Mike Tyson vs Joe Frazier

OK.
And similarly Frazier was not at his "usual best" in the 1st Bonavena fight, or against Foreman, Bugner, or Ali 2 & 3.

 

[/quote]

If you're going to compare these fighters, then you have to make the comparison when both men were at their best. A lot of people claim that Joe was past it by the age of 29 against Foreman. I actually agree with this claim. Tyson by the age of 23, was also past it, but for different reasons. Everyone from his original team, who were also like family to him was out of the picture. Cus' D Amato was dead.. Jim Jacobs was dead. His mother was dead. Kevin Rooney was gone. Bill Cayton was gone. He had recently gone through a horrible divorce with Robin Givens, and was reported to be suicidal at the time. Don King hired trainers and managers who a lot of experts felt were less than compitent. This became evident during the Douglas fight, when they used a disolved bag of water to reduce swelling over Mike's eye, rather than using an inswell device. Angelo Dundee and Gil Clancey were both interviewed some time later, to give their opinions on the fight. Both of them said that this was the worst display of corner work they had seen in their 50 years in the game.

I have often heard you make references to the Douglas loss, and how Tyson " got his ass kicked, " as you so often like to point out. Did you see this fight? And if so, have you compared Tyson's level of activity to that of his previous or later fights? Frankly, I thought Tyson was extremely sluggish and appearing to be unmotivated. I never saw him get off to such a slow start. People including yourself have said " it's because he couldn't fight back, cause' someone stood up to him" Tony Tucker, Tony Tubbs, Frank Bruno and Razor Ruddock, all started off early standing up to Tyson, and in fact were better fighters than Douglas, yet Mike wound up beating them. Tyson vs Douglas was not even remotely a clear indication of what types of fighters these guys were. It was a rare instance in which one man showed up giving his best performance, while the other gave his absolute worst.

Joe Frazier Won the heavyweight title at age 25, by beating ex-middleweight Jimmy Ellis, who hadn't fought in 17 months. Tyson Won his first of three titles at age 20, against a full fledged heavyweight in Trevor Berbick. Trevor was coming off the best win of his career against previously unbeaten Pinklon Thomas. Tyson would also beat 35-0 Tony Tucker, and James Smith ( both were big heavyweights ) for the other versions of the title. Tyson had good career wins against Spinks, Thomas, Biggs, Ruddock, and numerous others. Frazier's biggest career win was against Ali, which was indeed a legacy fight. Most people however, fail to acknlowledge that Ali had only fought twice in nearly four years. Frazier had incredible upper body movement, but personally, I think that his bobbing and weaving against an under 6 ft opponent, would get him in more trouble than it would do good. I see him catching a lot of hooks and uppers from Mike. What's more, Tyson had handled bigger stronger fighters such as Bruno, Ruddock, Tucker, and smith, meaning that he would not be so easily over powered by a smaller Frazier as you have already claimed..... Although Tyson had the tendency to crumble in some of his later fights, this was not the case between 1985-1989. In addition, most of these issues didn't come until the later rounds of the fight. Frazier's chances of surviving Tyson's power and onsloughts for 8-10 rounds are remote...

 

I remember that Dundee`s team in Foreman-Stewart even go far away in such nomination

 

????????

 

I actually think Frazier would win in a war. Frazier is one of the few fighters to put Tyson on the backfoot where he was uncomfortable also joe has the better cardio and despite being hurt or even knocked down he won't loose heart unlike Tyson. Frazier KO 10.

 

I am just remembered as Foreman corner ignored his haematomas and start to work when Big looked as chinese beekeeper

 

Frankly,

I think his corner did the best that they could given the circumstances. George was 44 years old, and taking a lot of shots froma very hard hitter. He had multiple cuts, and was bleeding everywhere. Although George looked atrocious, Dundee and his men kept him in the fight, resulting in Foreman taking a respectable decision.

 

Hmm, maybe I dont remember correct but Foreman corner doesnt use enswell etc at first few round altough George clearly need in such help. It is well known that enswell (or other cold and preferable solid materials) effective if used after each rounds where boxer take some beating, due to possible latent periods of haemotomas developing. IMO

 

Angelo Dundee has worked hundreds of corners, and with some of the greatest fighters of all time. Whatever, he did with George against Alex Stewart, I'm sure he had good reason for it....

 

Along with a misleading "Frazier was a slow starter" mantra, a lot of people are citing Tyson's speed as a key factor in this outcome. FOTC Joe was hardly a slow-poke. His short jarring uppercuts and hooks inside couldn't always reach Foreman, but Mike wasn't George. Although at the end of the line in the Foreman rematch, a completely shot Frazier was still able to survive in fine shape, beyond the opening rounds, up until the fatal fifth. Joe missed some hooks in that encounter because George was too far away. Mike would have no choice but to get within Joe's range to land his own vaunted artillery. If Tyson did have a handspeed advantage on Frazier, it might be offset by Joe delivering shorter punches. Smoke's hook wouldn't have to travel as far as Tyson's cross, which Joe would probably be inside of anyway. Frazier's hook was a low risk weapon which he could safely use to quickly find the range on Mike. Whenever Tyson tried his uppercut, he'd expose himself to Joe's meal ticket. With Joe's cross armed defense, his right would be positioned to block Mike's uppercuts.

