Tyson's power vs. Foreman's power.

80s Mike might have been (besides Joe Louis) the most devastatingly efficient puncher, whether in one shot or combinations, ever.

George Foreman was a bludgeoner, without question the more overall physically powerful puncher (Tyson and Holyfield back this up).

But George wasn't always accurate (to be fair, at times he didn't need to be). In 1973 he had very good hand speed for a heavyweight. But..

Mike was far faster and more accurate, and he had a high intelligence when it came to changing up punch velocities at the perfect time.

So, Mike could be seen as a more holistically effective puncher than George.

 

I agree that Foreman likely had better power overall, but, I am not sure the difference is particularly dramatic. There are a number of Tyson knockouts (Frazier, Spinks, Tubbs, for example) that Foreman was unlikely to replicate so quickly.

 

When people talk about Tysons power its more P4P as in anyone could feel his power despite his size opposed to hitting harder than anyone whose ever hit. Foreman is more the latter category where its very possible a HW who hits harder hasn't been born. Foremans jabs were harder than most HWs superman punches.

 

No nor would I. It's a bit like a choice between being hit by a train or run over by a car. I don't fancy either but if I've got to choose I'll go with the car.

 

Braindead comparison.

 

We'd have more common opponents if Foreman hadn't ducked guys like Holmes and Tucker.

 

He didn’t duck either of them, leaving aside the fact you want to compare a Tyson ten years removed from his prime with a Foreman past his by more than double that distance.

 

Holmes ducked Foreman and Foreman ducked Tyson

Holmes is more inexcusable though because he is the same age as Foreman, they should have fought after Holmes lost to Holyfield, nevermind them not fighting in the late 70s

 

"They tried to force me to fight Tony Tucker. And I remember looking at Tony Tucker, and saying, 'Mama didn't raise no fools. I'm not fighting him.' And they took the titles. Some people I'm not gonna fight. That's the good reason. I didn't want to fight him. Too tough.""

 

Like he said Kenny Norton was too tough for him as well, huh.

 

Use the quote function, alt of that guy who didn’t know how to use the quote function.

Everyone praises 90s Foreman’s power until his resume gets mentioned and the excuses come out.

 

Yeah but he was 50 years old.
And Foreman did better against David Jaco and against Holyfield than Tyson did plus Stewart had loaded gloves, just look who was his coach.

 

Alt accusations. Truly the pinnacle of high-functioning. Spanian would be proud.

 

He wasn’t 50 years old.

Tyson beat Jaco in 86, knocking him down three times en route to a first round stoppage. Foreman did the same, two years after Jaco’s audition against Tyson. Edge Tyson.

Tyson hurt Holyfield worse than Foreman did. The thread is about power.

 

He was close to his 50, Tyson at that age could not past some bums.

But Foreman did it faster while being inactive and old.

Tyson did not hurt him at all Holyfield had easy time neutralising Tyson.