What if in 1991 Tyson and Holyfield switched opponents?

To put it nicely, his "speed" was suspect during his entire comeback run but the Morrison fight was quite the shock to the system. When the Duke is slipping and dancing around you like the second coming of Walcott, you have problems.

Easy to get caught up in the excitement of the Holyfield fight, and think the guy could still be a killer to someone like Tyson or Morrison I guess.

 

exactly

 

Foreman is so overrated it's disgusting.

he would have been beaten to a bloody, unrecognizable mess by tyson.

 

Morrison has more height and reach. Tyson wouldn't fight like that. He would come after Foreman and get bombed out no doubt.

 

So your saying it was Morrisons height and reach that allowed him to take on an entirely different boxing style that he had never used in previous fights to overcome his poor stamina, and defeat Foreman?

 

No, not just that, but certainly that helps. I just don't think Tyson would try out-boxing him like that. And frankly, that's why My2Sense reiterates his opinion that Tyson was limited. Now, he was a mid-range slugger or swarmer if you want to call him that. Tommy choose to switch his tactics, often using somewhat question tactics by turning his back. I just don't see Tyson doing this. And frankly I don't think it would be in him to fight this way. He never had, either.

Lastly, Foreman was much better in the Holyfield fight then the Morrison fight.

 

Why does everyone think foreman is invincible?
Does tyson hit like a little ***** now?

No one can simply stand infront of tyson and let him tee off and get away with it.

 

James Buster Douglas:deal

 

Tokyo Douglas was 10x the fighter foreman was in the 90's and what he did in absolutely no way resembled standing right infront of tyson with no semblence of defense or speed.

 

For the sake of shake-up, it was rumored - circa 1994 - that George Foreman had a 30% stake in Tommy Morrison's contract, beginning mid-1992.

Can anybody expand on this?

 

Foreman was better in the Holyfield fight in spots when Holyfield slugged with him but he still got his butt kicked in most of the exchanges. Tyson would be throwing bombs compared to Holyfield if they stood toe to toe. Would Foreman be able to stand up to the same punishment he did against Holyfield? He was rocked on a few occasions by a lighter Holyfield. If Tyson got George reeling he would have been able to finish him.
Tyson was not as limited as you think Watch him jab and box with far taller mobile opponents when he was younger. Its not about boxing from the outside. Tyson could stay close and move around Foreman much like Morrison was able to do in angles. It was more that than Morrison sticking and moving from the outside. Foremans was just too slow and the fact that Morrison was not forced by Foreman to fight more of his usual fight with his poor stamina, shows how ineffective George could be against decent opposition. If Tyson was so limited he would have lost to half of the technical mobile guys he faced in the late 80's, because that style of fighting is a lot harder for a short pressure guy to overcome, compared to a slow guy that stands right in front of you.
Again who did George knockout or beat in his comeback thats remotely close to how good Tyson was in 91?

 

Holyfield would be more busy than Tyson was against Ruddock and probably fight more carefully, so I think he could handle Ruddock, although there would be some point when Ruddock connected and caused some drama for Holyfield, same as, say, Cooper did in their fight. In the end, Holy outworks Ruddock to a UD.

Foreman-Tyson is... interesting. There's no doubt in my mind that a young Foreman would smash Tyson, however, despite being better in some ways, I'm hesitant to say the same of old Foreman. In particular, Tyson was on to the fact that Foreman was relying on a lot of little tricks to get a psychological edge or to encourage people to think he was harmless/less dangerous than he truly was.

For example, at least a few times Foreman said to announcers or the general public before a fight things along the lines of "All these young guys are still trying to outbox me, to stay away and keep from really fighting. What are they afraid of" and stuff like that to ***** the pride of fighters and make them more likely to come to him, rather than make George have to chase them. Although I believe Foreman genuinely changed over the years I also believe he played up the genial old man image so that not just the public but also other fighters would think him less dangerous. And regardless of whether or not you believe everything Foreman says about the Moorer fight, there's no doubt in my mind after reviewing the tape that Foreman started deliberately and saved his strength for when Moorer would get complacent. Foreman is far more active in the last round than he was in the first, which is the exact opposite behavior of someone who is looking to get lucky.

That Tyson realized the game Foreman was playing means that Foreman couldn't have suckered Tyson the same way he did Moorer or some of the other fighters on his comeback. On the flip side, Tyson doesn't really have any choice but to fight Foreman up close and personal, since he can't exactly dance his way to victory.

