Joe Fraziers defense.

Frazier was the blueprint of Tyson.

 

Agreed.

I consider Joe one of the most skilled infighters ever. His technique was very similar to Henry Armstrong's, and I think he might actually have been a bit smoother and more polished with his movements.

 

There's similarities because of their similar dimensions, and I'm sure Tyson studied footage of Frazier; but I doubt he greatly impacted Tyson's style.

Cus D'Amato had a very specific fighting philosophy, and his stamp was placed on Floyd Patterson and Jose Torres before Joe Frazier would have a chance to influence his ideas. Mike Tyson would have fought the way he did even if Joe Frazier had never existed.

 

Precisely.

The guy who said his head movement was not as good as Tyson's is wrong imo, his head movement was better than Tyson's, but Frazier fought with more intensity and was a quintessential seek and destroy fighter where as Tyson was not the quintessential pressure fighter/swarmer so he did not get hit as much, Joe did not have the punch of Mike Tyson so he had to walk you down and wear you down with accumulation, and the best way for him to do that was to stay on the opponents toes and not give him a min breath.

Mike Tyson had quicker feet than Frazier to, he also as i pointed out was not a typical pressure fighter because he did not need to be because he could load up and take you with one shot. Joe had to walk into the wheel house to get stuff done and when you do that you are bound to get hit some.


Qawi had a better defence than Frazier though imo.

 

anyone know if there are punch stats for ali/frazier fights? be interesting to see ali's connect percentage against frazier's defense.

 

Frazier's head movement went up and down. Whereas Tyson's was lateral.
However, Tyson was a bit more accomplished than Frazier.

 

Up to and including the FOC.....Frazier was hard to hit.

To beat Ali, he went thru hell and his defense was never the same.

Then Foreman used him as a basketball based on raw power, and his defense thereafter was now nil.

 

In FOC Frazier's defense was really good. There is a moment when Ali misses few shots in a row and Frazier smiles at him. At his best Joe was a killer

 

Frazier defense to me was a mixed bag. Foreman and Ali had no trouble landing on him, neither did Bonevenna.

I do think Frazier had very good head movement, but the rest of his defense: glove blocking, defensive footwork, and clinching were seldom used.

With Frazier, I think his relentless offense put most of his opponents on defense.

 

I think that Frazier was quite good glove blocker. He also used his elbows to block opponents shots.

Well said that his defense was his offense

 

I'd go with that.

 

He defence was good, but how good can your defence be when you constantly, and i mean constantly, move forward?

All of his best opponents, i.e. Quarry, Bonavena, Ali, Ramons, Ellis and Foreman landed a shitload of punches during the first few rounds. In therein lies the foundation of his defence: it's designed to take a certain amount of "light" punishment, but enough to keep coming and wear the opponent down.

It's all about styles. Against a guy like Ali or Holmes, who were good hitters but not knockout artists, Frazier excels. This is because he can always ship the amount of hits he's gonna take, while keeping the pressure on and making them pay.

However, against a very heavy handed guy like Foreman this doesn't work. The "calculated" risk that he takes early results in a calculated loss because he is just too big a hitter. A lesser foe like Bonavena also had an unproportional amount of success, although to be fair, this was only Frazier's 14th professional bout. But for these reasons, i wouldn't be very confident about Frazier's chances against Tyson or Dempsey.


If you look at a similar but also very different pressure fighter like Tyson or Dempsey, there is a notable difference. Their defence was less predictable and more "explosive", i.e. often coupled with fast footwork and leaping attacks. The advantage? They are relatively less likely to succumb to very heavy bombers like Foreman. Although opinions vary, i see Tyson evading most of Foreman's concussive but slow punches, while countering George's wide open style with his own shots; something Frazier couldn't do.


The drawback of this style, however, is that smart, skilled boxers with good stamina who can make it through the first five rounds, will land more and more frequently as the fight goes on. This is because the Tyson/Dempsey explosive style requires a ton of energy and always sees them slowing down after the first five rounds. As their defensive maneuvers are widely depended on a full tank of gas, they will have to ship increasingly more punches as the rounds go by.

This is the reason that Tyson got knocked out by good but not great punchers in Douglas and Holyfield, but had no trouble with bigger bombers like Ruddock (2x), Bruno and Tucker. Dempsey did well evading a big man like Willard early because of his unpredictable, explosive attacks. But a skilled veteran like Tunney saw through it and landed a truckload of punches on Dempsey. So many, that his handlers had to guide him upon his ring exit after only 10 rounds of combat. I would pick Frazier to beat Tunney every time, however.