Would a prime foreman defeat tyson as easily as holyfield did?

There was be no late KO. If you really knew prime Foreman you would understand why.

Tyson would never be hit as consistently and as hard consistently as he would vs Foreman. Multiple truly sledgehammer blows ends the fight within two rounds. It would be a massacre.

 

I don't think the Frazier fights are definitive, but they are informative because Frazier's style dictated that he often put his face in the wheelhouse for Foreman's uppercut/shovel-hook tree-choppers. Every time I saw prime Tyson hurt, it was because he ran into an uppercut the same way. Even when not hurt by them, Tyson often ran into them. This tendency makes for a painful evening with George.

But that's where the utility of the Frazier comparison ends. That both Frazier and Tyson were shorter men (Tyson's official height of 5'11-1/2" was a lie; he's 5'10") who fought from a crouch does not make them substantially similar fighters, much less identical.

Tyson's offensive arsenal swamps Frazier's, as does his power (possibly even with the left hook, shot-for-shot). Tyson's defense was far more sophisticated, and he was faster of hand and foot. He had a better chin and none of Frazier's infirmities. Workrate and perhaps grit and sheer stamina Frazier had more of, but even those things have to be viewed in comparison to Tyson's greater efficiency: He rarely wasted punches. Frazier openly modeled himself on Armstrong and copied his strategy of victory through attrition. Workrate is essential for a fighter of that type; less so for a Mike Tyson.

Tyson's "mental frailty" invariably comes up in these discussions, and how it would lead him to quit when faced by a tough opponent. The Tyson of the period that I thought we were talking about (1986ish-1988) sometimes looked to me to be bored, but I never saw him on the verge of giving up and taking a beating. Any fight where he looked the least motivated he still won handily, and he certainly knew that he was winning.

Tyson got absolutely cracked (although never knocked down) but kept pressing on. If he was so easily demoralized and rendered defenseless by a game fighter who hurt him, I'd think we'd have seen some fractures in the facade when Tucker almost sent him into orbit with an uppercut. Of course, Tucker is no Foreman, and Foreman would have hit him with a LOT of those uppercuts, but there is no *evidence* that Tyson would psychologically crumble, at least that I can recall from his 1985-88 fights. And I doubt he'd get bored and careless vs. Foreman.

Besides, it's not like Foreman was the paragon of mental fortitude himself. And Mike Tyson would most certainly hit him and hit him a lot and hit him hard -- moreso than anything Foreman had ever seen before. Foreman of course showed with Lyle that, even post-Ali, he could take a beating but get up and go on to win (we never saw that from any version of Tyson).

Foreman would need to show that kind of grit with Tyson. Even assuming for the sake of argument that Lyle hit as hard as Tyson, Lyle's ability to put his punches in great volume on a man's face -- much less to the body -- do not compare favorably to Tyson's. In Tyson, Foreman would not only be facing a Lyle-caliber puncher (at least!), but one with the ferocity of a man not only trying to kill him but looking to eat him afterwards as his first meal in four or five days.

Rarely mentioned is the second Foreman-Frazier bout. In that one I actually think both men fought a better fight than the first time. Frazier was more strategic in his advances and Foreman more judicious with his assault. Naturally what leaves the impression is the inevitable result, but the image that always returns to me is Foreman getting his head turned by one of those hooks. This was Foreman at his most careful getting whacked by a punch that was one of Tyson's best from a man who could not hit like Mike Tyson.

What all of this adds up to for me is this: Tyson eats a lot of uppercuts and shovel hooks that stagger him and break his rhythm. Foreman takes a lot of left hooks and overhand rights that send him down more than once. As the attrition continues, Tyson gets more tentative and Foreman gets more and more sloppy. The knockdowns are hard on Foreman and Tyson's body attack, although increasingly intermittent, increasingly slows Foreman further. Tyson by TKO somewhere around the seventh.

 

There's only one fighter getting knocked out once the punches start finding their mark and it ain't Foreman, Tyson would not be able to take those uppercuts from Foreman for long at all.

 

I think this is a fantastic post.

 

Good post. Glad you did some research.

