Mike Tyson Vs. George Foreman

tyson would be to scared of foreman he was scared of foreman when foreman was in his 40's

 

You have a pretty skewed understanding of Foreman. There are many fighters who are not as technically orthodox or as technically sound as you'd expect and yet they excel. Hamed. Pryor. Locche. Burley. Jones. Ali. Foreman. All of these fighters compensated with fast hands, timing, power, instincts, etc. Foreman takes his place among them.

Answer these:

1. Who's stronger, Foreman or Tyson?

2. Does Tyson fight well when he is not in forward motion or when he is going backwards?

3. Does Foreman have the strength and inclination to move his opponent backwards?

 

Holyfield moved forward and lateral against Tyson. Tyson wasn't rushing up on him like he did against Berbick and Spinks and such.

 

Conversly, I think Foreman is more vunerable to Tyson than the other way around. The more and more I think about it and the more and more I watch Foreman Frazier I-II, Tyson Smith to try to draw some type of comparisions. The more I realize that the peek a book style employed by a swarmer actually has an advantage over the more brutish style employed by the puncher, particularly the unskilled puncher.

Frazier's loss to Foreman can be attributed to two key things:

1. His offensive approach was limited; Joe didnt utilize a variety of punches and more importantly he was far too reliant on the left hook. In either fight, almost everything he did whether it was jabbing the body, jabbing upstairs, etc...everything was almost a prelude to his patented left hook.

2. Joe Frazier had a second tier Chin. My favorite type of fighters are swarmers, Dempsey, Marciano, Patterson, Torres, Frazier, Tyson etc. So I have no bias towards Joe but his chin was not a Tier 1 Chin on the level of Tyson, Foreman, Holyfield, Mercer, Chuvalo, Tua, or McCall...Because of this hinderance, Joe's chances drop.

Joe just needed to use a better variety of punches because his head movement would have been sufficient enough to counter and dictate the pace of the fight. His power was adequate but his chin would have IMO always let him down which is why I'd always pick Foreman over Frazier but I think at thier absolute bests Frazier would always make it competitive while it lasted. Very competitve.

Tyson on the other hand brings a new element to this. The three reasons why I think Tyson wins:

1. Better punch selection; Tyson's arsenal epitomizes the word variety. Not to many orthodox HW fighters I know throw the right hook as frequently and as fluidly as Tyson. He is also renowned for his uppercuts, good jab, left hook, right cross he throws almost every punch in the book when he sees an opportunity. His style doesnt seem as limited and heavily reliant on a certain punch the way Frazier was.

2. Tier 1 Chin; this is where Tyson's durability comes into play. Tyson has never been let down by his chin in any fight even post prison. He's been let down by his stamina in fights where he clearly undertrained. He's been let down by his defense when he lacked a coherent fight plan, but never by his chin. Tyson's record vs the biggest punchers he's faced is 5-1 (Smith, Bruno 2x, Ruddock 2x, Lewis).

3. Power and Speed. It doesnt take a puncher with Tyson's power to beat Foreman, but it certainly doesnt hurt. Now having Tyson's speed and the ability to beat him to the punch helps tremendously. I have seen fights where the difference was determined simply because of handspeed. This is another case of that. Tyson's combination of the two attributes will give Foreman something pretty substantial to think about. There is a reason why Bonecrusher Smith held; he felt disadvataged by Tyson's speed. He may have seen his advantage as the bigger man to use his size to neutralize Tyson but unfortunately for him he was unable to do that whilst mounting an offense.

Its like being chased by a Lion or Tiger. You get to a small shed or room where there is an unloaded shotgun on one side of the room and on the opposite side there is the ammunition. The Lion follows you and almost bursts through the door and while you're holding the door you come to the realization that if you let go of the door to get the shotgun load it and kill the lion there is a good chance you'll be killed in the process especiallly if you arent as quick as that lion. Now, as you hold on to that door while you try to come up with a strategy you begin to realize more and more that by holding on to the door you remain alive and you DING!!! The final bell. That's what alot of Tyson's opponents did in lasting the distance and that is what Bonecrusher Smith did.

