BoxRec

Youngest vs. Oldest when winning the heavyweight title

I'm really not sure who would win.

Considering the timing you would have to think the younger Tyson would overwhelm the older Foreman

I think Tyson would overwealm him and KO him in the mid rounds Foreman would be able to keep him off

Back when Tyson had head movement and stamina, he gets the better of Big George.

Foreman would not stand a chance. Old man Foreman is vastly overrated, he was only a shadow of his former self when he came back. Great timing, a still useful punch, a rock solid chin and plenty of experience allowed him to dominate the steady diet of stiffs he was served up and it also allowed him to lose gracefully against better fighters he met but a young Tyson would hit him from all sides and do a number on the old man.

hhaehre wrote:Foreman would not stand a chance. Old man Foreman is vastly overrated, he was only a shadow of his former self when he came back. Great timing, a still useful punch, a rock solid chin and plenty of experience allowed him to dominate the steady diet of stiffs he was served up and it also allowed him to lose gracefully against better fighters he met but a young Tyson would hit him from all sides and do a number on the old man.

Wouldn't stand a chance? Like he didnt stand a chance against Holyfield? He lost but he did not lose face, Foreman ALWAYS "stands a chance". When you see the phrase "puncher's chance" his face is what you should see. Old man Foreman was pretty damn smart and KO'd Moorer and gave Holyfield a good run. Tyson was already pre-disposed to fear Foreman...it was part of who he was. These guys aren't robots or I might agree with you, they are people with unique characteristics. And "old man" Foreman had the strongest psyche/character in the business when he got older. That thin veneer of psycho instability would have certainly raised it's head in Tyson in any match with Foreman. For all the physical advantages Tyson MIGHT have had on that day it would be more than balanced by Foreman's solid will and hugely adequate capabilities.

Besides, like someone once said about a potential Duran vs Pryor fight, the only REAL fight that would ever come out of this matchup would be between Mike and the three guys it would have taken to get Tyson into the ring with Foreman.

I'm sorry hhaehre, I don't like to do this but I'm going to have to ask you to go home, hit the books and return when your more informed.

Why hit the books ?

Why not hit the video or DVd collection watch and learn
and hit the gym to get an actual feel for the sport.
To many I fear get their opinions from words written in books
by those who may not be as expert as they proclaim.

i think tyson would destroy him. now vintage GF would be a fight.

are you aware of his pre disposition regarding George? Books are actually handy, since what goes on in the ring shows much of the physical potential but leaves some aspects unstated, this is why you may have erred in your analysis. It does no harm to know more than what goes on in the ring. Half of the boxing game is in the noggin'. Joe Frazier had built up such a "head" of steam combined with a cool calm demolition mentality that he outperformed anything you might have seen in previous bouts because he had won the fight in his head. It even trumped Ali's invincible combination of ego and skill on one remarkable evening.

It is beyond possible and lands in the high probability range thatTyson would fold in the poker game of this fight, and his weak psyche would simply be revealed a bit earlier is all.

It depends who has written the books. I have quite a few
boxing books in the lil ole library and have found that what
these writers know about the training and athletic sides
of the sports has a lot to be desired.

To many experts and writers they over look the fundamentals
of the sport and seem to romanticise other factors and
aspects....ie psychology ad naseum, how x will always
loose to y because of Y's style etc etc

Robinson wrote:It depends who has written the books. I have quite a few
boxing books in the lil ole library and have found that what
these writers know about the training and athletic sides
of the sports has a lot to be desired.

To many experts and writers they over look the fundamentals
of the sport and seem to romanticise other factors and
aspects....ie psychology ad naseum, how x will always
loose to y because of Y's style etc etc

I don't disagree, no one has the ability to extrapolate this info into rock solid absolutes. Anything can happen, but it does not make sense to discount the human aspects vs the pure skill, strength and more easily measurable dynamics such as the "tale of tape". The "tale of psyche" is just as important.

BoxBuzz wrote:

Robinson wrote:It depends who has written the books. I have quite a few
boxing books in the lil ole library and have found that what
these writers know about the training and athletic sides
of the sports has a lot to be desired.

To many experts and writers they over look the fundamentals
of the sport and seem to romanticise other factors and
aspects....ie psychology ad naseum, how x will always
loose to y because of Y's style etc etc

I don't disagree, no one has the ability to extrapolate this info into rock solid absolutes. Anything can happen, but it does not make sense to discount the human aspects vs the pure skill, strength and more easily measurable dynamics such as the "tale of tape". The "tale of psyche" is just as important.

Who were those authors that granberry and his lap dog DaveV used to claim had brainwashed us all?

I voted for Big George.

In my experiences in the pro ring and cage and
my experiences coaching and being around other
fighters (MMAers, kickboxers, wrestlers and
boxers) I have never ever encountered any of
the pyscho babble that one encounters in these
books.