There are some things you might not have considered:

-tyson fighting from a crouch and having to dash forward to get in range is exactly why he will have a stylistic problem. Foreman feasted on short fighters and guys who stood in front of him aggressively throwing bombs. He has only been stopped once due to his own reckless behavior--punching himself out in a hot, humid outdoor environment. This isnt to say tyson cant hurt or stop foreman, his power is in the top 10. But he has quite the task ahead of him. On the other hand, Tyson has been stopped 5x in even less fights. Boxing rarely boils down to basic math, but the odds are in foremans favor.

-Out of all 5 of foremans losses, it isnt a coincidence that the guys who made him look bad or beat him were either slicksters/counter punchers or boxer punchers who adopted a more cautious style picking their shots carefully and using lateral movement. Tyson was neither a slick outside fighter, nor did he cautiously move around his opponent with lateral movement. He couldnt fight backing up, and he is the shorter, smaller man with shorter arms. So again, basic physics tips the scale in foremans favor who was biggger with tremendous physical strength. When they collide tyson will need every ounce of strength just to not get shoved back and bombed like 75% of foremans opponents.

-you sort of used a double standard mentioning fraziers hook whipping foremans head as evidence tyson could do the same. You yourself mention tyson getting hit by brutal uppercuts from tucker and of course, ruddock. Yet somehow you reason that Tyson hurts foreman but not the other way around even though foremans uppercuts were far more devastating than tucker and easily on the level of ruddock if not higher. Why is that? How do you gather from that its more likely tyson stops foreman than the other way around when both men had weapons that could hurt the other?

Also foremans arms were longer so in a shootout, his fists would reach tyson first. Youre also forgetting about foremans punishing jab which he used to bust chuvalos head up.

 

I used to believe Foreman would KO Tyson but I have changed my view since. Talking about a prime Tyson..he had more explosive two handed power than Joe Frazier. Smokin Joe was a much better inside fighter than Mike Tyson but he wasn't as quick or dynamic moving forward. Mike could hurt you with any punch he threw.

I think Big George always has a chance because he could hit but his defense was lacking a little and he would be buzzed by Tyson.

Mike Tyson KO 4

 

I used to think the same way as well. Then I studied film when youtube expanded on yee old world wide web. Up to that point I only had Tyson Fight DVD's and some of the SuperFights on VHS: Champions Forever, Leonard-Hearns: The War series, Hagler-Leonard: The SuperFight, The Fab Four, etc.

Then I studied Foreman, who is capable of knocking anyone out, but his deficiencies in tying up his opponent and using the push and shove to reset could cause him all sorts of problems against an aggressive counterpuncher in Tyson, short arms or not. Foreman wishes he could box Tyson like Holyfield did. It's not in him. Never has been.

That's the short of it, anyways. I could go on but it's been done to death.

 

1 good uppercut and its over. Even if it doesnt KO Tyson he would be struck with fear and looking for a way out. Frazier had 10 times more heart and backbone than Tyson and even that didnt matter. Its a huge misss match. I dont blame Tyson, he is just to small, its feels like an light heavy fighting a heavyweight.

Im not a Tyson hater i actually rate him very high. Tyson beats anyone that has the same height as him.

 

I really don't buy the cus theory. Frazier is no gauge here. Tyson is a fast enough starter and foremans always there to be hit. If both are on song, I see Tyson brutally stopping him. A lot faster in punch than Frazier, stronger, better chin, off the blocks far far quicker. I could see it being short to be honest. Foremans resume is dog shite also. Replace Lyle with Tyson and Foremans not getting out of that fight with the w...Only my opinion though Fergy

 

Tyson when pure, come right back after getting tagged. Chin and heart not an issue pre prison !

 

Me too. After keeping level with George for five rounds or so,Tyson gets discouraged after he sees that his opponent's going nowhere. After that the writing's on the wall and Mike falls around the seventh.

 

going nowhere?Tyson would add to what Lyle done. Prime George is a 6-8 round fighter if he fights conservatively. Tyson would see a big drop in foremans power and punch out put after a few rounds