Foreman, and not a 1970's version, I still think the same principals would apply.

Although I think a lot of people would pick Mike to take this one, I wouldn't have been the least bit surprised if George managed to pull of an upset, which in my mind wouldn't be so upsetting.

 

Anything is possible but not necessarily probable. Frankly, I'm starting to feel as though George Foreman in the 90s is becoming increasingly overrated.

He would never have beaten:

Holyfield
Bowe
Tyson
Ruddock
Morrison
Mercer
Lewis

If he fought them in the 90s.

 

Actually,

Foreman did fight Holyfield and Morrison in the 90's, and lost to both of them. Consider this however, both of these men were at the peak of their primes, and Foreman managed to go 12 rounds and stagger both of them. What's more, Evander was quite possibly the best fighter of the decade, while the Duke, was certainly no pushover himself. Foreman was 43 against Holyfiled, and 45 against Morrison. Nevertheless, he still managed to put together a comeback record of 31-3-0-26 between 1987 and 1997. His victories during this period included wins over Michael Moorer, Adilson Rodriguez, Gerry Cooney, Bert Cooper, Pierre Coetzer, Lou Savarese, Alex Stewart and Crawford Grimsley.

Given his rather extensive resume, and taking into account that Tyson lost to Douglas, Lewis Lost to Mccall, and Bowe was bested twice by Golata, I don't think that it's entirely out of the question that Foreman might have defeated one or all of these fighters.
( Keep in mind, this opinion is coming from someone who grew up during the 80's and 90's, following these men's careers quite closely. )

 

I see 2 scenarios:

Tyson by mid rounds KO

or

Foreman by late KO

 

That's some serious telling right there.