Why Mike Tyson Beats a Prime George Foreman

[uncle ben]

You really think Tyson fought as good comp? I could almost see a monty python skit here... "my fighter lost to the better man than your fighter!" lol. I mean at the end of the day Tyson lost to two guys who were pretty damn good, in Holy and Lewis among others, but Frazier lost to and beat Ali and even some of the guys like Ellis he fought were excellent fighters.

I can agree to disagree on the comp. Certainly one way a Tyson Foreman fight could go is a bomb session... While I see this differently it would not shock me to see these two exchanging shots and in that situation Tyson could indeed prevail.

I'll put it this way....if you put the fighters Frazier beat (we'll leave Ali out for the sake of argument) and put them up against the contenders Tyson beat, no one group goes undefeated and there would be unlikely to be any blow outs. If you took the best Tony Tucker and put him against the best Jimmy Ellis or say Pinklon Thomas against Oscar Bonavena, regardless of who you think would win, the fact is that either man would have a solid chance at beating the other and there'd be no foregone conclusions. Plus you have to factor in that the men Tyson beat were somewhat bigger men which could be a deciding factor in how formidable an opponent is H2H.

For example, Floyd Patterson was obviously better skilled than say Oliver McCall. But due to McCall's sheer size advantage in comparison to Patterson, that would make him overall a more formidable opponent, for the most part. I don't think Patterson would've had the type of success McCall did against Lennox Lewis, but I do think McCall would've done much better than Patterson did against Sonny Liston. Not because McCall possessed more skill, but because he was a physically bigger man. Although, I'd give Patterson a reasonable chance to beat McCall if that makes any sense.

[Joe Beamish]

In today's jab-n-grab heavyweight world, Foreman would control the fight.

[uncle ben]

Young foreman was honestly one of the worst fighters I've ever seen at the elite level.

He was big and strong and could punch. That was literally it.

Old foreman was craftier, still strong and hit hard but much wilier with more skill. He was a decent hw. but nothing great.

Young Foreman was a unique fighter in that he could get by with just those attributes you listed. I can think of many heavies who while being more technically skilled than a prime Foreman may very well have lost to him. Not to side track the thread, but someone like Rid**** Bowe comes to mind. While Bowe was a superior boxer and more technically sound, I'm not sure he was the superior fighter and I'd give a prime Foreman a very high chance of stopping him and badly.

[OctoberRed]

Young Foreman was a unique fighter in that he could get by with just those attributes you listed. I can think of many heavies who while being more technically skilled than a prime Foreman may very well have lost to him. Not to side track the thread, but someone like Rid**** Bowe comes to mind. While Bowe was a superior boxer and more technically sound, I'm not sure he was the superior fighter and I'd give a prime Foreman a very high chance of stopping him and badly.

Prime Bowe looked unstoppable at the time. The guy had never even been down until third Holyfield fight right?

[Zaroku]

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.

Prime mike and prime Forman... iron mike... ****s big George up...

[abracada]

What’s prime ?! Hard to define it

[Ben Bolt]

What’s prime ?! Hard to define it

Good point. Some fighters might've peaked before their memorable fights. Who to know?

Always the question: Ali 67 vs Ali 74?
(I give it to Ali 67 by wide decision.)

[HOUDINI563]

Foreman had the will to win, chin, durability and killer instinct of an ATG. He was an ATG. Bone-crusher Smith was a contender in a watered down era who lacked the attributes of an ATG fighter. Any comparison between an ATG such as Foreman and Smith is sheer idiocy. Incomparable.

[OctoberRed]

Foreman had the will to win, chin, durability and killer instinct of an ATG. He was an ATG. Bone-crusher Smith was a contender in a watered down era who lacked the attributes of an ATG fighter. Any comparison between an ATG such as Foreman and Smith is sheer idiocy. Incomparable.

comparing them is like comparing Foreman to Tua

[HOUDINI563]

True. Both punchers but the similarity ends there. One an ATG hwt champion. The other a contender who lacked the attributes of all time greatness.