Most likely to win in 100 tries: Spinks v Tyson, Patterson v Liston, Frazier v Foreman?

Well Frazier went 2 rounds the first time and 5 the second, but he might go longer but he'd still lose, he's all wrong for Big George.

 

If this was all of them fighting in their prime, I would say Frazier would be the man to win most often. He would have opportunities to catch and hurt Big George. I just can't see Spinks or Paterson ever being able to withstand their respective opponent's onslaughts other than on rare occasions.

 

Maybe Frazier since he could move better & land while coming in before 1972.
You could make a case for Spinks because his legs were bad then, & in other fights he might be able to control his fear.

Many folks have been harassed or semi-traumatized by a poster who constantly insults people, calls them liars & trolls, & is deeply immature with horrible grammar. MoneytheMan.

So you may want to choose a less similar username lest you be mistaken for him.

 

Excellent thread topic!

I don't think anyone at world-class level loses 100 times to the same opponent. So all of them, but if I had to guess, I'd say Frazier picks up the most wins out of the three, followed by Patterson, and lastly Spinks.

 

I don't see Frazier hurting Foreman. I don't think Frazier had that one punch power. Liston would always beat Patterson because Patterson was timid. Spinks would always lose to Tyson because of fear. Frazier didn't fear Foreman but he would always lose. I couldn't imagine Patterson ever beating Liston, Spinks ever beating Tyson or Frazier ever beating Foreman.

 

Liston had to bow out of the first Ali fight with a shoulder injury, and already wasn't a spring chicken. In 100 fights, I could see him getting a freak shoulder injury in one of them. Although it would have to be in the first round (probably as a result of trying to hit Patterson's elusive head.) Or maybe Patterson is lucky enough to (re)break Liston's jaw. On the other hand, Patterson/Liston is the only fight where the experiment was re-run with an identical result. So it has the strongest case out of the three for not being a fluke. Dunno. That one's tricky.

Joe has the best chance of the three of conjuring a nasty enough punch to hurt Foreman and back him off / KD him / KO him, assuming Frazier fights the perfect fight and Foreman gets unlucky. So if you want a conventional victory (maybe supported by a freak injury as well), Frazier's your guy.

 

Im going to think outside the box for a moment and say that if Michael Spinks actually TRIED to beat Tyson he might get a win or two in a 100 attempts

 

Patterson and Spinks were afraid. Frazier didn't know the meaning of the word. I therefore give him the best shot of beating his nemesis. Maybe he lands an early perfect left hook.

 

I will add that Frazier does not have to land a perfect single shot.
He had both a greater work rate than Big George & better endurance, if he can get to the later rounds he could take a decision or a TKO.
If it was both a referee that enforced the rules re: shoving & 1967-1971, Frazier might win I dunno 25 out of 100 matches with Foreman?

 

Frazier would win at 5 to 10 times out of 100. Just by getting into the mid to late rounds which would happen if they fought that many times.

 

Agreed. I actually give him a much better chance than that.

 

Well, a beyond washed up Frazier went 5 with changed tactics...so a prime one might get the W under similar circumstances.

 

Excellent post. With the exception of Peralta, he also lasted longer than anyone Foreman beat in his first career, but was also the only one of them to answer the 5th round without having been dropped. I think that gets overlooked.

 

Yes, but we have to take it into consideration in this scenario as is his biggest crutch. Or else, we could make the same argument for Floyd.