Why Mike Tyson Beats a Prime George Foreman

[Zaroku]

Nobody really went to Foreman's body. Some big Tyson shots to the body would have tested him

I agree, but Tyson might of found it tough to keep landing to the body.

[QueensburyRules]

--- Thing about going to the body is that opens you up for counters to the noggin.

Most folded up after taking a few big swings from George anyway.

[FrankBruno_Film]

Interesting discussion.

[Ascended]

You forgot one of the most important qualities to compare: Reach! Also you cannot compare Foreman to Ruddock. I actually like Razor but he became, by the time he fought Tyson, a one armed fighter with inside game. Foreman had a great reach, he could hit either hand and his jab was not an easy one to walk through, unless one could walk through a telephone pole to the head.

If Tyson could win this he would have to find a way and beat the law of averages on two points, first, he would have to get past a jab that when not slipped could snap the head back hard...Second he would have to catch Foreman before being tied up and controlled inside by Foreman who was at least as skilled as Razor in controlling the fight inside against a smaller man. And weight is not the issue because Foreman was a bigger man than Tyson no matter what their relative weight was.

Heres the tape that shows Foreman against a bobber and weaver and not just any bobber and weaver lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vz3tPjLhw2U

Lets look at the tape and we will see that actually for the first 30 seconds or so Frazier has some success, but as soon as Foreman gets leverage, and redirects Joe a few times its pretty much over. At a distance the jab snaps joe's head back, but when Joe starts to come in Foreman has incredible leverage the same leverage he would have against Tyson. I don't know if Mike, who was more fleet of foot than Joe, could get in to get to Foreman.

What's wrong with you cant see good the man said he was nothing like Joe he fought like dempsey so why use that blind quote of like joe still you keep using it cause you know mike was nothing like him and it's all you got you crazy troll

Mike was nothing like Joe you crazy dumb follower

[Ascended]

Only dumb idiots who never seen Mike says that dumb quote of he was like joe Mike fought nothing like him you dumb idiots watch matches instead of saying that lie that's been said for years when it never should have been created

[Ascended]

Prime Tyson seemed more polished than Foreman, but man, if Big George ever caught him!

If he caught him what would happen nothing cause Mike never was in danger from a big punch

[Ascended]

This is part of my why Mike Tyson beats fighter X series. For a frame of reference im referring to Tyson circa 1987-1988.

1. The gap in skill is quite a gap.The way Foreman fougt Ali was like WTF. He fought Ali similar to how Max Baer fought Primo Carnera except Baer won. It isnt too far fetched to imagine Max fighting Ali the same way Foreman did.

Foreman a lot of times left himself opened to be countered and had a habit of using his jaw to block punches. It all caught up with him once he fought someone in a position to exploit those errors. A prime Tyson on the other hands was elusive, a great counter puncher and could pick his shots very well. Foreman would struggle greatly to land on Tyson

I want to make a disclaimer and say Foreman was a greater fighter than Bonecrusher Smith. That said, Foreman wasnt any faster or defensively sound. Tyson would bob, weave, slip and counter like he did fighting Smith. The difference being Foreman probably wouldn't resort to holding and waltzing for 12 rounds just to survive.

2. Speed. A Tyson/Foreman fight would be about who gets there first with the most. Foreman is not beating Tyson to the punch consistently. As far as handspeed, Tyson is rated along with Ali and Patterson for being one of the most quick handed heavies of all time. Tyson also was much lighter on his feet than Foreman and had clearly superior footwork. Tyson wouldn't come straight ahead like Fraizer, he'd be using angles to get in range. The handspeed difference would leave Tyson with a smorgasboard of counterpunching opportunities. In the Fraizer Foreman rematch, Foreman missed many punches against a very faded Fraizer. Fraizer just didnt have the tools to capitalize on it anymore. Tyson wouldnt have that problem.

