If Foreman had gotten the decision against Briggs

[6 Pack]

WHat if Foreman had gotten the decision over Briggs like we all know he should have?

He would not have retired. The possible match ups are

Foreman-Lewis, Foreman-Tyson, Foreman-Golota, Foreman-Moorer 2, Foreman-Holyfield 2.

Most likely Foreman would stay away from Lewis. George ussually only fought a guy when he looked vulnurable unless it was for the title and a big pay day. Lewis looked great in destroying Golota and was the second best heavyweight in the world.

Holyfield would not fight Foreman again because he was sued by FOreman for not giving him a rematch after their first fight in 91, and said he would never fight Foreman again.

So we are left with Golota, Tyson and Moorer.

Tyson would be the money fight every one would buy. Foreman would have liked what he saw in Tyson's fights with Holyfield. The fact Tyson was bullied so easily and as a result was thrown off his game plan would be incouraging for Foreman.

Foreman is a much much bigger man than Holyfield and thus could easily bully Tyson just the same. Tyson's lack of head movement and susceptibility to the jab would also be good for George as Foreman still had a hell of a jab.

George's chin was also possibly the best in the division, another prerequisite to fighting Tyson. The fight would most likely go into the late rounds, and it is there that Tyson was very vulnerable in his second comeback.

Plus Tyson would come right at Foreman. Most guys beat George by running and avoid exchanges from a guy who weighed 255 pounds and had a granite chin. Tyson can only come forward.

It would have been a good one. Tyson had much faster hands, but after his loss to Holyfield he seldom looked dominating (except his fight with Lou Savarese).

There is also Golota.

Golota would have been coming back from a one round KO loss to Lewis and two mental break downs with Bowe. Foreman would smell blood.

Like Tyson as long as you had the chin to stick around and were too big and strong to be bullied Golota would start to crack in the late rounds. Golota did not like to have guys stand up to him. Even if he was winning the fight handily as I think he would with Foreman.

He would be too quick and have good movement enought to expose Foreman as slow and immobile (some thing Tyson would not do as he seldom dance around his foes and boxed). But in the late rounds with Foreman still there coming forward with that jab and follow up punches still coming even though Foreman's face was swollen, Golota would start to panic.

Moving all fight long and constantly having to feel the preassure would break Golota's fragile will. Bowe was a punching bag and still Golota folded under the preassure when he was still there deep in the fight. He was dominating Grant until a few rights dropped him and Golota decided he was done for the night.

Tyson made him quite even quicker after two rounds, though Golota told his corner to stop the fight after one. If Foreman came on late, and I think he would, and still was coming forward as strong as he was in the beginning, and I think he would, Golota would quit again.

So if Foreman got by Golota, then who? If he fought Tyson could he win? Or is that too much to ask of him. If he did get by his fight with either Golota or Tyson his next fight would have to be Lewis or Holyfield or Moorer. I would think Lewis and Holyfield beat him outright. IT would not be easy, guys that big who have chins like that and hit hard are never easy to beat, but they would win by decision.

As for Moorer, I don't know. Moorer could win by decision like he was on his way to doing before he got KOed the first time or he could gt KOed agian. WHat do you guys think?

[overhand_right]

erm, guys, tyson was SUSPENDED, the fight would not have happened.

the fight that was being lined up by the networks at the time was holyfield - foreman 2, however that is showtime v hbo, so what most likely would have happened would be lewis v foreman instead of lewis v briggs.

i see big george getting decked en route to a one sided decision loss, similar to lewis v tucker, and retirement.

[Tomato-Can]

I agree with Overhand on the outcome of a Lewis-Foreman fight but I don't think George would have taken that bout. Big George would have retired first.

I also agree that Big George would have taken a fight with Tyson and after some problems earley would have won by late KO.

George Foreman 2 was no dummy. He had a pretty good idea who he could beat and who he could'nt

[6 Pack]

Overhand...no duh! His suspension was only for a year. Foreman could easily have fought a couple more Savarese or Briggs type guys or even Golota while waiting for Tyson to come back and have a tune up of his own.

Remember Foreman was only fight once or maybe twice a year. It was not odd for Foreman to even take a year or even a year and a half off at the end of his career. Check his record, it is true.

Foreman would never fight Lewis. Lewis was too dangerous.
Foreman would only fight those he deemed beatable. Lewis was out. Too bid, too strong.

