Do both guys come forward? Yes. Will both guys be hit? Yes. Is Tyson more powerful, with a more versatile ****nal? Based on evidence, yes. Does Tyson have a better chin? Based on evidence, yes. Did Frazier completely fall apart against Foreman? Yes. Is Tyson at least in the same caliber in terms of power as Foreman? Yes. Did Frazier ever beat a puncher of that caliber? No.
First off Frazier was a slow starter. Let's quit the revisionist ****. It was as well understood as anything there was in boxing at that time. It was just as well understood as Tyson being a fast starter...which he was. I loved Frazier and rooted for him in every bout of his I witnessed. That being said this is not a good matchup for Frazier. Tyson will jump all over Joe as soon as the bell rings. The only aspect of the game Frazier excels vs Tyson is heart and will to win but that will only take him so far. I don't see how Joe stays away from the bombs coming his way even for one round. He is facing a bigger and stronger physically hwt who is going to push him back immediately. IF somehow Joe survives the initial assault, gets into a groove and starts pushing Tyson back the fights over and Fraziers going to win. I do not see how this scenario could ever pan out. Tyson by a brutal ko within three rounds. I have even money it's over in the first round.
21 of his 26 KOS came within the first five rounds. This slow starter thing is an overblown myth. My ass. His head movement was superior to Tyson's What about, Bonavena, Mathis, and Manuel Ramos? They could bang And? :huh That Is certainly up for debate.
21 of his first 26 KOs came in the first five rounds. You forgot, chin, defense, resume, body attack, power, endurance. Frazier is taller and has a reach advantage over Tyson. Tyson won't be able to bully him the way Foreman did. So Tyson is doing to a peak Frazier what Foreman couldn't do to a past prime Frazier? :huh
He can punch coming in and he has one of the best uppercuts of all time. According to Holmes, everyone hits harder than Tyson. I'm going to take his opinion with a grain of salt, and assume that a fighter who needed to grind down cruiserweight opposition for several rounds does not punch harder than a man who scored highlight-reel KOs over much bigger fighters. Frazier was bounced around like a ragdoll by the only puncher he ever fought. Tyson didn't go down before taking a monstrous beating. It took Lewis, arguably a bigger puncher than Foreman 8 rounds to KO the shell of Tyson. Getting up doesn't really matter when you're pretty much out on your feet and sent flying again. Only a moron can genuinely believe this. I guess Foremans wide, glancing blows are much harder than Tysons laster fast, accurate bombs, huh?
So could Frazier Which is absolutely the worst punch to through against a hooker. Holmes has been in the ring with both men. He said Frazier hit harder. We have you, a tysonite saying otherwise. Who are we to believe? Anybody hit with those shots is going down. The question is who's getting up? :think How about you rewatch Foreman-Frazier then come back and tell me who's the hardest puncher. This actually proves my point. You're right. Anybody who believes Foreman hits harder than Tyson has to be a moron. atsch
Tyson is going to be hitting much harder though. Tell that to Foreman. Bonecrusher Smith was trained by Frazier and fought Tyson. He picked Tyson to KO him early. See, I can do it too. Just because a fighter says something, doesn't mean it's true. Especially if the fighter in question is completely biased like Holmes. Holmes said Norton hit MUCH harder than Tyson. You think this is true? Opinionated drivel. It's too close to call. No it doesn't. Please. Tyson was a phenom. His power was incredible. There's no reason to think Foreman hit drastically harder, especially since Tyson was way faster with more polished technique.
Then again, you also think that Ruddock hit harder than Liston and Foreman, so watching film is probably pointless.
There's no evidence that Tyson had a better chin than Frazier. There's no evidence that Tyson hit harder than Frazier, nevermind hitting as hard as Foreman. Also : Frazier beat better fighters than Tyson beat. Tyson lost to worse fighters than the ones Frazier lost to. You have to make huge leaps of faith and live with a lot of make-believe stuff in your head to reckon Tyson proved himself more in his career than Frazier did in his. Like believing wins over Berbick and Spinks etc. are somehow better than beating up Muhammad Ali .... or that getting beaten up and KO'd by Douglas was not as bad as getting beaten up and destroyed by Foreman.
Tyson hit harder than Frazier for sure. Tyson has true ko power in his right hand that Joe lacked as a very start. Tyson had that uppercut that knocked hwts down with singular punches. I do not know of anyone really knowledgeable in the fight game that would argue this point. I despised Tyson BTW but we need to be honest here. Joe was a more wear them down type fighter rather than a one punch guy. Tyson was more along the lines of Dempsey more of an explosive puncher
I don't need to make huge leaps of fate to believe that Tyson hit harder than Frazier. Nor do I need to make huge leaps of fate to believe that Tyson who took monstrous punishment in each of his losses had a better chin than Frazier who was knocked around the ring by the only big puncher he ever fought. The only guys making a leap of faith here are the ones thinking that a win over Muhammad Ali suddenly makes you capable of beating any fighter, even if the said fighter is a nightmare in terms of style. Norton beat Ali too, and looked better in the rematches, but nobody gives him a shot against Tyson, because it's OBVIOUS that a weak-chinned, come forward pressure fighter CAN'T win over a big puncher with a better chin. But when it comes to Frazier, it's suddenly a completely different tune.