Now Foreman is a different breed than Bonecrusher. He won't be afraid to bring it but when he does he will find himself in position where he is being countered by sharp punches. I do believe Foreman's belief in his own power will probably prompt a few fierce exchanges which as a direct result of Tyson's superior handspeed, power and sporadic headmovement would give him the upperhand in each exchange. This will likely prompt Foreman to fight in a more conventional manner because he will soon realize that each time he goes over all willy nilly he gets nailed by a puncher as big as him even if he is getting with some big shots in. This transition by Foreman will work to Tyson's advantage because he can adopt or rather revert to his Pavlovian approach. Foreman would never submit to any fighter but if you offer substantial resistance he will be tentative, just like any fighter would. Now given Foreman's dimensions and Tyson's dimensions Big George's adjustments would likely include a more measured pace, cross arm defense and more prudence in picking his shots on the outside while intermittingly pressing forward to try to land bigger shots. Given his unpolished technique it would keep him out of his natural element of consistently advancing to his foe and would inevitably lead to a Tyson victory as Mike not only dictates the pace of the fight but he capitalizes on his primary advantages that I mentioned above to enlist a stoppage victory anywhere from round 6-8

 

1. I think that you are alone in the boxing world with this answer.
2. Fair enough.
3. I assume that you are agreeing that Foreman would and could back up Tyson.

One more question:

Which past HW champs should be favored against Tyson?

 

Stonehands, i want to ask you something.


During our long discussions you always maintained that Liston is much stronger than Lewis, among others, because he has a short stocky frame (6'0" or 6'1" opposed to Lewis' 6'5", four-five inches shorter).


Now, Tyson has an even more stocky build than Liston, is an inch shorter and about 5-10 pounds heavier when both in peak shape.
And Foreman is 6'3", although 6'4" seems more accurate to me (he looked taller than Ali). So Foreman has four or five inches on Tyson.

So why is Liston stronger than Lewis because of his stocky build yet Tyson is not stronger than Foreman despite the same stocky build?

 

I have to say as a young man I boxed in the same area as Tyson. I saw him when he first came up. He was extremely fast, and a very hard puncher for a stocky guy. Even when he was 16 years old. However it was evident to everyone at that time. and became more so later that the key to beat him was the jab. A hard jab, not a range finder. Tyson and all shorter peek-a-boo fighters (myself included) rely on timing more so then other styles. Nothing will screw up your timing more than a hard jab. Foreman had long arms, and an extremely hard jab, so did Liston. Tyson always had trouble with bigger Guys with a decent Jab. Lewis, Douglas, Tucker, Bone crusher (not as much), Mitch Green,
Holmes would have beaten Tyson (in my view) as a young man. The Holmes who beat Ken Norton would have stopped Tyson. But that is another forum. I have to say I am always surprized at how people seem to think Tyson was unbeatable in his prime. He barely makes my top ten?

 

Yes but Tyson was nearly always fighting men of these size and in Bruno/Rudduck fought similar styled men who possibly hit as hard as Foreman.

Actually a PSI test taken in the 80s had Bruno scoring higher than Foreman and Tyson

 

I don't think the issue in this matchup would come down to who hit harder, but rather their styles. Foreman typically ate up fighters who fought in a crouching position or with a lower center of gravity. Sure, I think Tyson would be a very dangerous fight for George, and one that Mike could possibly win, but I'd have to give the edge to Foreman here for stylistic reasons.

 

The key points in Tyson's favour:

1. Tyson was near impossible to hit during his prime and when you missed you got hurt. Why is it assumed Foreman will land on Tyson?