[overhand_right]

he didnt really take a year off. after his fight with axel schulz he was supposed to fight michael moorer in madison square garden in late 95 then early 96, but it repeatedly fell apart. he eventually fought a bum in japan in late 96.

then he had 2 fights in 97, savarese and briggs.

foreman in december 97 would not have known tyson would get his liscense back in jan 99, and just wait around for the big fight to materialize, in my opinion. tyson was supposed to be suspeneded for up to 5 yrs.

the holyfield fight seemed unlikely due to showtime and dk, therfore lewis would be his only option for a big payday, in early 98, where big ole george would be retired.

[6 Pack]

I think every one knew Tyson was coming back. ANd Georges took off for 17 months before his fight with Moorer then Axel fight, then another year. Then a couple fights in 97, and all he had to do was fight Golota or another Briggs type guy in 98 and him and Tyson would clash for the big money.

It is entirely concievable. Tyson would get a huge pay day, as would Foreman, and both would think they would beat the other guy easy so they would take the fight. It would be a very big fight too. Tyson would win the lineal title if he won. That would help secure him some credibility, more so than wins over the average guys he did end up beating.

ANd Foreman knows a win over TYson and his win over Moorer would make him look like he was fight behing Joe Louis and Ali. If not among them.

Fighting once in 98, and Foreman routinely fought only once a year at this time, and then the Tyson fight.

Either way it is an interesting scenario, but it never happened so lets not get too caught up

But what do you think of a fight between a early 90s Tyson and an early 90's Foreman? You never addressed the issue when I brought it up on your topic of "if Tyson had not gone to jail". I know you don't think the fight would be made but I think it might have.

SO for arguement sake if it was made what do you think?

[BoxBuzz]

After some thought, I don't think it would make much difference at what point in their careers they fought. Foreman's advantage of superior size and strength would always be there. Mike Tyson was taylor made for Big George. A small heavyweight who comes right at you and doesn't want to outbox you. Foremans good chin would allow him to use his famous two handed shove he liked to use on short fighters to keep them out of their range and still in his.

I see Tyson getting discouraged that he can't affect George or impose his will on him. He does not have the heart to do the trenches work that would need to be done. Foreman and Holyfield were two guys with great heart....Just don't see Mike having that kind of day with George. Be it late 90s or early 90s, Big George wins by lopsided decision or late KO.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Holmes was a stick-&-move fighter who relied upon speed & boxing ability to beat you. Foreman was a powerhouse who knocked you senseless. Power stays, speed doesn't. It would take a brave man to bet on Holmes in 1999 when the two were 50.

[dempseyfire]

I would pick Foreman in 92 over the Tyson of 92, but in 1998? Foreman would've been close to 49 years old. Tyson had declined a lot himself by then but I think he still had enough to beat Foreman by decision. But an interesting matchup all the same.

[Ambling Alp]

I detest Tyson as much as the next person, but he would have destroyed Foreman at any time during Foreman's comeback. George was simply way to slow. Tyson would probably jump all over him and hit him almost at will.
Foreman's other big problem was that he couldn't followup when he got a guy hurt. Even if he managed to hurt Tyson with a good shot, Tyson would probably survive. It's doubtful that Foreman could take out Tyson with one shot like he did with Moorer.
This would have been brutal. Tyson would probably win within 5 rounds.
Now in Foreman's prime this would have been a completely different story. Foreman would have destroyed him. But the middle aged Foreman would been in big trouble.

[The Great John L]

I detest Tyson as much as the next person, but he would have destroyed Foreman at any time during Foreman's comeback. George was simply way to slow. Tyson would probably jump all over him and hit him almost at will.
Foreman's other big problem was that he couldn't followup when he got a guy hurt. Even if he managed to hurt Tyson with a good shot, Tyson would probably survive. It's doubtful that Foreman could take out Tyson with one shot like he did with Moorer.
This would have been brutal. Tyson would probably win within 5 rounds.
Now in Foreman's prime this would have been a completely different story. Foreman would have destroyed him. But the middle aged Foreman would been in big trouble.

Nice post. That sounds about right. I gag everytime read a post about how the middle-aged Foreman was better than the prime Foreman. Foreman was as slow as a glacier in his second career, knew it and selected his opponents accordingly.

[HomicideHenry]

Karma is a bitch, that's for sure. What goes around comes around. Foreman got a gift decision over Axel Schulz, then lost a controversial decision to Briggs.

I agree that Foreman knew who he could beat, and who he couldn't. Had he fought Tucker, he would have lost miserably, only because Tucker was so tall and rangy and had a pretty good jab rate. Would have boxed George's ears off.

