Mike Tyson Vs. George Foreman

I think George's punching power was somewhat overrated, but he still left Ali urinating blood for three days. His physical strength on the other hand, is only paralelled by Jim Jeffries among ATG HW boxers. How's Tyson going to evade being manhandled like a rag doll by an adversary who never took a backwards step against Holyfield? Bear in mind, that the immediate trigger which set off Tyson's earbiting episode was a powerful shove backwards by Evander. It was in response to that act of physical dominance that Tyson angrily beckoned Holyfield to "come on!," right before tearing in to take out that chunk of Holy's flesh. If Evander could push Mike around with that level of ease, what's going to happen if he confronts Foreman? How's somebody with Tyson's height and reach going to win a retreating battle?

 

I think this thread tells its own story. Quality posters like StoneHands, JT, Chris P and Duo, etc favour Foreman, mongs like I Am Nobody and Senya, who are quite likely two of the three lowest rated posters that regularly appear in the Classic Section (the other being Bill) go with Tyson.

 

Abused, but won. Therein lies the difference.

 

Or people who have more than a water-biscuit sized knowledge and think more logically than those who thinks Tyson walks on water, and are sold by that video that did the rounds in the early 90s. Great puncher, tiny little heart, about the same size as a salted peanut (but a bit less salty).

 

ATG puncher not ATG heart. That's why he loses. It's not rocket science.

 

You do need heart if you're going to ever rate as the best, which he never is- unless by his dumb gormless embarrassing knicker-wetting fans, who endlessly watch the Sammy Scaff fight saying "Wow".

 

He even avoided the fat old version of Foreman. Looks like Mike took on the 1990s mantle of:

This content is protected

 

"Mallard" Mike Tyson. It is rather catchy.

 

Uh MDWC, would that water Mike would be walking on against George happen to be his own pee?

 

Interesting fight. I favour Foreman to win, but he'd have his hands full. While Foreman recieves credit for having a solid jab, it was not a particularly blinding. Certainly nothing like the jolting the jab of Holmes and Ali. Foreman did have a heavy jab, the kind which sends opponents back a few steps. I'm not too sure his left hand had the authority to keep Tyson under control from distance. His clubbing hooks and booming right hands would the key punches from long range.

Foreman's uppercut was an awesome weapon inside, just ask Frazier. He also had the strength to force Tyson back and make him ineffective. He'd no doubt use the same tactics as Holyfield did when he fought Tyson the first time. Tyson was a bully at his very best, but Foreman probably punches harder than anyone Tyson has shared a ring with, including Lewis.

Foreman TKO10

 

By the way, did you realize that mallards feed on toads?

 

No, my friend, ducks cannot live on bread alone!

 

It is silly to compare Muhammad Ali and Mike Tyson when it one says that the two would similarly beat George Foreman to the punch with superior handspeed. While Tyson did have the handspeed - he did not have the 82" reach of Muhammad Ali that allowed Ali to stand at a safe distance from Foreman and land the right hand lead.

I'm not sure how Mike Tyson would react when he gets hurt from George Foreman. He showed heart in Tokyo - yes. No one questions his chin - his chin alone is what let him take hard punches from Ruddock and come right back. I'm not saying that he doesn't have heart (he does) but I'm not sure if he has the heart of say Arthuro Gatti or Evander Holyfield to fight back hard when he is hurt. This becomes very important when expecting Mike Tyson to remain effective once Foreman tags him with a hammerlike uppercut.

Very true that George Foreman's shoving of Mike Tyson would be counter productive. As to being able to push around Tyson - the bottom line is that you could do it easily. However, I'd like to explain and say that Tyson was just passive with this regard - he let himself get pushed around and move around - he let himself easily get clinched and you see almost 0 effort to undo any of that. It was more about Tyson being passive (I don't know why) than about him not having the strength to resist. The only time I remember an inconsistency is when Tyson pushes around Razor Ruddock (and Ruddock was a strong guy).

He bit Holyfield's ears out of frustration for being outboxed, outfoxed, and headbutted repeatedly - the shoving was marginal in comparison to those three. In any case, pushing around and such isn't very important for me - Tyson's best asset would be pouncing on Foreman with his superior speed from midrange - remember - Tyson had such speed that Holyfield was almost helpless to stop Tyson in round 1 of fight 1 - watch it again on youtube and observe the right hand leads land even before Holyfield sees them (granted, Holy was also 34 years old at the time).

Conventional wisdom says to pick Foreman and I'll go by that. Don't expect me to put money though. It would be an interesting fight to see and I even think Tyson would win round 1.

 

As for avoiding Foreman - you should keep your risk / reward ratio as low as possible. In the case of Foreman - the ratio was low. If anyone knows something about styles and boxings and match ups - it is Tyson. I think he knew beforehand that Holyfield and Lewis were either going to win or were very dangerous - he knowingly took that when seeing a loss. So it isn't that he is trying to avoid fights where he knows he has little chance (it is the ratio that counts - for Holy the ratio was higher as he expected Holy to be washed up, for Lewis the reward was a necessity (not IMO - just go to debter's prison or bankrupt and go to Switzerland).

 

easy to call someone an idiot on the computer isn't it legend? just like your boy tyson no balls, no brains.get a life.