Prime Mike Tyson ('88.) VS Prime George Foreman ('73.)

I'm waiting for moneytheclown to show up.

 

This video is fun to watch, but add very little to other key factors on
why those fighters were successful and what strength and weaknesses
they may have over each . This is why highlight video's are just what they
are, "Highlights".
The biggest example is Foreman , this video captures his punching
power, but fail to demonstrate how he got the power there, and more
importantly how that would effect a hypothetical match-up against
Tyson.
In the video Tyson looks sharper, and faster with better combinations etc
and overall better skill.
But the tactics to this match -up are about the same tactics Foreman used
against Frazier and Norton.
Foreman stops Tyson in his tracks by using his biggest advantages.
His size, and great strength(Probably the strongest heavyweight champ in history)
Foreman would nullify what Tyson did better by simply pushing him off balance
anytime he tried to set his feet and attack.
Foreman also would carry the Bigger Bully advantages in the ring.
Look at all of Tyson's fights. There isn't one he wasn't favored to
win big in his prime. That tells you what most of the betting experts thought
of his competition. (Same thing with Mayweather Jr.s "competition)"
Vegas doesn't give away money on whims.
Would Tyson be favored if the fighter facing him is Foreman?
Doubtful. If he was it would be by the slimmest of margins.
Foreman does what he does, keep Tyson off balance by pushing,
and pulling him. Eventually one of those uppercuts would land cleanly
Hurt Tyson badly. Foreman stops him with in 10rds.
Also, there are 3 fighters I believe could force Tyson to self doubt.
Liston, Foreman and ALI. Once a fighter beats the opponents mind,
everything else would be easy.

 

Can't wait for this epic clash of the Tysonistas and the Foreman Grillers.

 

This thread is nowhere until moneytheclown and his bozo henchmen show up.

 

Is he for or against Tyson? Because that's what this comes down to.

Both these guys have some mythical status amongst their supporters and in my opinion, while they're ATGs, they are also wildly overrated by their particular fanbase. Foreman has the "oh yeah, he carried bulls bareback to school in winter crowd" and Tyson has the "omg he'd kill people in the ring, he was a savage' crowd.

This thread could get interesting. Where's Sangria at?

 

Lmao.

Funny thing is, George literally said he needed grown up men to help him lift up the calf and only held it up in the air. No walking around or lifting. The original photo was supposed to be staged, but the supporting structure broke, so let's give credit where credit is due — he did hold the beast on his arms once it was in there.

 

On topic: Foreman, and it's one of the worst matchups Mike can get himself into.

 

OK I'll throw my 2c into this.

I used to favour Foreman heavily when I first used to internally debate this fight, mainly for the fact that he was the bigger, stronger man (there I said it) and he wanted to slug and Tyson was the little guy playing his game. He's got the chin, the size, and he hits as hard if not harder than Tyson.

I've come to believe that this fight is closer to 50-50, though.

There is such a thing as speed and accuracy, and that's all on Tyson's side. I also believe that Tyson's defence at his best would be more effective that it seems at first glance against Foreman. There's also the fact that Foreman lost twice by gassing out and Tyson, though he did slow down in the later rounds, was dangerous late as well. Finally, Tyson's chin shouldn't be discounted either - it was excellent. The dude could take a licking and keep on ticking.

So I recognize the arguments for both fighters and I think that this is one of those matchups that ought to be run a couple of times in real life to really get the feel for it. Neither of them really fought a guy like the other in my opinion*.

*Tyson is not Frazier

 

This is a 50-50 match up as Tyson is no way Frazier and head superior defense and foot and hand speed and definitely hit harder than Joe. Most people including Joe Frazier believed any swarmer would be destroyed by Foreman, thatś true for the most part but Tyson was not at all typical. Joe also thought he himself would have no problem with Mike.......love Joe, but he was nuts on that one.

 

1973 George Foreman was a clone of Charles Sonny Liston, his idol. Foreman was a Gang Leader in the streets of Houston, Texas, he did not have a Cus D Amato as his father like mentor. Like Liston, George had bad the streets as his mentors, Liston had Blinky Palermo and Frank Costello, Foreman had the streets. In 1973 George Foreman was a mean spirited scowling man that intimidated his opponents with size and a homicidal stare. he would shove off his smaller opponents, smothering them with a tornado like punches that smothered you into oblivion, the force of the blows was like an Earthquake, if an opponent survived past round 5 his chances were great. George had two great trainers, Archie Moore and D. Sadler. He wanted to make Sonny proud wherever Sonny was.

 

Talented slick Boxers, and Adaptable fighters were bad news for Foreman. George was bad news for talented Swarmers and other Sluggers. So the question becomes was Tyson a talented slick Boxer or Adaptable fighter? Or was he a talented Swarmer or Slugger, or even a combination of both? I'm going with the latter and picking George to win.

 

Foreman used to rob people with the help of his friends, Foreman even stated him and his friends would hold people down and Rob them then run, Foreman was no Liston, Rahman, Tyson or even a Pinklon Thomas when it came to the streets.

 

Young Foreman, especially prior to losing to Ali, was a swarmer-slugger. Old Foreman didn't fight like that.