I do think the Foreman of the 80's and 90's, though, was a better skilled George Foreman, with better stamina and didn't waste shots like the young George did.

I personally would have loved to have seen Tyson-Foreman, because to me it would have been like the old George taking on the young George. Both men in their "primes" were deemed indestructable, viscous, and Tyson, like Foreman was, was branded a villian.

The story I always heard was Tyson was actually scared of Foreman saying that Foreman was putting on the grandpa act for everyone to buy into, when in fact he was still the monster he was. Tyson said he wasn't fooled, that Foreman was an animal. But the fight was derailed, of course, due to Tyson's rape conviction.

[dempseyfire]

Karma is a bitch, that's for sure. What goes around comes around. Foreman got a gift decision over Axel Schulz, then lost a controversial decision to Briggs.

I agree that Foreman knew who he could beat, and who he couldn't. Had he fought Tucker, he would have lost miserably, only because Tucker was so tall and rangy and had a pretty good jab rate. Would have boxed George's ears off.

I do think the Foreman of the 80's and 90's, though, was a better skilled George Foreman, with better stamina and didn't waste shots like the young George did.

I personally would have loved to have seen Tyson-Foreman, because to me it would have been like the old George taking on the young George. Both men in their "primes" were deemed indestructable, viscous, and Tyson, like Foreman was, was branded a villian.

The story I always heard was Tyson was actually scared of Foreman saying that Foreman was putting on the grandpa act for everyone to buy into, when in fact he was still the monster he was. Tyson said he wasn't fooled, that Foreman was an animal. But the fight was derailed, of course, due to Tyson's rape conviction.

The whole "better stamina" thing is a myth.

Foreman's stamina in his comeback was definetely worse than when he was younger. Look at the Holyfield, Steward, Morrison fights. Then look at a young Foreman vs Peralta, or even in the Toronto exhibition. The only reason people say that was that George's defining fight in the 70s was vs Ali in which he got very fatigued, and his defining fight in the 90s was a 10th round KO over Moorer.

As for Foreman never having a chance in the 90s, read this:
Tuesday Sep 16, 2003
Why We Never Saw Foreman-Tyson
by Frank Lotierzo

On March 9 1987, former heavyweight champion George Foreman stopped journeyman Steve Zouski in the fourth round. Foreman's fight versus Zouski was the official beginning of the second leg of Foreman's 18-year career, after being retired for ten years. Foreman's bout with Zouski was his first fight since losing a decision to third-ranked contender Jimmy Young back on March 17 1977.

Foreman said he came back to reclaim the title he lost to Muhammad Ali back in October of 1974. After beating Zouski, Foreman fought on a schedule that had him in the ring just about every other month. He would constantly tell anyone with a microphone after each fight that, he came back because he knew he could beat Mike Tyson and wanted to fight him for the title. Through Big George's first ten to fifteen fights, he was laughed at for the quality of the fighters he was fighting and wasn't taken seriously. Foreman never made excuses for them and admitted that he was fighting guys who had no chance of beating him. He said that he wanted to get used to being back in the ring and was in no hurry. In 1987, Foreman fought five times; in 1988, he fought nine times and in 1989, he fought five times. After 19 fights, Foreman was 19-0 (18). During the course of those 19 fights, Foreman only fought two name fighters: former light heavyweight and cruiserweight champ Dwight Muhammad Qawi (formerly Dwight Braxton), and fringe contender Bert Cooper, stopping both.

On January 15, 1990, Foreman fought former heavyweight title challenger, the hard-hitting Gerry Cooney. Cooney was making a comeback after not fighting in almost two and a half years. Cooney viewed Foreman as an easy win and figured he could capitalize off of Foreman's name and jump to the front of the heavyweight picture with an impressive victory. Going into the fight neither Foreman or Cooney were perceived to be a real threat to any of the top heavyweights in the world, let alone Tyson who was just 23 and the unbeaten, undisputed champ.

By January of 1990, Foreman had built up such a following and fan base that the Foreman-Cooney fight was only seen on PPV. It took Foreman less than two full rounds to mutilate Cooney sending him back into permanent retirement. Foreman displayed accuracy and devastating power in stopping Cooney. It wasn't until after Foreman's destruction of Cooney that he was taken as a serious title contender. Before the boxing world had time to digest Foreman's showing against Cooney, it was dealt an even bigger shock 26 days later.

