Two of the hardest hittin fighters EVER in a fight where they were both at their very peak. This is obviously as unprovable as any other H2H comparison and entirely unobjective. Who do you think would have won?
I always like Tyson in this one.Prime Tyson wasnt your average swarmer.Forman hits harder but he couldnt deliver anywhere near as fast.I like Tyson
I think that Foreman being able to get off the deck and win, even in his first career, is an important part of this fight. I'd favor George, all said.
Stylistically, it's an interesting fight when you think about Big George's enormous strength/power and uppercut combined with Tyson's bob and weave style.
Tyson by KO, probably within 5 if we're talking about the best Tyson. Just based on styles, not greatness. I actually think Tyson is a bad matchup for George, instead of the other way around as most seem to believe. Foreman was just too crude IMO. Tyson's bob, weave, and counter with power style would be useful against Foreman's wide, telegraphed bombs and allow him to land often early on. I don't think Foreman had the durability to withstand it. Not then anyway.
Couldn't really of put it better myself. I just feel Tyson's bob and weave style and ability to land blistering combinations will be the difference.
Both could hit. Foreman may have hit harder than Tyson. Tyson had exlient defense while Foreman's was unimpresive. I'll take the guy who gets hit less in this match up Tyson by ko 6-9. I think the older version of Foreman who had a better defense might have done better against a prime Tyson but I would still take Tyson in this match up probbly a 9-3 decision.