Would Foreman and Liston really blast out Tyson in two rounds

Tyson stops Foreman late. Liston beats both.

 

Just like Mike doesn't have that tremendous feather-power that Young had, which knocked Foreman down? Or that 10 punches a round that lead to Foreman getting knocked out by Ali, another weak puncher?
Or Lyle, who nearly had Foreman out (and in fact the only puncher who landed on him). Outside of Foreman, the only one of note that Lyle ever stopped is glass chinned Shavers.

Tyson has more stoppages over ranked fighters, more one-punch KO's, much more speed, a better chin, much better fundamentals and his defence is in another league compared to Foreman.


Those who are (and many seem to be) convinced 100% about "Foreman by KO" must be kidding themselves.


Foreman KO'd Frazier, so he'll blast out Tyson. atsch
Tyson is completely different to Frazier. Frazier has an average chin. Frazier bobs and weaves predictable, designed to take light punishment on the long term. Frazier was a very slow starter, Ali, Foreman, Ellis, Quarry, Bonavena, even Ramos beat the **** out of him during the early rounds. Tyson was one of the quickest starters in history. Frazier does not really have one-punch KO power, he had to wear his foe down. Tyson had as much one punch KO power as anyone in history. Do i need to go on?

 

I'd tip Liston to crush Foreman. I'd tip him to stop Tyson late.

As for Tyson Vs Foreman, I'm always changing my mind. Right now I'm going to make Tyson a slight favourite to stop him late.

They'd all be exciting matchups in my opinion.

 

Tho i like Foreman to win, you've definitely added some balance and common sense.

 

I think Foreman would brutalize Tyson 1-3 rounds.

I think Liston is more likely to box him and break him down a bit more gradual, like 6-10 rounds.

 

Tyson resume is easily better then Listons

 

I'd disagree about Spinks being a great fighter. Grerat ltheavy and a good heavyweight. Holmes-Tyson is similar to Lewis-Tyson. Not identical but both wins carry similar weight for the victors. If you think Tyson was at his peak against Holyfield, than I'm not going to try to change you mind on that one but I think you're very wrong there. It appears you obviously aren't a big Tyson fan. Neither was I but I credit him for what he did. Tyson was a great fighter.

 

In terms of Quality, Eddie Machen, Zora Folley, Cleveland Williams, Floyd Patterson were all just as good as anyone Tyson beat. Floyd Patterson is better than anyone Tyson beat. Add Nino Valdez, Johnny Summerlin to that list and its quite a list. I think its on par with tysons resume.

 

Tyson simply wasn't that kind of fighter. He stopped no one late except for Jose Ribalta in '86 -and of the 9 times Ribalta was stopped, he was stopped late once. By Tyson. Tyson's power diminished as the fight wore on. His fast twitch fibers were pretty much spent after the mid-point. Tyson was no wrecking machine in the 10th round. A 45 year old Foreman threw a short right hand in the 10th round and an undefeated 26 year old champion fell like a collapsed tent. That's power that doesn't fade late.

Pontius points out that Frazier had to get his mojo working more gradually. I agree. But Frazier was also more able to carry that power into the later rounds. If Ali was a normal human being like the rest of us, he wouldn't have gotten up from that blast. Frazier also stopped the durable Mathis and Machen late.

Tyson couldn't carry that kind of power into the late rounds.

Tyson was the faster starter all right and very dangerous early. But pre-Zaire Foreman was brimming with confidence and disdain, and he was durable as hell. Foreman was never stopped with punches. Never. When he went down, he got up. When he got hurt, he overcome it -and won. Tyson never did. That is the rub. Not the Fraizer factor (which really shouldn't be so summarily dismissed).

Those choosing Tyson are cornered in my estimation. I think it is fair to consider a "decision" unlikely. No one's coming in there to box. Not 1988 Tyson and not 1973 Foreman. Tyson's only real shot is to do what no one has ever done, and that is to ....stop... Foreman... early. That is a helluva tall order; On the other hand, Tyson has been stopped five times -early, midway, and late --and half the guys that did it are nothing more than ordinary.

So, what's more likely? That Tyson is going to KO one of the strongest, most powerful, and most durable HWs ever early? Or that George is going to survive the early pressure by manhandling him and is eventually going to hurt Tyson?

