Frazier vs. Tyson primes

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 15 Nov 2006, 15:32

Sweet Scientist wrote:
cultus wrote: And Frazier sucked .
...so much for ever taking YOU seriously...

I'm the biggest Ali supporter you can find....and I have to admit Frazier sucked....in the first fight Frazier sucked the life right out of the greatest fighter who ever lived. Frazier deserves utmost respect for heart alone and he was damn good as well.

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 15 Nov 2006, 15:32

I'm a bit surprised there's so many saying that Frazier would survive Tyson (I'm one of them)

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 15 Nov 2006, 17:40

If Holyfield (possibly past his prime) beats Tyson twice, Joe Frazier definitely does. Frazier had balls of steel, fought to the death, and a devastating left hook. He'd take Tyson out in 7 or 8 rounds

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 15 Nov 2006, 23:35

bollox wrote:I'm a bit surprised there's so many saying that Frazier would survive Tyson (I'm one of them)

Actually...It's more surprising to me that there's so many who think Tyson would beat Frazier...they must have been hypnotised by those late '80's highlight reels or something...must be all they ever saw on Tyson...they all went to sleep early in the '90's and missed all his losses...

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 16 Nov 2006, 03:02

Decagon wrote:
Seamus wrote:Not really applicable since prime Tyson generally took care of business early. Frazier typically fought harder in the late rounds, but I'd attribute a big part of that to him having more heart. Tyson on the other hand looked a bit frustrated late against Bonecrusher and Tucker, but it had nothing at all to do with conditioning. Peak Tyson never got in the ring in less than top shape.
Laughable. Tyson had NO stamina after the fourth or fifth round. Even suggesting that he was anywhere the equal of Frazier in the last half of the fight is asinine. Tyson could get Frazier out in 3 or 4, but if he didn't, he'd almost assuredly lose.

if tyson has no stamina, then how come he easily outpointed tony tucker, bonecrusher smith, razor ruddock after 12 rounds? how come he knocked out tyrell biggs in 7, jesse ferguson in 6, and jose ribalta in 10? how come from 1986-91 he went the distance over 5 times and showed no signs of fatigue late in the fight??

wheres that bad stamina?

bad stamina= george foreman

tyson simply lacked late round power. but tysons stamina was tops.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 16 Nov 2006, 03:04

The only person to finish Frazier early was Foreman and Tyson was no Foreman, he didnt have Foremans size nor his strength

tyson had foremans weight 220lb, punching power, far superior handspeed, far more accuracy, much better combinations and a deadly uppercut

tyson was better than foreman. i believe foreman is very overated. i believe a prime joe frazier would stand a much better chance vs george

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 16 Nov 2006, 05:31

Decagon wrote:But you run into the problem with how fighters should be ranked. Sure, Mike Tyson might have been better in his prime than Foreman was in his, but that's pure supposition. Isn't it much better to include emphasis on what actually happend, rather than what might have happened? Foreman did beat Joe Frazier, George Chuvalo, Lyle and Ken Norton. Tyson beat Spinks and Holmes, who at the time he fought them were nowhere near as good as Frazier, Norton and perhaps even Lyle or Chuvalo were when Foreman beat them. And while Foreman does get overrated because of his win over Moorer, we can't ignore that fight when ranking him. Once Tyson got a little old, he was useless. Foreman was able to change his style and fight differently.

exactly...

Professor X · Post by **Professor X** » 16 Nov 2006, 06:04

[quote="dr_devious"]If Holyfield (possibly past his prime) beats Tyson twice, Joe Frazier definitely does. Frazier had balls of steel, fought to the death, and a devastating left hook. He'd take Tyson out in 7 or 8 rounds[/quote]

Holyfield was "possibly past his prime" against Tyson? No need to grip up for poor Mike's sake, there, dr. devious. 36 yr old Holyfield was definitely past his prime by then, against Tyson. Do I really need to point that out?

Frazier wins by DQ

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 16 Nov 2006, 07:13

bollox wrote:I'm a bit surprised there's so many saying that Frazier would survive Tyson (I'm one of them)

It's not surprising; Joe Frazier is tough as hell.

Even when Foreman slaughtered him, he kept getting up to fight back.

Imagine if he had done that against Tyson; how would Tyson have reacted?

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 16 Nov 2006, 13:24

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

The only person to finish Frazier early was Foreman and Tyson was no Foreman, he didnt have Foremans size nor his strength
tyson had foremans weight 220lb, punching power, far superior handspeed, far more accuracy, much better combinations and a deadly uppercut

tyson was better than foreman. i believe foreman is very overated. i believe a prime joe frazier would stand a much better chance vs george

Tyson definetely did NOT hit as hard as Foreman. He was much shorter with a much shorter reach . . . he didn't have nearly the ram-rod long left jab of Foreman, the body strength (he let himself get tied up throughout his entire career) nor work the body as effectively as George (despite being shorter). Foreman's uppercut was also even more deadly than Tyson's.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 16 Nov 2006, 14:34

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
tyson was better than foreman.

...at what? Catching pidgeons? Smoking marijuana? Video games? Rape?

TigerMoth · Post by **TigerMoth** » 17 Nov 2006, 01:35

[quote="Sweet Scientist"][quote="bollox"]I'm a bit surprised there's so many saying that Frazier would survive Tyson (I'm one of them)

[/quote]

Actually...It's more surprising to me that there's so many who think Tyson would beat Frazier...they must have been hypnotised by those late '80's highlight reels or something...must be all they ever saw on Tyson...they all went to sleep early in the '90's and missed all his losses...

[/quote]

Early on I was a big Tyson fan. Now, I find him to be a circus clown.

But, with regards to Tyson:Frazier (I was also a very big Frazier fan), I think it would be an intriguing fight and can't imagine anynone could predict the outcome. Tyson was naturally bigger. Joe, I thought at his best in Ali I, weighted 205. Tyson, very fit, was 215 - 220. I think Tyson had faster hands and was more capable with both hands. Joe primarily used his left but did have an effective right on occasion.

I recently saw on old Frazier fight. I was amazed (I had forgotten apparently), now gritty, determined a fighter he was. Willing to take punishment, tireless, tremendous will-power. I think Tyson was a pussy in comparison.

But, Tyson did start very fast (early in his career), had great speed, great power, great bodywork, great uppercut. So, maybe he would have gotten to Joe before he warmed up and imposed his will and stamina.

I think if the fight ended early, it would have been a Tyson win. But, if Joe lasted a few rounds, he would have imposed his will, determination, stamina and would have KO'd Tyson.

meade95 · Post by **meade95** » 17 Nov 2006, 19:57

Always one of the best "what if match-ups".

My take. Inside of four rounds Tyson wins - If it goes past four rounds and Frazier shows he can take what Mike is throwing.....Frazier stops Tyson late -