On February 10 1990, 42-1 underdog James "Buster" Douglas literally turned the boxing world upside down when he traveled to Tokyo and knocked out undisputed heavyweight champ Mike Tyson. Don King promoted Tyson, at the time of his defeat. After Tyson's loss to Douglas, King wanted to have Tyson fight in a high profile fight. He figured a spectacular knockout win over a name opponent would get Tyson back on track to being the man in the heavyweight picture again. King thought he found the perfect opponent in Foreman who was all over television after beating Cooney. Foreman never passed up an opportunity to take a shot at Tyson and throw out challenges to him while doing the talk show circuit.

In the subsequent months following Foreman's victory over Cooney and Douglas' upset of Tyson, there was much talk of a Foreman-Tyson fight. It was a potential fight that captured the public's imagination, and not just the boxing public. In fact, there were several reports that the fight was signed and about to be announced. ESPN Sportscenter devoted numerous segments on the fight assuming it was going to happen. Shortly thereafter, there was an announcement that Foreman and Tyson were going to fight on the same card. In late April of 1990, it was announced that Foreman and Tyson would be fighting a co-main event on June 16 to be broadcast on HBO. Foreman's opponent was Adilson Rodrigues, who was ranked in the top ten by two of the major sanctioning bodies. Tyson's opponent was the unranked Henry Tillman. Tillman was best known for beating Tyson twice in the 1984 Olympic trials.

At this time, Evander Holyfield was getting ready for his sixth fight as a heavyweight against Seamus McDonagh on June 1 in Atlantic City. On the day of the Holyfield-McDonagh fight, I went to grab something to eat with Georgie Benton, Lou Duva and Bobby Goodman. At the time, Goodman was, and still is, Don King's matchmaker. I've known Benton for many years, through him I met Duva, and was introduced to Goodman a couple weeks before Tyson fought Larry Holmes at the Convention Center in Atlantic City in January 1988.

While we were eating, Benton said, "Bobby, what's up with Foreman and Tyson, how come they're not fighting each other on the 16th? Isn't that the fight that King was trying to make?" He said, " Georgie,You'll never believe this but, Fuckin' Tyson is scared shit less of Foreman and wants no part of him. I was there when Don was trying to make the fight. He was telling Tyson that Foreman represented huge money, plus he was old and slow and would be no problem. Tyson got up and screamed at King saying, 'I'm not fight in' that Fuckin' animal, if you love the motherfucker so much, you fight him!'"

Goodman stated that Tyson said Foreman was much better than people thought, and was a dangerous fight for any of the top heavyweights. Goodman proceeded to explain how Tyson was calling Foreman a big con man, and explained that the grandpop act was just a front. He said Tyson saw Foreman as trying to set up the boxing world into thinking he was a pushover, knowing that he really wasn't. Tyson said Foreman was a wolf in sheep's clothing. Goodman continued to say that after seeing Tyson's response to King trying to push him into a fight with Foreman, he had no doubt that Tyson had fear of Foreman. He also said that from that point on, he felt that if Foreman and Tyson ever fought, Foreman would knock Tyson out!

Throughout the lunch Goodman, Duva, Benton, and myself shared stories and thoughts on the fight game. Out of the blue Goodman said, "Oh I remember why else Tyson wanted no parts of Foreman. He said that King had found out from Steve Lott that Tyson and Cus D'Amato used to watch the Frazier-Foreman fight over and over." He continued saying that Tyson loved that fight because he was awed by Foreman's power and Frazier's toughness and how he kept getting up after every knockdown. He also said that Lott told King that Cus sat alongside Tyson saying, "It's suicide against Foreman if you're short and fight a swarming attacking style like Marciano or Frazier," never figuring that Foreman could be a possible Tyson opponent down the road. He said that Cus said the only fighters who had a chance against Foreman were, tall rangy fighters who could fight him from a distance while moving away from him, and no way any swarmer could beat Foreman by going to him.

Those are the words of the man who actually had a hand in trying to make the Foreman-Tyson fight, and was in the room when the negotiations broke down. Over the years, I've talked to many people who were involved with Tyson and Foreman and they all verify the story, every one of them. I have also talked to people who were involved with promoting Foreman, including Ron Weathers who promoted a few of Foreman's comeback fights. He told me the same story. The fight didn't happen because of Tyson being fearful of losing to George. Bob Arum also said that he dreamed of making Foreman-Tyson. He said it would be huge money and that Foreman would stop Tyson easier than he did Frazier. This is something Arum often repeated to the press. I have also heard this from George's brother Roy who was his business manager. I co-hosted a boxing show with Roy in Atlantic City for a little less than two months and this was a regular topic when discussing Tyson. Anyone who covered boxing at the time or knew any of the involved parties knew of this. It's not breaking news.

