Prime Tyson v Prime Frazier

Before people get all upset about legends not receiving their rightful dues, let's try and remember that some of these matchups have nothing to do with legacy. They have nothing to do with who rates higher on this person's all time list or is more highly thought of by such factions as the ring magazine.

This matchup is about styles and one man's ability to overcome both the stylisitic and physical attributes of the other. Personally, I think think this fight is a mismatch. Anytime you have a fast starting, one-punch KO artist going up against a slow starting guy with a suspect chin and the tendency to need many rounds to wear down his foe, its a bad situation for the latter. Yes, I realize that the analysis of this match cannot be simplified to what I just described, but I think it outlines the general gist of what we're looking at here. Frazier was anialated within 5 rounds or less on two occasions in his career by a big puncher, while being either floored or outpointed in the early rounds on a few others. Tyson has never been taken out early and was usually dominant in the first half of a fight. Additionally, I see no way that these guys avoid getting tagged by the other. They were two men who fought similar styles where they lowered their center of gravity and exchanged shots at a relatively close range. We can talk all we want about Frazier's picture perfect left, Balboa like will, and off the charts upper body movement... But, I don't think its the right stuff for this fight. Tyson's chin survived the artillary of Frank Bruno, Razor Ruddock, James Smith, and a few others during the early rounds of a fight... I don't think he'd need to take Joe's pressure for too long, and I sure as hell don't think Joe can take his for any great length of time either.

 

magoo, your arguments are reasonable but this is prime v prime and Frazier wasn't in his prime when fighting Foreman so I wouldnt recall that example. Also I think that "slow starter" is not exactly correct with Frazier. He was better as the rounds go by, but it doesn't mean that he started standing stiff or sluggish slow (in prime) and easy to hit. Just because he was so good in later rounds, many consider him as a typical slow starter, but who could match Frazier's tempo when he was at his best? Only Marciano I suppose...

 

While being slightly past his best, Joe Frazier was still 29 years of age and the undefeated reigning champion. George Foreman as far as anyone was concerned at the time was nobody, and he dispatched Frazier more than convincingly. I know that some people here have tried to make relentless never ending arguments about Frazier being " completely shot ", but I think that's taking things a bit too far in the other direction. Yes, I acknoweldge that he was declining but there is a wide spectrum that lies inbetween being in the peak of one's prime and being totally washed up. Furthermore, Frazier showed vulnerability in the early rounds of fights consistantly throughout his career. He was being outboxed early in both of his matches against Jerrry Quarry and in his first match against Jimmy Ellis. He was also floored twice by Oscar Bonavena. To clearify, this WAS a peak Frazier. Tyson is simply all wrong for him in my opinion.

 

I didn't said that Frazier was shot, in my opinion people to often don't realise that there are points in career between being "prime" and "shot". It isn't about the age, some fighters start to decline being 24, some 30 and some 35, it's more about the punishment taken in the ring.

As I have learned, Foreman wasn't nobody at that time. 37-0-0 with 34 KO's and was in The Ring's top 3 since 1970

If we are talking abut prime Tyson prime Frazier matchup, we cant use Foreman argument because:

- Frazier wasn't at his best, the first Ali fight cost him a lot of health
- style make fights, and Foreman's style and physical attributes are much more dangerous for Frazier than Tyson's

Peak Frazier was as I belive in Ellis (I wouldn't say that Joe was outboxed here, Jimmy was almost murdered here), Foster and Ali I fights

 

205.5 lbs against 214 lbs? Frazier was not even close to the form he showed from 1967 - 1970. The evidence was clear in the Daniels and Stander fights.

Tyson wouldn't be able to hit prime Frazier as cleanly, especially when Ali, who's hands are much faster had trouble hitting FOTC Joe Frazier, cleanly. I will agree that Frazier is vulnerable in the early rounds, probably because of his reckless, relentless pressure to get inside. Quicker hands can catch Frazier, of which Tyson probably can, but he's not landing with the same frequency as Ali.

I don't think prime Frazier gets enough credit in head to head matches against the other heavyweight champions. I put 1967 - 1970 Frazier against any heavyweight in history, and none of them would have an easy fight with Frazier. Not Foreman, not Liston, not Tyson or Lennox Lewis, who are usually heralded as the biggest punching heavyweight champions in history.

