Lets settle the did tyson duck foreman debate

Lots of feeling here...

I'm not saying Tyson ducked old Foreman or that he would lose to him. I'm just saying that Tyson was stylistically well suited for George. Holy and Morrison both beat Foreman with lateral movement. Perhaps Tyson could surprise just like Morrison did and show an ability for lateral movement that wasn't known before, but that was not the way Tyson was used to fight. He was used to go after an opponent who gave ground to him and that kind of fight wasn't easily fought against Old George, to put it lightly.

I can't really see what's controversial about those statements.

 

What version of George? Prime 1973 George? The old version of George who couldn’t get past Morrison? Or a mythical version of George that never existed, the one that only includes the positive aspects of young George combined with only the positive aspects of old George?

There was only two versions of George not three.

The first was the ATG who beat both Norton and Frazier within a few rounds before losing interest in the sport after losing to Ali.

The second one was a carefully matched limited contender who lost to Holyfield and Morrison before landing an undeserved shot at a vulnerable accidental ex lightheavyweight champion Michael Moorer.

 

In what way is any of this a counter argument to Foreman not being a good stylistical match-up for Tyson? You do understand that that is a relative concept? It's the same as saying that fighter A would be a more difficult opponent for fighter B than other opponents of similar quality but different styles. That's all. It's not the same as saying that fighter A is better than fighter B or even that he would beat him.

No one has argued that Old George was as good as Tyson. No one has said that Old George beat anyone as good as Tyson. I think we're all in agreement that he wasn't and he didn't. What is being said is that old Foreman's juggernaut style wouldn't suit Tyson very well.

 

You dont get it......Tyson was build to avoid the jab and fire coming in........Foreman had a heavy but very slow jab......and the rest of his wide winging shots were telegraphed from a mile away, Tyson could have lunch and still get out of the way and fire right back.......Foreman in both careers had ZERO head movement and simply relied on his chin while over powering his opponents.....not in a million years are you overpowering Tyson or use your chin as a sole defense...........even ham and eggers disfigured his face in his comeback........Tyson would have a field day rattling combos off head and body.......lateral movement.......why dont you check out the Bonehugger fight, plenty of in and out with lateral movement...........what made Tyson special and dangerous was his speed combined with ATG power throwing every punch in the book text book style.........thats how he caught all the big guys and Grandpa Foreman would get the absolute worst of it, he is getting stopped by the Ref, Mercy stoppage.

 

[

Because the insinuation is that Foreman is suited to Tyson only because of a notion he was suited to Frazier. But that only works if he was still as capable as he was when he fought Frazier or if Tyson is the same as Frazier. Not in a million years was George that capable anymore. The comeback version of George laboured with Qawi and Guido Trane, and he wouldn’t have if his style always produced a Frazier like win against those kinds of fighters. Tyson was a fast shifting explosive fighter operating at a different skill level.

Although Foreman has a good jab, I don’t think he could time it as well as he would need to.

Douglas did because he used Feints and set traps. That was not George’s forte.

precisely, nobody has said comeback Foreman can beat anybody as good as Tyson. They have said Foreman was too risky for Tyson, when he wasn’t.

Tyson Fought Bonecrusher Smith, a physical juggernaut type. Bonecrusher ended up grabbing Mike all the time because he couldn’t cope with his speed. Bonecrusher was a kind of poor mans Foreman.

Comeback Foreman was slow, lumbering, fought at a walking pace, but still had heavy hands, was still accurate and durable.

I don’t think Comeback Foreman was much different of a threat to Tyson than Brian Nielsen was.

 

Tyson usually attacked from the sides. He wasn’t walking straight into fighters until he got bored with boxing. Even then, he could beat most fighters to the draw with his quick hands. But watch his feet, he usually angled himself diagonally from the opponent. This bullying pushing style only works if Tyson is around the front of Foreman. Even then Tyson can time a blow right through the centre of George’s arms before he can reach Tyson. How many punches can Tyson get off before Foreman gets his hands on him?

Comeback Foreman is going to have to be a lot better than he was in real life to first absorb that many punches before Tyson is going to be broken down. There is zero chance that Tyson cannot hit George Forman more times than Alex Stewart did. Zero.

