Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by sppedboy22, Jul 9, 2020.
The tyson that holyfield faced was NOT prime tyson
It wasn't prime Holyfield either and Foreman was far stronger than Holyfield anyway. It's not like Tyson got weaker, i actually think he gained muscle mass coming out of prison. Holyfield pushed him around.
thats real impressive being pushed around huh you keep saying it
the dude is slow I exposed that dumb quote of mike is a so called bad matchup to a slow George and he had no response never seen mike get hit often by a slow puncher but George could do it even though he would be one of the slowest yea that makes sense weirdo
but like his favorite phrase is holyfield did it I think it's meant to say mike was pushed around all day which he wasnt nobody ever pushed mike all day like joe got treated by George so really dumb to pretend like he did
holy outboxed mike and pushed him sometime
George wouldnt be able to push mike all day just like I said sau said he would have to fight like holy to push mike and pushing would still get him countered cause was slow
You're wrong because you don't understand the purpose of the pushing and manhandling. Pushing alone doesn't win you fights because you don't score pushing only punches right. But Foreman manhandled his opponents with purpose, he'd use collar ties, post with the jab, frame off his opponents, manipulate their guards, all to make his often faster opponents more vulnerable. He was too slow to simply chase them down or beat them to the punch, so he used his size and strength to move them into positions where he could hit them with his full power and also to disrupt their own offence.
Foreman learned these techniques off of Liston who he sparred with extensively during the early part of his career. These very techniques were used by Liston to destroy the much faster and more explosive Patterson and guess what Patterson was trained by Cus D'Amato the trainer for Tyson.
Foreman/Tyson would be a repeat of the same techniques used in Liston/Patterson only difference is Tyson has a better chin and would last a big longer. But Foreman would brutalise Tyson. Sure Tyson could get inside first and land first beating Foreman to the punch, but once he's there, Foreman manhandles him, forces him backwards and beats him down. Foreman has all the tools to beat Tyson convincingly.
Tyson knocks out Kingston Foreman but ends up in the hospital after fighting Holyfield Foreman.
which match can I see where George fought like holy or anybody else who beat mike and find me a match where like you said mike gets bullied then beat up and cant defend himself cause I never seen that
I never seen mike bullied and cant defend like joe not even close to it not even from 20 pounds heavier them him razor who was stronger then mike so tell me the match sense you keep using that dumb quote even though I told that other crazy person it wouldnt work
just like I told him George has to outbox he has to change his style to holy or anybody else that beat mike it's not opinion he has to so he can land
brawling is not a style that worked why you think no brawler beat
why you think kratos said old George gives a tougher match cause his skills upgraded
he uses the jab from distance
he has real defense most people know he had no real defense in his young version
he is way tougher for taking damage
so your wrong not me
I feel like im talking to a crazy blind troll like most who refuse to see the obvious or just blind
Tyson TKO in 6. Foreman could win but I favour Tyson. (I have been over this many times & with different scenarios but finally decided imo that Mike would win).
Mike has a tougher match with that old George cause of his skills why cant thes
why would it take that long I got 2nd round it's no way George could last that long and how could George win he couldnt with that style he would have to change it like I said uptop
Foreman fights nothing like Holyfield, but then again Tyson fights nothing like the guys that beat Foreman either, so by your own flawed logic how does Tyson beat Foreman?
You've never seen Mike bullied? You never seen his fight with Lewis? Sure he was past prime but he was manhandled in that fight, all the things Foreman uses, Lewis used to subdue Mike and Mike has no answer for being framed, leaned on, collar tied and manipulated into uppercuts which was one of Foreman's best punches.
Fact is when you were physical with Tyson, he became less effective we've seen that numerous times. Tucker was one of the first that made him look less than invincible, through being physical, controlling Mike's head position and using the uppercut.
Douglas too often clinched and pushed Tyson backward and used his lead hand to push Tyson's head down into his uppercut again a often used Foreman trick.
Holyfield didn't have the size advantage but pushed Tyson back again and again. You saying Ruddock was stronger is meaningless, because Ruddock didn't use his strength to do the things Foreman would and Douglas, Lewis and Holyfield did. It's not even about strength it's about technique.