 

tyson by KO

 

Easy time or not, Tyson would beat Frazier and I'm inclined to thinking that it would be sooner rather than later. Also, if you think that weighing a 9 lbs less and being maybe 2 years younger would have made him a more formidable opponent for Foreman, then go with it........ Lets not forget that a late 60's Frazier was getting decked by Bonavena and was outboxed in the early rounds by Quarry and Ellis. Personally I think he'd be a very hittable target for Tyson.

 

In my opinion Frazier had clearly lost some of the fire he had before the first fight against Ali by the time he fought Foreman. He was not doing as much work in the gym and there were reports of him having the worst of some sparring sessions. Lets not forget the numerous injuries especially to his back that he had suffered.

In an interview before the Ali fight he states that Ali is his final goal and that he might retire when he wins:

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1084610/index.htm

I also don't think he was being "outboxed" by Quarry and Ellis. The first round against Quarry was tough but he gave as good as he got. By the second round he was already in control.

The fight against Bonavena was Frazier's 12th as a professional and he hadn't yet adopted the bobbing and weaving defense that he used later on. In the rematch he took Bonavena's best and pressured him for 15 rounds.

It's a bit silly to me that Tyson gets a pass for being past his peak at 24 years of age but for Frazier no such thing could happen.

Frazier in 1968:

This content is protected

Frazier in 1973:

This content is protected

 

Strength? How do you know?

In my opinion Frazier would bully Tyson and Mike doesn't handle that well. Combined with Frazier's superior head movement, will carry him into the later rounds. Frazier will get dropped early maybe twice, but he will get up.

 

Good post. If excuses are being made for Tyson's loss to Douglas (and they certainly are) double the amount should be done for Frazier's loss to Foreman.

The popular argument is "that Tyson was a sharper, better and more or less as powerful a puncher as Foreman, so he would KO him at least as quickly". Well, using Tyson's loss to Douglas in the same way would mean that guys like Ali and Holmes would outbox him without even breaking a sweat. So one should be careful with such comparisons.

 

i thonk tyson bombs him out early

but on a sidenote tyson really respected frazier and once said

when joe was cooking, joe WAS cooking

 

Thank you Jaffay.

I've argued this all along in defense of Joe Frazier, prime vs prime against any heavyweight champion or heavyweight contender. I'm not disputing the logic saying the first four rounds are a nightmare for Frazier against Tyson. In fact, some may argue that Tyson could bomb Frazier out earlier than what Foreman did, based on the premise that Tyson was a faster, two fisted starter than Foreman. I don't argue with that statement either.

Frazier's 1973 title defense against Foreman is a bad example of trying to justify the arguments that suggest Frazier gets blown out by every other big puncher, notably Liston, Lyle, Shavers, Mac Foster, Tyson and Lennox Lewis. Just like Douglas never fought the very best Mike Tyson, the same statement can be said that Foreman never fought the very best version of Frazier. Anyone who denies that should revisit Frazier's career from the late 1960's and watch his fights. It's obvious when compared to the speed of Ali, any other heavyweight is going to look slow.

Tyson, Foreman, Liston, Lyle, Shavers, Mac Foster, Lennox Lewis and all the heavyweight big punchers would be very hard pressed to KO the late 1960s version of Joe Frazier. I'll give this version of Frazier more than a punchers chance against any of the above mentioned because of his superior head movement, determination, endurance, pressure, pace and body attack.

Tyson may have quicker hands and one of the best right hands in heavyweight history, but Frazier's right was a solid punch as well. Ask, Ali, Quarry, Joe Bugner and Jimmy Ellis about Frazier's right hand, which some on this forum are quick to say that it doesn't even qualify as a heavyweight punch.

Prime Tyson probably has prime Frazier on the canvas once or twice within the first four rounds, but he's not stopping prime Frazier. Joe's body work would take over the fight after round five and I'd bet that some of the best trading action would happen throughout rounds 5 - 7. Who get's the better of the other is up to debate. What I will say is that Frazier is stronger than Tyson in these rounds, and the only factor that keeps Tyson in the fight at this time is his power.