The more I think about it, the sillier I think it is that Tyson has anything more than a puncher's chance. And that's slim to none. And slim is on a diet.

 

I wouldnt say floyd patterson is better than michael spinks and i think guys like ruddock and bruno would have great shots at koing patterson's glass jaw.

 

Tyson was no Jimmy Young, an ATG defensive heavyweight who did not resist George's power or physical strength. Foreman also very foolishly ignored Gil Clancy's advice to spend a few weeks getting acclimated to the heat and humidity of the fight location, and paid for it. Young caught George in round 12 with a flash knockdown which Cosell initially believed to be a slip. (The replay proved that Jimmy caught Foreman off-balance and severely fatigued, in a situation which many referees might have ruled a slip.)

I'd be curious to know just who characterized Ali as a weak puncher between 1970 and 1976. George thoroughly spent himself in Zaire, then was brought down by the hardest punch Muhammad ever delivered. (Foreman has rated Ali as the fifth hardest puncher he ever faced.) Bonavena certainly didn't consider Ali a weak puncher, and he had Jerry Quarry out on his feet at the end of their rematch. Although it took Muhammad most of 15 rounds to do it, he was the first (and only?) one to ever drop Wepner with headshots. A single right hand destroyed Lyle, more than Foreman was able to do to Ron with any single punch. Ali's hands would not permit him to throw repeated hard shots, but when he sat down on his punches he was a very dangerous striker.

Ron had a peculiar history of boxing boxers and slugging with sluggers at the top level. Many common opponents of both have asserted that Lyle and Foreman closely compared in punching power (although George had far greater physical strength).

All true, but the caliber of his opposition was arguably inferior to the best of George's heyday, and Foreman certainly did far better with Holyfield than Mike managed to do. The question bears repeating: If Tyson himself believed what his supporters are saying about his chances against a youthful Foreman, then why did he not accept a lucrative payday against the aged version? (Answer please?)

Including Mike himself?

Yeah, that's what Tyson seems to believe. (Think you can, think you can't. Either way, you're right!)

Holmes has made it clear that Tyson did not have as much one punch power as Shavers, and while much of what Larry says is taken with a grain of salt, too many common opponents of Foreman, Lyle, Cooney and Shavers agree with Holmes about the supremacy of Earnie's punching power for Larry's judgement to be casually dismissed.

Frazier was indeed significantly different from Tyson, especially in the heart department. He recovered from being seriously stunned or hurt on numerous occasions to win. High blood pressure, arthritis, a cataract in one eye rendering him virtually blind in it during his career, and a broken bone in his bread and butter left hand during the 1964 Olympic finals would have been far too many obstacles for most to overcome. He succeeded anyway, and did not ever give up. He took on Foreman a second time, with virtually nothing left, and actually improved on his previous showing, marking up George's eye with his hook, before Foreman inflicted significant dental damage with a deadly knockdown blow. But Joe got up twice (because he ALWAYS got up), forcing Eddie Futch to walk across the ring to tell the referee to stop it. (Contrast that with prime Tyson's cowardly refusal to step in the ring with an aged Foreman even one single time.)

Mike Tyson was and is a COWARD, scared shitless of Foreman, even in 2008!:scaredas: Do I need to go on? (As desperate as Tyson is for money today, taking on George is one matchup the public would bite on even now. So why does he want to box girls like Laila Ali instead?)

 

I couldn't disagree more. You make Tyson sound like a desperate headhunter (later in his career perhaps) rather than the systematic wrecking machine which he was.

Watch Tyson Vs Mitch Green - Just because he didn't knock him out doesn't mean he didn't put the hurt on him late. He maintained his level of intensity for ten rounds.

Watch Tyson Vs Pinklon Thomas - Okay, not a LATE stoppage, but it displays Tysons patience and ability to break down his opponents with scientific body punching and ferocious combinations.

The simple fact is that aggressive knockout punchers in Tysons mould tend to knock out their opponents early, rather than late - As is also the case with Jack Dempsey. Thing is, as you say, Foreman was tough, strong and sturdily chinned so it was not this easy. There are no doubts in my mind that a peak Tyson was better conditioned and just as sturdily chinned. By his own admission Foreman was a wind-up doll.

If Tyson weathered Foremans relentless storm, a la Ali, there's no reason why he couldn't stop him late.