2. Tyson is an excellent counter puncher when you missed. He's not thought of as a counter puncher but when you miss you get hurt

3. Tyson is 1 of the fastest HW fighters ever and would beat Foreman to the punch every time.

I used to think Foreman would smash Tyson coming in but Tyson didn't walk into punches or leave openings. Even in a toe to toe exchange Tyson's power, speed and combos may do more damage than Foreman's shots

 

He ate up Frazier who had a predictable defense and had a eat a punch 1 to land a punch style. Tyson's defense is much better so Foreman would not land easily like he did on Frazier and he got inside far faster than Frazier and hit harder

 

True, but I never said that it was going to be easy for Foreman to land on Tyson and I also acknowledge the fact that Mike could win it. I just wouldn't favor Tyson is all I'm saying.

 

Delete

 

Fair enough I didn't used to either but I changed stand point on this fight after looking more at Tyson's skill/defense/speed advantages.

The Lyle fight is also telling, Tyson would be allot better than Lyle at catching Foreman and would hit harder

 

Good stuff in this post. Systematic and feasible, even if I do disagree...

I don't see Frazier doing any better had he had a wider repertoire of punches. Frazier lost because of unchangable disadvantages: size and strength. Frazier lost because what Foreman brought -even in 76, after Zaire, when Foreman was not what he was before Ali emasculated him. Frazier could never be expected to last 7 rounds against Foreman.

You are correct, in my opinion, about Frazier having a second-tier chin. This doesn't mean he had a weak chin, but that he couldn't take big shots as well as the elite chin. You do however, put Tyson in the first tier. I would not, unless I created a higher category ("elite"). Now, don't mistake this. Tyson is a durable guy with a shock absorber neck. He took good shots from monster punchers like Bruno, like Ruddock. But when he got hurt, he didn't have first rate recuperative powers like say Holyfield or Marciano or Louis or Ali or Holmes. When Buster hurt him, he tended to stay hurt. He fought on, but the vulnerability was palpable. When Holyfield hurt him in the third round, he asserted that he couldn't even remember the rest of the fight after that.

Neither Bruno nor Ruddock convince me that Tyson would be able to stand with Foreman. Neither would even approach the aggression that Foreman brought.

Tyson had problems doing what he wanted with 6'4 Bonecrusher. 6'5 Tucker did better than most. 6'4 Douglas beat him. It is not insignificant that big, strong guys gave a 5'11 Tyson some degree of problems. Foreman was among them. Holyfield was demonstrably stronger than Tyson and his height gave him an advantage as well. Tyson would be forced to punch up from his comfort range, which was mid-range. This works far better against guys who are 6' than it does against bigger guys.

Again, I don't see the offensive variety making the difference here. It's a size and strength problem... and power and chin (as in Foreman's) problem.

See above. I think it is very likely that one of Foreman's big shots are going to connect early and Tyson is going to be hurt... and he is going to stay hurt. He may fight on, but Foreman won't be timid like Smith, scared like Bruno, or reliant on one shot thrown between 5 breaths like Ruddock. Lewis imposed his will and was actively punching. Foreman will do the same.

Smith was more unwilling than unable. Handspeed and power certainly help Tyson but it isn't enough. Foreman eats smaller aggressive guys. He eats them, even with his geritol, and Cooper and Qawi demonstrate this. Tyson is simply an amped up version of the style that is made for Foreman.

Let's say a guy loves spicy peppers. He eats Red Chilis and Bahamians like nothing. Would you bet that he couldn't handle the Habanero? I wouldn't. Why would you? He habitually eats spicy peppers!

We part ways even further here. If two punchers exchange blows, you favor the guy with the better chin and the bigger heart. That's Foreman. You can't discount a one foot reach advantage either. To be sure, Tyson was trained to get inside, but as things turned out, most of the guys he looked so good against were not eager to fight him so much as survive. Foreman had an underestimated jab and he was known to extend his arms at the smaller man to stop his rush or to put him off balance. Tyson is not going to push him back to overcome this.

I am not sure that Foreman will have to consider standing off or getting tentative against Tyson, because he will go right at him, move him backwards, and hurt him early.

--When that happens, the conclusion will be timely. Tyson's durability will help him survive, but Tyson can't be counted on to overcome real adversity like Chico Corrales... that just isn't in him. He'll go down eventually, heroically perhaps, but he is not going to win a contest of testicular fortitude with Foreman. No way.