My guess is that Tyson would try to move in and out and not stay still enough for Foreman to get an easy bead on him. Tyson would realize he couldn't bomb Foreman out right away and that utilizing quick movement after doing his damage was the best means of survival. However, Mike's defense and movement during this period, although better than it was for Bruno and Douglas, was still far short of his peak. So put it all together and that means Tyson has to put himself into the danger zone to score against Foreman, try to get out after hitting George without getting walloped, and that he's not at his best defensively while doing it.

Could Tyson get away with that for 12 rounds? Part of me thinks maybe he could, (at least well enough not to get KO'd) that he'd be moving as fast as he could the whole time. Adding onto that, Foreman is much slower than Tyson, (although at this time he was still considerably faster than he was against Moorer) and he tends to fight for part of a round. (Or at lest he did against Holyfield.) On the other hand, Ruddock is slow, predictable, probably less durable than George, has worse fundamentals in some ways (it's hard to recall Ruddock throwing a meaningful jab in the two Tyson bouts, for example) and he went 7 & 12 with Tyson and hit him enough times to cause a little drama and pulses to rise during their bouts. The question is: will it be enough?

My head says that Tyson will win a clear but hard won decision in a fight somewhat like Ruddock II. Both are ATGs, afterall, and Tyson was the one who was much closer to prime and with a massive speed advantage on a relatively stationary target whose cross arm defense would let Mike pound away at his body with impunity before creating opening for the head. Plus, Tyson's chin was decent enough to soak up a pretty fair amount of punishment.

My heart says don't count out Big George. That Tyson has to get hit sometime and any shot from Foreman is potentially lethal. That Tyson would come to the ring remembering what Cus always said about George and short swarmers. But especially, that anything can happen.

And... I think I'm done rambling now. So I'll leave it by saying that Tyson is the favorite, in the bout and in my mind, but that George is a very live underdog and will have a trick or two up his sleeve.

 

I thought everyone else took crazy pills, finally someone normal.

I don't get where this story of Tyson being afraid of Foreman is. It's reached levels where people are actually saying that Tyson ducked Foreman.

Tyson took on the real threat in Ruddock as opposed to the novelty fight in Foreman.

Just to clarify Foreman in Jan of 1990 beat an inactive Cooney who was 4 years removed from his last win. Cooney was never elite to begin with but ok lets move. Tyson lost to Douglas 1 month later. He recoups by fighting Tillman and Stewart (the same Alex Stewart that later rearranged Big George's face). Then Tyson steps up his challenge and faces the number 2 ranked fighter in the world after him in Donovan 'Razor' Ruddock. First fight ended in controversy via Richard Steele so they had a rematch 3 months later. Tyson won again. Then they set their sights for Evander Holyfield. Unfortunately that fight never came off because Tyson went to prison.

The only time that this fight could have come off was after Alex Stewart.


So if Tyson were to fight Foreman there would have been a few obstacles that would have made a Tyson-Foreman fight difficult to make.

1. Don King vs. Bob Arum angle. 2 Big Promoters and 2 big egos with steep demands.

2. Tyson had recently signed to Showtime right after the Stewart fight. George was a HBO fighter. The networks would have had lots of difficulty negotiating this one.

3. Foreman was not part of the division elite, what would Tyson really gain from beating him apart from criticism from the press for taking such a fight?

As for the fight itself people keep acting that Tyson would be in the danger zone conveniently forgetting that Foreman is facing a fighter who punching power rivals his own. Foreman's cross arm defense allows him to absorb better punishment but doesn't allow him to counter as quickly. That would be a severe disadvantage especially against Tyson. Point is Foreman would be in the danger zone and the fact that he wouldn't be able to land combinations on Tyson would leave him landing 1-2 punches at a time. His jab was imposing but it lacked the quickness or fluidity that would keep it effective against a fighter who's style is based on evading a jab to land punchers of his own. Douglas, Holyfield and Lewis didn't stay stationary with Tyson because they would have lost if they did so. They used lateral movement because it kept them away from Tyson's danger zone and they were able to land on him repeatedly without taking much in return. Unless Foreman can effectively keep Tyson from landing then there would be very little chance of him seeing the final bell let alone win via anything.

Foreman's reputation is actually benefiting because this fight never happened, the speculation alone has given it more credence than it may deserve.

As for the OP Tyson would have stopped Foreman in about 6 rounds.
Holyfield would score a hard fought but clear decision after a few shaky moments.

 

in a way Foreman would be a terrible match for Tyson and I thought at the time would beat him, and Ruddock would be bad for Evander. I think Evander would find a way to win, but that is a really tough fight for Evander. Ruddock's left hook was great.

 

Great Post Iron Champ