Old Foreman vs Tyson?

I will disagree with you respectfully. After his first defeat, Tyson was very eager to prove that he was still the best.
Foreman from 1990/1991 was his best comeback version IMO. He had just destroyed Cooney and Rodriguez, and his speed was not that bad. But Tyson was just so much quicker and explosive that he would still have prevailed (and very clearly so).

 

You need to get a life son...

 

Tyson wouldnt manage to drop Foreman who weighed two tons. Neither Holyfield managed to drop him after almost 20 consecutive punches landed on him, nor others punchers he faced.

However Tyson by UD.

 

Something that gets sidelined in the conversation about Tyson being overrated or not is how hard he hit. He hit harder than most fighters in his era and hit hard enough to execute his gameplan. But Tyson did not have the sort of power that would be needed to quickly take down someone like Foreman. Whether Briggs hits harder than Tyson or not Foreman went a full 12 rounds with him at the very end and Briggs came closer to knocking out Lennox Lewis than he did to Foreman.

The key to beating old Foreman is outpointing him and in Foremans last 2-3 years Tyson has a much better chance at outpointing him than in the early 90s. But while everyone got close as champ George still won all his decisions except the Briggs fights most people felt he won. And I don't expect Tysons fight to go any different. A 5 ft 10 220+ Tyson was not built to win decisions where the other fighter got early rounds and wasn't put down. If we look at the Tony Tucker fight Tyson took most of the early rounds then Tucker tried coming back but Tysons lead was secure if he wasn't knocked down. Whether Tyson got the knockout or not he had to secure a substantial advantage early and that'd be hard against even the worst version of George.

People can point to Savarese say Tyson destroyed him and Foreman won a close decision thus Tyson beats Foreman of that period. But Tysons trying to destroy fighters and most of Tysons wins look like that on some level regardless of the quality of the victim he either got them or he didn't. That performance doesn't mean he can't do a better job going the distance hes 6 ft 5. Briggs was 6 ft 4. Schulz was a point fighter.