Tyson's style was designed to get cut off the ring on fighters slip inside and fire devastating combinations against an opponent who would try to create distance. One of the techniques to do this was having Tyson squaring up, which is often seen as a negative. But Tyson used this because it allowed him to attack opponents moving away on either side but without having to reset. Taking away that need to reset his feet meant he could get to opponents faster and stay in close when they tried to move away laterally, it's why we often see Tyson go southpaw when an opponent moves to their left.
Problem is with squaring up is that, if your opponent doesn't try and get away like the vast majority of Tyson opponents and they stand their ground and push back, Tyson is easily backed up as he doesn't have a foot positioned at the rear in a normal stance to resist an opponents forward momentum, even a weaker opponent can push back the stronger Tyson, which is how the smaller Holyfield was able to do it.
Tyson had some of the best head movement we've ever seen, as I said his style was about cutting off opponents and getting inside and I think nobody ever slipped a jab as well as Tyson did. I don't care who you are your jab won't work vs Tyson and Foreman's heavy jab too would be slipped easily. But thing is when Foreman throws a punch he's not just trying to punch you, if it lands great but if it misses he keeps his hands out for a reason, a missed punch is turned into a frame, a collar tie, or the follow through is used to pull down an opponents guard. If Tyson slips inside his jab, Foreman will turn that missed jab in to a collar tie pulling Tyson out of position, if Tyson slips to the outside of his jab, Foreman uses his forearm, frames and pushes him off raising his head for a follow up shot to the head or his now exposed body. Tyson slips under the jab, foreman uses his forearm to lean on his neck and pulling him into the uppercut. Head movement doesn't work vs these techniques as we saw vs Frazier.
The fact you call Foreman a brawler just exposes how little you understand about the techniques involved here. I don't think you sound like a crazy blind troll, you are just ignorant of the techniques being utilised by Foreman and that they are Kryptonite vs Tyson's style.
Big George Tyson is made to order for George, look what lesser punchers have done to Tyson when he cant intimidate them back them up
I’ve always thought George was Tysons kryptonite… stylistic nightmare for Tyson,
George knew it and so did Tyson. People don’t realize or if they do there in denial, fighters avoid certain fighters as per there trainers, managers and themselves. George and his uppercuts, punching power, and sheer physical strength would have been too much for a Tyson. That’s not too say if they fought 10 times Mike couldn’t have won a couple because he could have but if they fought 10 times I’d pick George to win 8 of them. Crouch fighters were tailor made for George.
Great post. Muppettheman is an absolute fool.
from logic poster castro
Don't think foreman lands more than Tyson. I think Tyson outlands foreman 2 to 1 with foreman looking very awkward at times. Tyson's defense was superb. Foreman doesn't have the Handspeed to hit Tyson flush or the jab to set him up which Tillis Douglas and Tucker had.
Tyson was the more explosive puncher who was more likely to hurt someone suddenly out of nowhere unlike Foremans clubbing heavy predictable type of power which was maybe better at wearing someone out.
In tySons losses it wasn't something big suddenly getting him in trouble, in his losses he was outclassed and outskilled over several rounds and hit again and again and again until he had nothing left.
The way you people imagine foreman winning never happened to Tyson while foreman demonstrated his lack of defense and susceptibility to be badly hurt and in jeopardy lf losing (as you yourself accurately described it) by a single punch vs lyle.
Tyson has knocked more and better guys cold with one quick shot than lyle.
Foreman needs to grapple with Tyson and push him back kind of like berbick tried but find way to tighten up his defense and also slow Tyson down enough with heavy body blows so that he can start hitting him in the head later on.
And he needs to do it without gassing out before tyson or getting knocked out himself which the grappling and mauling should help with. Tyson would possibly indulge him and allow being clinched like he sometimes did.
Don't think a straight shootout out is how foreman should do it. His defense and speed wasn't good enough just like Tyson's inferior defense and speed was a big factor in holyfield winning alot of the exchanges.
Imo beating your opponent to the punch, staying calm and having a good defense is more important in a slugfest than a a small edge in power. Especially since both guys are elite Punchers anyway