It is absolutely a fact that Mike Tyson was afraid to fight 41-year-old George Foreman--the same Foreman who Evander Holyfield would fight and beat in April of 1991. I have not a doubt that had Foreman and Tyson fought anytime between 1990 and 1997 that Foreman would have knocked Tyson out inside of three rounds. Tyson just has nothing to beat Foreman with; his edge in hand speed would have been a non-factor. He can't beat him by backing away, and he would have gotten his head handed to him if he brought the fight to Foreman. In addition, Foreman was bigger, stronger, tougher and hit harder. Not to mention the fact that Foreman had a better chin and no fear or doubt, unlike Tyson, who was full of fear and self-doubt.
Think about it, Foreman-Tyson was the biggest fight that could have been made in 1990. Foreman was perceived to be an easy fight for Tyson, and it would have been his biggest payday to date. There can only be one reason why Tyson didn't fight Foreman, and that's because he feared losing to him.
I haven't a morsel of a doubt that Tyson just doesn't match up with Foreman, and he knows it. If Tyson of 1990 was afraid of an old Foreman, think how petrified he would of been of a prime Foreman, the one who stared down both Joe Frazier and Muhammad Ali in 1973 and 1974.
Writers Note

The above account is of a quick get to together for something to eat between myself and the above mentioned parties. The only thing I can't recall for certain is if it took place after the Holyfield-McDonagh final press conference, or the weigh in? However, the above quotes are just that, quotes. Everything there is exactly how the conversation unfolded. Whether you chose to believe it or not is up to you. All I can say is that is exactly what was said. To disbelieve this you have to assume a lot of people close to both Foreman and Tyson are lying. Remember, Tyson is a student of boxing and boxing history. If there ever was a fighter who understood styles and match ups, its Tyson. He was smart enough to know that Foreman was all wrong for him. You can talk about his speed and defense for the next 100 years. The fact of the matter is he had nothing to beat Foreman with! Sometimes the truth is very hard to believe and accept, but the truth is the truth. And the truth is, Mike Tyson was fearful of fighting George Foreman in 1990. The only reason why Foreman-Tyson was never made is because Tyson was afraid Foreman would beat him.

[Ambling Alp]

I simply don't believe this. Even if Tyson really was scared of Foreman (and he had little reason to be) he wouldn't tell anyone.
There are clues that indicate that is made up. You can tell that author was biased with some of statements. "The fact of the matter is that he (Tyson)had nothing to beat Foreman with!"
He is making up stories to back up his own opinion.

Also, if you really think about it, a Foreman-Tyson fight at that stage (Douglas was the champion) would make little sense. Foreman was hoping to get a title fight. There is no way that Foreman was going to risk fighting Tyson in a non-title fight. If he lost badly his comeback would be over.
There were occasional rumours of a Tyson-Foreman fight, but that is probably all there ever was to it. Unless it was a title fight, it wasn't going to happen.
Again, I think a prime Foreman destroys a prime Tyson.
However, I think these "conversations" are complete BS.

[dempseyfire]

I simply don't believe this. Even if Tyson really was scared of Foreman (and he had little reason to be) he wouldn't tell anyone.
There are clues that indicate that is made up. You can tell that author was biased with some of statements. "The fact of the matter is that he (Tyson)had nothing to beat Foreman with!"
He is making up stories to back up his own opinion.

Also, if you really think about it, a Foreman-Tyson fight at that stage (Douglas was the champion) would make little sense. Foreman was hoping to get a title fight. There is no way that Foreman was going to risk fighting Tyson in a non-title fight. If he lost badly his comeback would be over.
There were occasional rumours of a Tyson-Foreman fight, but that is probably all there ever was to it. Unless it was a title fight, it wasn't going to happen.
Again, I think a prime Foreman destroys a prime Tyson.
However, I think these "conversations" are complete BS.

If it was all made up Lotierzo would have been sued for libel. He is a very well known writer. He would not be able to get away with publishing made-up stories. You may not agree with his assesment but no way those conversations did not take place.

[BoxBuzz]

I find the dempseyfire contribution definitive on this subject.

Decagon and Alp...I nearly always have respect for what you folks have to say....and this discussion is no exception, but what dempsey has contributed here rings true in so many ways.

Foreman gave Holy all he could handle and rocked him on occasion. He certainly got Holyfields respect with some of his shots...something Tyson never got. No one can argue that Foreman gave a much better account of himself with Holy than Tyson ever did. Don't forget that Foreman beat the man that beat Holyfield for the title. Add the styles discrepancy and it just adds up that Foreman would have been a great bet if this would have happened.