Can you imagine Tyson hitting Foreman more times than Stewart did?

It is about more than just styles and intangibles. More importantly it is about levels.

If one fighter is dominant at elite level he is not going to be at risk against an opponent who dosnt stand out at a level just below this.

It is fantasy to assume fixed style based weaknesses between fighters of different levels.

 

All I know is that George regained the heavyweight title from the man who himself decisively beat a great champion for it. George was the oldest man ever to do that. That says it as baldly as can be. Everything else is conjecture. Of course, that's what forums are for lol.

 

We have to keep this short (as I try to do too), as the bibles tend to get longer and longer in this kind of debates.

- Yep I see Evander beating Ruddock, hence I see Ruddock giving him a much more competitive bout than Foreman.

- The Norton "win" sticks to Larry again and again in discussion, the same with Ali. Thats not the same than beating Shavers, hence going down, for example. Dominance and with that performance, that we use for H2H eva. of course is relative. And Foremans performance on that level was no tier 1 material in any respect.

- Ruddock´s competitiveness was short, I don´t value this guy in the beginning of the 90s with his stepdown fights later. Nobody knew what he could take back then, beside the asthma (?) quit.

- For the matter of what style was used: These are pro boxers, not machines! Morrison could move and step, Tyson did measure distance against Ruddock (Bonecrusher too), and Ruddock DID have a jab and coulde move too! People act like Tyson was a come forward machine...

This content is protected

Weaver fight shows that too.

I agree with you, its boxing and both got a chance to win. My post was against the Foreman-ATG-hyping that he busts Ruddock up, for the "reason" beeing an ATG. Can´t stand this simpleton posts, as they tend to appear more and more often.

- People forget that fighters that time were unknown and difficult to assess, totally different aspect than now.

- Young Lewis WAS agressive, exposed his chin and was adjusted for that reason. What dangerous KO-artists did Foreman fight? I think we´ve had this debate going back and forth some time ago. I´ll give you Briggs back then, and give him now. Can´t remember much of the fight, but rgarding the age this was a fine job from George. Cooney WAS NO puncher at that time!!! Like Tyson was NO puncher against Lewis. A little danger for a round. These guys were finished. Stewarts high KO% came by fighting very very very low opp. Himself getting exposed by Moorers power on the other hand. Foreman was meant to do this to him too, in the same manner Mercer beat Morrison regarding his own fight with him. These guys could punch, but showed they could get hit too. Morrison was down against Williams in another appearance, twice! Some here think he is pure hype. This is not the same risk than fighting an upcoming Morrsion like Mercer did. Thats what I´m talking about, as others do as well. Regarding this, its very debatable to what extend the folding Cooper counts as a puncher (coming of an Nate Miller loss prior), but I guess we can give Foreman Morrison as a guy who could punch.
But this is not the level of fighting undefeated Ruddock, Tyson, Bowe, Lewis, Morrison, Mercer. For example, I´m not sure Foreman was willing to fight Frank Bruno after the Tyson fight. Thats the kind of calculation we are talking about. And of course it might change the view of Tyson ducking Foreman, or the other way around.

 

I think what you are describing could happen. But I would be curios to see what Tyson does when Foreman comes bullying forward. Is he able to sidestep or will he just be pushed back? If the latter, he could run into some trouble.

 

I hadn't really thought of Frazier personally. Only of the challenges I think George would pose to Tyson.

Show me the fights where Smith effortlessly push back guys of 230-240 lbs muscle like Briggs and Morrison. Or where he absorbs the kind of punches Morrisson laid on Foreman without stopping for a second.

 

I´ve quote this elsewhere some time ago: The fight could end up in a very unpleasant Bonecrusher hugging, since both guys are aware of getting hit. So the exchange is limited to Tyson coming in, as happened often in other fights. This comes down to reflexes and handspeed. Foremans raw power helps too, but less pin-point.

Another question is Foreman punching on the inside, but Tyson could do this too (despite the repetition Tyson beeing an horrible in-fighter...ask Ferguson, Jameson or Tubbs for that manner....).

 

This content is protected

 

He said muscle - Witherspoon was a tub in this fight not to mention none of what Bojak requested is presented.