What if in 1991 Tyson and Holyfield switched opponents?

Thanks

 

This is it, in a nutshell. This myth that Tyson was so scared of Big George is just that.

...And talking of power, did Big George really have the neccessary tools to take Tyson out? He displayed some big power in the Cooney fight, but in several instances in his comeback, his vaunted power seemed lacking.

Then one has to ask if he had enough speed to land more than one big punch at a time, or even the reflexes or speed to land anything big?
His cross-armed defence dictated that countering was out of the question when he was on the defensive.

I assume most people are thinking Big George would catch Tyson coming in, but even if he did, could he follow it up with anything meaningful before Tyson initiated a clinch or threw something back? George was about as quick as molasses. We're dealing with one of the slowest fighters of all time against one of the quickest. The speed disparity between the two is enormous.

 

Not true.

From July 3rd 1991, after Holyfield, 1 year prior to the Stewart fight.
This fight could have been made before his sentencing in Feb 92.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-4061795.html

A heavyweight fight between former champions Mike Tyson and George Foreman could be held this year in Las Vegas, says promoter Don King, who already has labeled the match "The People's Championship."
"We're very close to consummating this deal," King, who manages Tyson, said after negotiating Monday with Roy Foreman, George's brother and manager.
King said the fighters would split the revenue equally, with each receiving $15 million, and would divide a two-thirds split of pay per view revenues.
He said the fight could generate $100 million and top the $86 million collected for last ...

 

It comes from Frank Lotierzo.

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/boxing-news/lotierzo1609.php

All depends on wether you believe his take on events or not.

 

You're going over the top with your defence of Tyson.
6 rounds? Prime Tyson couldn't ko these men - Tillis, Green, Ribalta, Smith, Tucker and finally Douglas (though wether prime is debatable).

Yet past prime Tyson is going to ko solid chinned Foreman, a man ko'd only once in 81 fights.:think

 

Also not true. Can't find rings rankings for 1991, the best I could do:

Ring Magazine HW rankings May 1992

1. Evander Holyfield
2. Mike Tyson
3. Riddick Bowe
4. Razor Ruddock
5. Ray Mercer
6. George Foreman
7. Tim Witherspoon
8. Tony Tucker
9. Lennox Lewis
10. Michael Moorer

That 'Novelty' as you called him was ranked 6th in the HW division early 1992, 2 places behind the 'real threat'.
Though how Tyson was still ranked after his incarceration is a mystery.....

 

Who cares what he was ranked. He was also promoted by Bob Arum who was as influential as King was. Just the fact he was ranked above Lennox Lewis is a joke right there. In fact who in that list would you favor old George over? The last guy on the list pasted him for 10-11 rounds before losing, and he certainly was the smallest, slowest, and had the weakest chin of the lot.

 

holyfield foreman was great evander landing 15 punching booming combos glad that fight took place man

 

Actually he did stop Ribalta, and besides Tucker and Smith the Tillis and Green fights were before he even won the title and were all for the most part one sided fights.
Why dont you say George couldnt even KO club fighter Crawford Grimsley(who James Thunder scored the fastest knockout in heavyweight history over), Tommy Morrison, Alex Stewart (Tyson KO1), Lou Savarese (Tyson KO 1), and Shannon Briggs??:nut

 

Tyson would have beaten George quite comfortably, he was still a major force back then and Ruddock was more on fire than George was at the time.. Mike may have just taken Foremans best and fired back winning a unan points... Evander would have had a few shaky moments against Ruddock but still found a way by realising that his skills were just superior and he didn't have to go being a tough guy in the bout... George v Ruddock would have probably been a better undercard fight for Tyson v Holyfields main event... LOL...

 

Because I'm not the one on the attack here. The guy was basically calling Big George a ****ing bum, and a description of Tyson he wasn't.

Ribaltaatsch this is what happens when I don't check facts. I remembered it as a long fight, forgot the ko.

One sided fights "in his prime" (key word here). I don't care if it was before he won the title or not, he was prime.
You digress from my point. How is Tyson going to knock out George in 6 given the facts I stated about Georges chin?

 

So rankings have no meaning?:think

91 Foreman fought Holyfield to a UD loss for the undisputed championship (wether he deserved a shot or not).
91 Lennox Lewis was still fighting the likes of McCrory's and Mason at Euro level, maybe that has something to do with it.....

 

Who was calling George a bum? As far as the Ribalta fight it was a long fight but Ribalta was floored two or three times and kept getting back up. He took a horrendous beating. Your knocking Tyson for going the distance four or five times?
How would he knock out Foreman? If Foreman stands in front of Tyson like he did with most of his opponents, Tyson could easily knock him out or stop him. Its not like George wasnt shook up in a few fights and Tyson of 91 could still put some combinations together pretty well, especially against Foreman who was going to be right there in front of him.
George never ever showed in his comeback that he was on the level anywhere close to what Tyson was in 91.
I just dont buy into the whole intimidation thing, and I certainly dont think George could punch any harder or faster than Ruddock who landed on Tyson quite a bit. It was much more difficult for Tyson to come forward against Ruddock, who stayed back and timed Tyson coming forward with hooks and uppercuts, than it would be for Tyson to work on Foreman like a swinging heavybag.

 

I don't think Tyson was stromger than Frazier at all. And he SURE did't have Joe's warriar-fighttothedeath mentality. Tyson was weakminded from the beginning going all the way back to the amareurs. it is:thumbsup written in all the books about him how he struggled w/hen challenged even then and Atlas pulled him thru.

 

Rankings do have meaning for title shots, but the rankings are often manipulated as everyone knows. My point is Lewis was a far more capable and credible threat and contender than Foreman was at that time who was kind of a side show.
Tyson certainly earned his #1 status by fighting Ruddock twice before going to jail, but not coming out of prison. Fighting McNeely and Mathis was BS. I believe he was ranked #1 by every sanctioning body upon his release from jail, because of the fees the sanctioning body would collect from one of his fights.
That was ring magazines rankings anyway wasnt it?