I'm actually a bit puzzled at the degree of passion on behalf of the doubters on this one...but that's what makes talking sports interesting I suppose.

[yiddo14]

Most likely Foreman would stay away from Lewis. George ussually only fought a guy when he looked vulnurable unless it was for the title and a big pay day. Lewis looked great in destroying Golota and was the second best heavyweight in the world.

Lewis was the number one heavyweight in the world at the time.
Big George was'nt the only one steering clear of him...

[Klee Gluckman]

Tyson has no chance against Foreman. Foreman could easily soak up Tyson punches, Tyson quits late in the fight. If Botha, and Noris Frustrated him to the point where he was fowling.

[Ambling Alp]

I find the dempseyfire contribution definitive on this subject.

Decagon and Alp...I nearly always have respect for what you folks have to say....and this discussion is no exception, but what dempsey has contributed here rings true in so many ways.

Foreman gave Holy all he could handle and rocked him on occasion. He certainly got Holyfields respect with some of his shots...something Tyson never got. No one can argue that Foreman gave a much better account of himself with Holy than Tyson ever did. Don't forget that Foreman beat the man that beat Holyfield for the title. Add the styles discrepancy and it just adds up that Foreman would have been a great bet if this would have happened.

I'm actually a bit puzzled at the degree of passion on behalf of the doubters on this one...but that's what makes talking sports interesting I suppose.

Well Buzz, this may surprise you, but I am going to argue that Tyson did better against Holyfield than Foreman did. The first half of the Holyfield-Tyson fight was very evenly matched. It looked like it could go either way. Than Tyson gradually faded and Holyfield took over. Tyson lost, but it wasn't like he was embarrassed.
Foreman did land a few bombs, but Holyfield was never in danger of losing. If they would fought 10 more times, the middle aged Foreman never would have beaten Holyfield. Tyson would have won 2 or 3 times against Holyfield had he fought him 10 times.
Foreman had a lot of trouble with Alex Stewart and Lou Savarese. Neither one of them lasted one round with Tyson.
Of course you are right that styles are important. However, I am arguing that the style of the middle aged Foreman was made for Tyson.
Old George was easy to hit. Holyfield hit him almost at will. He almost had him a couple of times but the bell rang. Holyfield could punch, but Tyson was a much harder puncher. If Tyson hit Foreman that many times, Foreman wouldn't be able to stay on his feet.
Old George fought at way too slow of a pace. He might land a good punch now and then, but he couldn't follow up. He didn't have a consistent jab to keep Tyson at bay. Tyson would jump all over him. And once Foreman went down, there is no way that Old George is going to drag that old big body back up.
I don't like saying all of this. Like a lot of people, I liked Foreman and couldn't stand Tyson. However IMO it's a lot of wishful thinking on some people's part that the middle aged Foreman would have beaten Tyson.

[dempseyfire]

I .

. Tyson would have won 2 or 3 times against Holyfield had he fought him 10 times.
quote]

Hmmm, based on what??

Tyson in 15 rounds with Holyfield won, what, three??

He DID get dominated and embarassed. Holyfield landed a lot on Foreman but he also doesn't have the issue of reaching Foreman like Tyson does . . .Holyfield was firing 4-6 punch combos off of double left jabs. Tyson even at his peak did not fight in this fashion, let alone in the 1990s.

Tyson in order to beat Foreman would've had to fight a very disciplined fight (he struggled enough following a fight plan even with Rooney in the 80s) and by 1997-98 he was incapable of doing so.

[Ambling Alp]

I simply don't believe this. Even if Tyson really was scared of Foreman (and he had little reason to be) he wouldn't tell anyone.
There are clues that indicate that is made up. You can tell that author was biased with some of statements. "The fact of the matter is that he (Tyson)had nothing to beat Foreman with!"
He is making up stories to back up his own opinion.

Also, if you really think about it, a Foreman-Tyson fight at that stage (Douglas was the champion) would make little sense. Foreman was hoping to get a title fight. There is no way that Foreman was going to risk fighting Tyson in a non-title fight. If he lost badly his comeback would be over.
There were occasional rumours of a Tyson-Foreman fight, but that is probably all there ever was to it. Unless it was a title fight, it wasn't going to happen.
Again, I think a prime Foreman destroys a prime Tyson.
However, I think these "conversations" are complete BS.