Thats my opionion on that.

Now watching the fights, analysing a fighters
style, attributes and so on is one thing but declaring
that one fighter would crumble as soon as some one
stand up to him, or that another has a bully mentality
or that another manages to 'psyche out' his foes
with his mouth....to me thats something for arm
chair fans to get excited over as they put their
feet up and read a good Bert Sugar novella.

Kym, I guess you have changed your mind now since you have been told that Mike Tyson feared George Foreman? Wonder who started that one? That has to be the most ridiculous rumor floating around the boxing message boards.

I'm not surprised that Collins believes that stuff. Collins feared Granberry to the point that he/she cried to the moderators until he/she got Gran banned. LOL. For a person who is afraid to debate on a message board, it is probably easy for that person to believe that boxers fear other boxers. LOL.

And Buzz, says it would take three men to get Mike Tyson into the ring with Foreman. LOL. I love it. Where does this stuff come from? LOL.

Tyson by conclussive stoppage.

Speed kills.

BoxBuzz wrote: Wouldn't stand a chance? Like he didnt stand a chance against Holyfield?

I seem to remember he actually lost that fight. If you are going to build an argument for old man George you would be advised to base it on fights he actually won not one where he got outpunched by a juiced up cruiser weight.

BoxBuzz wrote: He lost but he did not lose face, Foreman ALWAYS "stands a chance". When you see the phrase "puncher's chance" his face is what you should see.

Pretty much any heavyweight has got a punchers chance. In his second career he had only one single punch ko (against Moorer) that I know of. The rest of his ko's were the result of an accumulation of punches mostly against journeyman fighters.

BoxBuzz wrote: Old man Foreman was pretty damn smart and KO'd Moorer and gave Holyfield a good run. Tyson was already pre-disposed to fear Foreman...it was part of who he was. These guys aren't robots or I might agree with you, they are people with unique characteristics. And "old man" Foreman had the strongest psyche/character in the business when he got older. That thin veneer of psycho instability would have certainly raised it's head in Tyson in any match with Foreman.

Really ? You have that kind of insight into the psyche of the prime Tyson ?

BoxBuzz wrote: For all the physical advantages Tyson MIGHT have had on that day it would be more than balanced by Foreman's solid will and hugely adequate capabilities.

Besides, like someone once said about a potential Duran vs Pryor fight, the only REAL fight that would ever come out of this matchup would be between Mike and the three guys it would have taken to get Tyson into the ring with Foreman.

Funny, it did not take three guys to get the likes of Alex Stewart or Tommy Morrison in the ring with Foreman. But I guess those guys were so much stronger in the mental department than frail little Mike.

BoxBuzz wrote: I'm sorry hhaehre, I don't like to do this but I'm going to have to ask you to go home, hit the books and return when your more informed.

No need for books, the fights are there to watch and analyze. I have seen almost all of Foremans fights and in his second career there is nothing, and I mean NOTHING, to suggest he would beat Tyson. The second career was very carefully orchestrated and he still looked old and slow, struggling with several fringe level fighters. He looked ok against Holyfield, but was beaten out of shape by the fragile Alex Stewart, outpointed by the fragile Morrison, struggled and arguably lost against the mediocre Shultz and definitively got a gift against Savarese. He still had a good punch but not like in his prime and if he could not knock out guys like Morrison, Savarese and the mighty Crawford Grimsley we are to believe that he would spank a prime Tyson because Tyson was scared ?

Since you had a suggestion for me I've got one for you. Look at the actual fights and leave the psychological ramblings to the head-shrinkers.

tyson of 86 would be to fast for foreman of 94,tyson wins around the tenth with foreman looking all swollen and lumpy but even more popular

Tyson '86 would win on points, as he had just about enough stamina to do 12 in those days without getting KO'd.

Obviously, tyson would beat him on points or by KO.

Kym, I guess you have changed your mind now since you have been told that Mike Tyson feared George Foreman? Wonder who started that one? That has to be the most ridiculous rumor floating around the boxing message boards.

It is a lie,Tyson or anyone in Tyson's camp never feared old George.
Cus created his famous system to counter Foreman offense.

^^^Fukin' fanboys

So Foreman fares about the same as say....Bonecrusher?

Buzz wrote: "the only REAL fight that would ever come out of this matchup would be between Mike and the three guys it would have taken to get Tyson into the ring with Foreman."

Do you really believe that crap or do you just like to troll?

John Galt wrote:Buzz wrote: "the only REAL fight that would ever come out of this matchup would be between Mike and the three guys it would have taken to get Tyson into the ring with Foreman."

Do you really believe that crap or do you just like to troll?

DaveV, how are you, my man?

Still training fighters?