3. Chin. This is a big one. As far as I can tell, many think Foreman will beat Tyson once he just lands a few punches. This is absurd. One, KO'ing Fraizer, Roman and Norton in no way, shape or form automatically means therefore you'll KO a prime Mike Tyson. In the 70s, Foremans best weight was 225 pounds approximately at 6'3. Tysons best weight was 218 at 5'11. Theres this erroneous idea that Foreman would just be towering over Tyson with his shadow just engulfing Tyson and blocking out the sun.

From reading a lot of posts on Foreman vs Tyson, its easy to walk away with the idea that Foreman was this 7'1 335 pound giant carved out of marble that could bench press a city bus and turn cinderblocks into powder with a single uppercut. Meanwhile Tyson becomes this featherfisted fairy with the punching power of your local high school homecoming princess and the chin thereof. I read on here somewhere that Tysons best left hook would just bounce off of Foremans chin and make him mad. Absurdity!

Tyson fought and beat bigger punchers than 6'3 225 lbs that had punching power in the same zip code as Foremans.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE if anyone disagrees dont just assert it! Back it up with film. If you think Ruddock couldnt hit at least ALMOST as hard as a 70s Foreman, post film of their various knockouts so we can see the result their punches had on their various opponents. And out of Foremans 68 KOs, the vast majority where of the same calibur of opponents that Ruddock, Smith, Bruno etc knocked out on their way up.

A washed up Tyson took the best bombs of SHW mega puncher Lennox Lewis for 8 rounds. Even if Foreman did land solid a prime Tyson isnt just going to fall over.

Tysons chin was superior to Lyles, Scott Ledoux, Jimmy Young, Boone Kirkman. None of those guys just fell over as if dead when Foreman hit them the first time. Why would Tyson?

History shows us that Tyson was never stopped or seriously hurt early. He was only stopped late by fighters who punched in accurate combinations and went out of their way to hit without getting hit.

Foreman was hurt early as history shows us. Badly staggered by Ali and dropped and badly staggered by Ron Lyle. Neither had the combination of speed, accuracy, punching power and finishing ability Tyson did.

Thus, if anyone would be in trouble early in a 70s Foreman/80s Tyson matchup, history teaches us that it likely would be Foreman which brings me to my next point

4. Foreman would have no other options but an early stoppage which is highly unlikely. From the opening bell of round 1 the clock would be ticking. There would be no 10th or 11th round in which Foreman would be throwing combinations. If he gasses out mid rounds against a Mike Tyson on the rampage, he's in serious trouble. There is nothing historically we can point to that gives us any indication that Tyson would be in any early trouble. Perhaps Foreman wobbles Tyson for a few seconds similar to how Bruno did, but that likely would be it. I dont care if he had Fraizers style or not (he didnt) Tyson could take a way better shot, as far as single power punches are concerned.

My prediction:

Tyson wins by mid round KO after scoring a knockdown. This includes any version of Tyson up until 1991. Post Rooney Tyson just struggles a little bit more and takes some extra unnecessary punches.



Truthfully if prime Tyson was in the early 70s, Ali would realistically be the only one who could oppose him and have a realistic chance at victory. Before Ali's era, Prime Tyson would rule unopposed as the only one before Ali who could POSSIBLY beat a prime Tyson was Joe Louis and even then, thats up in the air.

Everything you said is facts all these crazy idiots said bull george was to slow and easy to read simple as that and nobody beat Mike who was that way

Why is that hard to admit that george loses its obvious he would be fast

[billeau2]

What's wrong with you cant see good the man said he was nothing like Joe he fought like dempsey so why use that blind quote of like joe still you keep using it cause you know mike was nothing like him and it's all you got you crazy troll

A new idiot in the history section, yay! None too soon either, are you a sock puppet for a more long standing troll? Lol.

Tyson may have emulated Dempsey, but the comparison to Frazier holds... For reasons stated in there post which... Surprise, you did not respond to... Rusty.

[SUBZER0ED]

If he caught him what would happen nothing cause Mike never was in danger from a big punch

Tell that to Buster Douglas.

[Ascended]

Tell that to Buster Douglas.

Bad trolling I said from 1 punch that means 1 big punch and he didnt why dont you try watching the Match before you say lies mental troll nobody ever put mike in danger like I said from 1 shot