If it was all made up Lotierzo would have been sued for libel. He is a very well known writer. He would not be able to get away with publishing made-up stories. You may not agree with his assesment but no way those conversations did not take place.

It's very difficult to win a libel suit which is why most people who are libled against don't even try. Writers take information form unreliable sources, write half-truths, exaggerations, misquote people and write out right lies all of the time.

Does that article seem 100 % legitimate to you? I see a lot of red flags and have mentioned some of them already.
Another thing that bothers me about the article, is that he says that he went to have lunch with Benton,Duva, and Goodman, and this topic just sort of came up.
Yet at the end of the article, the writer says that these are quotes. How can they all be quotes? It wasn't an interview. He was having lunch, he wouldn't have had a tape recorder on. I seriously doubt these are the exact words that they said.

Another quote that really seems suspicious: Goodman said Lott told King that Cus said alongside Tyson "It's suicide against Foreman if you're short and fight a swarming style like Marciano or Frazier".

I'm sorry, but I think there is good reason to dispute this "quote".
1. It almost for sure isn't a exact quote". It's like the old telephone game. Goodman said that Lott said that King said that Cus said... come on. This isn't a quote.
2. Don King is part of this. Never believe anything he says.


Yet another think I found interesting in the article is that the author himself says "Whether you choose to beleive it or not is up to you". That seems like a very peculiar thing for a writer to say.

[Ambling Alp]

I .

. Tyson would have won 2 or 3 times against Holyfield had he fought him 10 times.
quote]

Hmmm, based on what??

Tyson in 15 rounds with Holyfield won, what, three??

He DID get dominated and embarassed. Holyfield landed a lot on Foreman but he also doesn't have the issue of reaching Foreman like Tyson does . . .Holyfield was firing 4-6 punch combos off of double left jabs. Tyson even at his peak did not fight in this fashion, let alone in the 1990s.

Tyson in order to beat Foreman would've had to fight a very disciplined fight (he struggled enough following a fight plan even with Rooney in the 80s) and by 1997-98 he was incapable of doing so.

You really don't think Tyson couldn't have won 2 or 3 times against holyfield in 10 fights? He would have one with his "puncher's chance" alone.
Tyson won 3 or 4 rounds in their first fight and one in their second. A few of the rounds in the first fight were close, and the first rounds in the 2nd Holyfield were fairly close. He was competitive with Holyfield. Tyson wasn't embarrassed in the first holyfield fight. Getting stopped in 11 rounds in a tough fight against a great fighter isn't embarrassing.

Why would Tyson have to fight a disciplined fight against foreman. Foreman simply wasn't that dangerous against someone that could take a punch. How many examples do you need?
-Foreman barely beat Alex Stewart. (Tyson blew him out in one round)
-Foreman barely beat Lou Savarese. (Tyson blew him out in one round)
-Foreman lost to Tommy Morrison, who had no chin and no defense.
-Foreman got a gift decision against Axel Schulz, a mediocre fighter.
-Foreman should have gotten the decision against Briggs, but he should have been able to stop him easily if he can handle Tyson easily.
-Foreman couldn't knockout Crawford Grimsley. Grimsley was knocked out in his next two fights, including getting knocked out in the first round by the great Jimmy Thunder.
-Foreman couldn't knock out Big Foot Martin, who was knocked by several other fighters.

All of these guys (none were anything special at all) can give Foreman trouble but Foreman would just blow away Tyson?
It's much, much more likely that Tyson would have blown away old George.
George could still land a good shot here and there, (though not near as hard as he could in prime) but he couldn't do it enough. A fighter with a decent chin would get off the the hook.

Winning the title against Moorer at that age like he did was incredible. He took a lot punishment in that fight. The punch that knocked out Moorer out was a good shot. However, that punch doesn't knockout Tyson. Furthermore, there is no way that Foreman would have taken that many punches from Tyson and survived.
How long do you think Moorer would have last against Tyson?

My other main point I want to make is that Tyson in the 1990's could still fight. Remember, Foreman's last fight was in 1997, so we are only talking about Tyson's fight's up until then. Yes, Tyson looked bad against Lewis, and even worse against Williams and McBride. But they were way after Foreman retired.
In 1996, Tyson's fight against Bruno was one of the best performances of his career.

Yes I believe that a prime Foreman would crush a prime Tyson.
Yes, I believe a 40 year old foreman would beat a 40 year old Tyson.
However, if you are going to give Tyson a 17 year age advantage, then no I don't think Foreman would beat Tyson.

[The Great John L]

Alp, good post and very reasonable analysis/opinion.