Like Frazier, Tyson's a converted southpaw, but the maxim against hooking with a hooker favors Joe.

Many of you are mentioning the belief that Tyson had superior physical strength.

In Joe's final match, he drew with weight trained muscleman Jumbo Cummings. Even though Frazier was rusty, badly overweight, and over ten years past peak, Cummings couldn't use his physical strength and size to decisively crush Smoke. If Floyd couldn't do it then, what would FOTC Frazier have done to Cummings? Bonavena was also strong as an ox, yet Joe had him retreating by the end of their 15 rounder. Even if Tyson was as strong as Foreman, he'd still have to get within Joe's punching range to try bulling him backwards. Mike simply didn't have the height or arm length needed to neutralize Joe's hook.

In Frazier's rematch with Quarry, Joe demonstrated fine use of his right, and showed he was perfectly capable of boxing well with somebody his own size. Against Jerry in 1974, Smoke actually had a reach advantage, and on Futch's instructions he used it, along with his unexpected right. Quarry was favored to win their second bout, but Joe screwed him up a bit with his change in tactics. Against Tyson, Joe would be facing a shorter opponent with a shorter reach. Would Futch have Joe pull a Quarry II with Mike?

Don't forget that Quarry blew out Bodell and Shavers in one, and tried to get the jump on Joe in their 1969 tussle. There's no guarantee Mike would succeed where Jerry failed. Neither was Mike a perfect finisher, although a very good one.

Bonecrusher Smith proved that peak Tyson could be rocked, and would have kayoed Mike as he did Bruno, if he'd gotten himself uncorked in time.

 

very similar styles
for me either tyson catches him early or he gets knocked out later.
tyson looked the part against a lot of guys but struggled when he fought the best around and frazier was a class act.

 

an thats one hell of an avatar mr magoo

 

Although Frazier was well past his prime, Jumbo Cummings was hardly world class. One of Floyd's limiting factors, is that he couldn't finish people when he had them in trouble, as was evident in the Frank Bruno fight among others. He possesed tremendous strength, but couldn't use it to the best of his ability..

 

A lot of people here are picking Tyson to win by early blowout on the asumption that any big puncher who is a fast starter will take Frazier out before he warms up to his task.

I do not think that this is necisarily the case as it hangs on a number of asumptions.

A lot of people have made tha analogy of Foreman. Big George was able to destroy Frazier as decisively as he did in part because he wasshopworn but more crucialy because he had a large reach advantage and could therfore push Frazier back to create punching room working within a substantial safety zone.

"That left hook he threw at me was like a bulet pinging past my head"

George Foreman

If George had a 71" reach then it would have been like a lot of bulets pinging into his head.

I also challenge the asumption that Frazier was necisarily a slow starter. I could point to footage where this is clearly not the case.

The pivotal question is how Tyson would cope with Fraziers infighting ability.

Tyson operated as a mid range fighter and always had problems when sombody clinched him on the inside. Say Frazier fighting out of a crouch starts working tysons body on the inside. I can se a situation where Tyson is having trouble landing and get's backed up. Tyson never really fought anybody with quite this style and it is hard to say how well he would cope with it.

 

Tyson had very good finishing skills but he did not always finish off hurt fighters. He had Frank Bruno hurt within 10 seconds of their first fight, the very same first round Bruno comes back to wobble him, and lasts until the 5th.
Pinklon Thomas, another guy who was battered in the opening round, actually got back into it and lasted until the 6th. Razor Ruddock, same thing, got hurt or decked early and kept getting back into the fight. These guys were all upright lumbering statues.

I'm not convinced Tyson will even have Frazier is any real difficulty before Frazier has imposed himself, but I'm conceding that Tyson might have some success in the first round or two, and possibly have Frazier stunned or floored.

Yes. The earliest defeat he suffered was against Foreman, where he got up 6 times and didn't look close to being down for a "10" count, and he's willing to fight on. That's Frazier at his absolute worst, getting battered, and proving his toughness. And no way can Tyson replicate that kind of showing against Frazier.
Truth is, Tyson has none of the strengths that allowed Foreman to dominate Frazier, and I doubt Tyson could have lasted out of the first round against a young Foreman.

I'm not saying Frazier wouldn't get hit. I'm not saying he'd go down and be badly hurt either. I'm not convinced Tyson's style would even allow him to do his usual first round stuff. I think Frazier might just crowd Tyson from the opening bell.
I'm emphasizing that Tyson would get hit too, and I doubt he could take it.
Frazier was stopped only by Foreman and by Ali in that war in Manila. He finished on his feet twice against Foreman and was pulled out by his corner against Ali.
Tyson would never have been able to cope with what Ali dished out in Manila or with Foreman's onslaught.

Frazier proved he was extremely hard to stop. He was tougher than Tyson. I'm conceding that Tyson was very powerful and capable of hurting Frazier, but I know Frazier was very powerful and capable of hurting Tyson too. Who takes punishment better and fights back better when hurt ? The answer is obviously Frazier.

No, he's going to put Tyson into his shell, have Tyson fighting timid, and grind his way through Tyson. Tyson lasts 4 - 9 rounds, IMO, before he's beaten into submission.