And again with this "not being able come back from being hurt" crap!? He's been hit with some big shots in his career and shaken them off (e.g., Frank Bruno I). Pre-prison he almost came back from the ONLY LOSS OF HIS CAREER AT THAT STAGE by knocking Buster Douglas to the ground for a very, very long count. He couldn't finish the job, but then again he was nowhere near his best that night.

As I indicated above, this isn't a fight I'm neccessarily confident with my prediction, I think it could go either way - But to dismiss Tyson as having nothing more than a punchers chance is very unfair. He was no headhunter. And he was more strong-willed than given credit for, psychologically he is not on the same level as the likes of Ali, Holyfield etc, but he's no Wladimir Klitschko.

 

Spinx was coming off a long layoff when he fought tyson. Patterson was 26-27 years old at his absolute peak when he fought Liston.


Bruno? atsch Patterson would make dogmeat out of him

Ruddock might have a chance, but whos to say cleveland williams wouldnt flatten razor ruddock? Williams was essentially a more skilled faster version of ruddock

 

Headhunter? That wasn't implied in what I wrote at all. Mike was not systematic! He blitzed guys with evasive aggression again and again until they folded.

Wrong. Tyson absolutely did not maintain the level of intensity he had in the early rounds after round 7. Absolutely not. Tyson looked almost ordinary in the last few.

Tyson stopped Pink in 6.

Both the Green and Thomas fights work against, not for, your argument.

Are you arguing that Tyson maintained his KO power late in the fight? The record is your enemy, not me. You should watch the Green fight again. Watch rounds 1 and 2 and then watch 7 and 8 or 8 and 9 or 9 and 10. It just isn't so. Tyson was content to allow the clinch, to throw one shot at a time and flurry now and then. Nothing like the whirling dervish you see early.

Much of Tyson's power relied on those fast twitch fibers. These are not a factor in an endurance contest.

Foreman's condition was nothing to write home about, but I don't see it as a factor here.

This is a matter of probability. Tyson stopped one man late in 58 fights and visibly faded in or damn near in every fight that went past 8 or 9 rounds. He'd be less than ordinary in the -real- championship rounds. He wasn't designed to carry that aggression -that lethal combination of speed and power late into a 15 rounder.

"Stunned" isn't "hurt". I'm talking about adversity. Tyson has never come back from it. Again, look at the record!

Buster was his first test of adversity. He got knocked out, and if you look at the fight, he tried and should be respected for that but he looked to me like he was in a daze for most of the second half. I have always questioned his recuperative powers. Bruno hit him with one shot at a time and then grabbed on for dear life. Ruddock was reduced to looking for the one shot too. I'm not talking about that.

Holyfield I was his second taste of adversity. Tyson couldn't remember the fight after getting clocked in round 3. Holyfield II was his third. Tyson took the coward's way out. And that was after he tried to break his arm in the first or second round. He laid down for Lewis and for Williams. He streetfought McBride -tried to break his arm like a punk, got pushed down and didn't want to get up and then quit.

This is who he is, people. You saw it again and again. Accept it.

He is not NEAR the level of Foreman!! Go watch Foreman-Moorer or Foreman-Lyle or Foreman-Stewart.

Tyson was strong-willed when things were going his way, as they usually were. I have my doubts that his heart was bigger than Klitschko's when he was truly tested.

...And it is utterly foolish to think that Foreman isn't going to put him through adversity. And it is even more foolish to think that Tyson is going to make a Spartan's stand in the face of it.

 

You people are ****ing insane. Liston's resume is packed full of mediocre fighters who you aggrandize in order to push your Liston agenda. Tyson beat WORLD CHAMPIONS: Smith, Holmes, Tubbs, Berbick, Thomas, Spinks, Tucker, Bruno, Seldon, Botha.... Liston beat an innocuous bunch of b-fighters from the division's weakest era and one smallish world champion in Patterson. Tyson fought in an era of giants. Hell, even Mike Spinks makes most of Liston's opponents look small. Let alone Green, Smith, Tucker, Golota, Ruddock (x2), Berbick, Williams, Bruno, Thomas... et. al. And I would pick a few of THOSE guys to beat Liston.

The amount of myopia and intellectual dishonestly on this board is not only astounding it is repulsive.

Enjoy. Once again, I think I have had it with this delusional bull****.