[dempseyfire]

. Tyson would have won 2 or 3 times against Holyfield had he fought him 10 times.
quote]

Hmmm, based on what??

Tyson in 15 rounds with Holyfield won, what, three??

He DID get dominated and embarassed. Holyfield landed a lot on Foreman but he also doesn't have the issue of reaching Foreman like Tyson does . . .Holyfield was firing 4-6 punch combos off of double left jabs. Tyson even at his peak did not fight in this fashion, let alone in the 1990s.

Tyson in order to beat Foreman would've had to fight a very disciplined fight (he struggled enough following a fight plan even with Rooney in the 80s) and by 1997-98 he was incapable of doing so.

You really don't think Tyson couldn't have won 2 or 3 times against holyfield in 10 fights? He would have one with his "puncher's chance" alone.
Tyson won 3 or 4 rounds in their first fight and one in their second. A few of the rounds in the first fight were close, and the first rounds in the 2nd Holyfield were fairly close. He was competitive with Holyfield. Tyson wasn't embarrassed in the first holyfield fight. Getting stopped in 11 rounds in a tough fight against a great fighter isn't embarrassing.

Why would Tyson have to fight a disciplined fight against foreman. Foreman simply wasn't that dangerous against someone that could take a punch. How many examples do you need?
-Foreman barely beat Alex Stewart. (Tyson blew him out in one round)
-Foreman barely beat Lou Savarese. (Tyson blew him out in one round)
-Foreman lost to Tommy Morrison, who had no chin and no defense.
-Foreman got a gift decision against Axel Schulz, a mediocre fighter.
-Foreman should have gotten the decision against Briggs, but he should have been able to stop him easily if he can handle Tyson easily.
-Foreman couldn't knockout Crawford Grimsley. Grimsley was knocked out in his next two fights, including getting knocked out in the first round by the great Jimmy Thunder.
-Foreman couldn't knock out Big Foot Martin, who was knocked by several other fighters.

All of these guys (none were anything special at all) can give Foreman trouble but Foreman would just blow away Tyson?
It's much, much more likely that Tyson would have blown away old George.
George could still land a good shot here and there, (though not near as hard as he could in prime) but he couldn't do it enough. A fighter with a decent chin would get off the the hook.

Winning the title against Moorer at that age like he did was incredible. He took a lot punishment in that fight. The punch that knocked out Moorer out was a good shot. However, that punch doesn't knockout Tyson. Furthermore, there is no way that Foreman would have taken that many punches from Tyson and survived.
How long do you think Moorer would have last against Tyson?

My other main point I want to make is that Tyson in the 1990's could still fight. Remember, Foreman's last fight was in 1997, so we are only talking about Tyson's fight's up until then. Yes, Tyson looked bad against Lewis, and even worse against Williams and McBride. But they were way after Foreman retired.
In 1996, Tyson's fight against Bruno was one of the best performances of his career.

Yes I believe that a prime Foreman would crush a prime Tyson.
Yes, I believe a 40 year old foreman would beat a 40 year old Tyson.
However, if you are going to give Tyson a 17 year age advantage, then no I don't think Foreman would beat Tyson.

Tyson lost the 3rd round in the rematch BIG TIME. He may have been doing ok before he started to have Evander's ear for a midnight snack, but if you are getting so frustrated dealing with a fighter that you have to take two chomps out of his lobes, you aren't winning that round.

3 rounds in the first fight AT MOST, and only round 5 was definitive. The subsequent rounds 6-11 was Evander kicking Tyson's ass and outboxing the puss out of him.

You're honestly going to do the whole "A beat C who went distance with D" . . come on, we are beyond that. By that measure,
"FRANS BOTHA was easily winning rounds vs Tyson, yet Foreman gets blown away?" etc. After he won the title Foreman was just coming in for a night's pay. He wasn't trying to knock Shutlz, Saverese, Grimsley out.

Anyway, I never said Foreman blows Tyson away. I'm seeing Tyson winning the early rounds but gradually getting worn down by Foreman's jab and strength in-close. Who did Tyson ever "blow away" in the 1990s who was as durable as Foreman? Tyson couldn't put away a big strong unintimidated fighter like Ruddock and Ruddock had very little skills and fought Tyson like he was asking to get knocked out.

George wouldn't come into the ring scared to death like Bruno did.

Now look, I don't see a Tyson win as some impossibility. But Tyson isn't going to just come in and do a Henry Tillman/Bruno decapitation on a specimen like Foreman, no matter how old he is. I think it would have a highly competetive match either way, and a very fun fight.