Watching the video for the hundredth time, it seems to me George's strategy against Joe; specifically the pushing and twisting off balance, club-parrying, etc would have been easily as effective against Iron Mike, and, given Mike's propensity for never roaring back after getting knocked down, might have finished him even earlier. Thoughts? This isn't mean to be either an attack or defense against Mike (whom I admire quite a bit during his 80s run). I just don't see where Mike would have done much better, despite the better right and and at least as good defense.
I disagree that Tyson had as good a defense as Frazier. Frazier's was more funky and unpredictable (at least in his prime). But I think Tyson would've done better against Foreman than the depleted Frazier but because of styles, the end result remains the same with Foreman looking down on a kod Tyson.
I seemed to have dumbly forgotten about Joe when he was Smokin'. Part of that was being extremely tricky to get a bullseye on. I think Mike's defense did have a lot to do with having a really great, incoming defense. But he probably was more predictable coming in. I think Dundee said that Mike had kind of a one-two-three style. Though I think that was unfairly dismissive of him, at the same time there were trackable patterns to what he did. Joe wasn't as easy a nut to crack. It might sound weird and is obviously out-of-place, but Berbick at his best was a little like that, a very awkward and thus hard to figure out fighter defensively.
Yeah Tyson's head movement was kinda robotic and he usually abandoned it (or at least didn't use it nearly as much) after the first round or 2 while Frazier's was more unpredictable, and he maintained it the entire fight while pressing forward, smothering you giving you no room to breathe. The guy was a ****ing tank!