Mike Tyson v George Foreman

Foreman via stoppage

 

I lean towards Foreman by mid rounds stoppage , but Tyson has a chance with that handspeed .

 

Yes I do not know why an older Tyson would be compared to peak Tyson, that is just as fair & reasonable as doing the opposite.

Foreman was slow on his wide punches, not his jab & uppercut.
though I could see it go either way, don't know that it is so easy for either guy to be KOed. zforeman vs. Lyle was after a long lay off, not peak, a round he was winning was stopped after 2 minutes, & he still won.

 

:hammertime:mj

 

Agreed. Its really a fight that anyone can win.

 

Maybe I'm in the minority but I always wanted to see Tyson fight Foreman in the early-mid 1990's. Foreman although pretty slow was still hittin hard & freakin immovable in his second career. Certainly Tyson was gonna stay in Big George's punching range rather than use angles the way Morrison, Evander and Axel Schults did. Tyson was no longer the same force he was in the 80's.

I always thought if immovable George withstood Tyson's early barrage that by rounds 9-12 he'd be pounding a fatiguing Tyson .

 

a lot of people wanted to see that fight and there were even some who thought George had a good chance of winning it

 

Foreman wins with relative ease. He would control Tyson with his greater strength and line him up for the KO. The only guys that gave Foreman problems were the master boxers who would frustrate and wear him down, Tyson does not fall into this category instead relying on speed and power to take his man out. These would not have been enough against a prime Foreman.

 

Foreman has the tools: long jab, brutal power, deceptive speed, unreal hookercuts,immense physical strength to push mike around, iron chin, unshakeable determination.Mike wasn't Joe or Kenny though. Tyson had ARGUABLY the greatest defense the division hasever seen, and without question an iron chin and was as tough as they come. Underrated jab as well. Def fight of the year. Foreman or Tyson in 5 by KO. Foreman might simply be too big and tough, but Mike was a tank. I go back and forth. Mike needs to watch out for the hooker cut and George the uppercut andstraight right of Tyson. I wouldnt bet on this one, two of the guys I could never bet against. Mental edge to Foreman after the Cus D'Amato stories though.

 

Thats just the thing, i dont see Foreman withstanding a Tyson barrage. George was immovable but Holyfield wasnt exactly a big puncher. Foremans "immovability" (is there such a word?) would have been better measure against the big guys like Bruno, Tucker, Ruddock, Lewis, Bowe, seems funny a lot of these guys were missing from his CV.

He doesnt have the footwork of a Douglas or anywhere near the skill. Yes Foreman has power, but hes so damn slow, he'd most likely be one of the slowest guys Tysons ever fought. Im referring to Old Foreman here.

As for young Foreman, i see two possible scenarios, a) Foreman gets 'Berbicked' or b) Tyson gets 'Frazierd'

I wouldnt really want to stand and trade in front of either of these guys.

Both kinda cancel each other out. Foreman has the size and jab to push Tyson back (and Tyson was pretty easy to push back), but Tyson was one of the fastest starters in heavyweight history, if/when Tyson had you he wasnt letting you off the hook, it would be suicidal to try and trade with Tyson esp in the first round. Etienne, Savarese, Spinks, Williams, Stewart, Seldon (i know) these were all quality fighters Tyson disposed of in the 1st round, some of them fought Foreman too.

Tyson showed he can give and take in a prolonged war (Ruddock), Foreman showed it too against Lyle, but i feel Foreman looked much more vulnerable.

Against respective opponents Ruddock and Lyle, both men were coming off a huge defeat a the time, so both were in a very similar position, however i feel a pre prison Tyson was so much more mentally stronger than a prime Foreman. But the old Foreman was mentally stronger than post prison Tyson.

I think Tyson was more likely to recapture his title off Holyfield than Foreman was to capture it off Holmes (had Foreman not retired after Young)

 

Agreed, the only advantage Tyson has is hand speed. He is by far the weaker man. He is the smaller man. He has the shorter reach. He is not so strong mentally as Foreman was. ( pre Ali ) He doesn't have the edge in power. In fact nothing other than hand speed in this fight. Foremans habit of shoving people back and off balance to punch them, negates any good work they might do with regards to head movement, and punch slipping.

 

1988 Tyson beats any version of G Foreman .

 

No.

 

I've never understood how people say it's a given for Foreman. Tyson was NOT Frazier!

Tyson was bigger, stronger, much more powerful, WAAAAYYY faster, had a better chin, and better defense than Frazier. So to claim that George would go through Mike in the same fashion is absurd.

Young Foreman was NOT that hard to hit, and he could be hurt/dropped. And he NEVER in his career fought a puncher as devastating as Tyson.

So, knowing all that, to say Mike has no chance against a prime Foreman is a joke.

 

Foreman is a whole different ball game to Ruddock, all he had in his arsenal was his smash, and he hardly ever landed it on Tyson.

Everyone of Foreman's punches were hurtful, his jab would sicken Tyson and his short uppercuts would be devastating and also his straight right hand. His physical strength and presence would make a massive impact in the fight IMO.

All of those guys above were afraid and were basically fighting on the defensive from the opening bell. Foreman would come straight for Mike and there's no way he can fight on the backfoot or in close against Big George!