Fighters That Could Take Tyson In The Prime

First topic message reminder :

I was watching this amazing video of Tyson https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QACELH3www and it got me thinking, is there anyone that could have actually taken Tyson in the prime? Obviously people would put someone like Muhammed Ali, but in complete honesty I think he would actually have taken him, just my personal opinion... But do you guys think that there would have been a Heavyweight on the planet that could have taken Pre-Prison and before he began cutting his training like Pre-Buster Douglas? Because in my personal opinion there isn't a fighter on the planet that could have honestly taken him, his pure aggression and power was enough to take out a lot of guys in the later stages, but when you mixed that with his athletisicm and ability to not get caught whilst coming in was just purely incredible, I would love to see Haye have taken on Tyson in his prime, personally I think you need to have a guy that has speed and 1 punch knockout power, enough to rock him back (I know what you're thinking what about Muhammed Ali?) But I just don't see it happening. I don't think Haye would beat him by the way but give him a decent fight. Or even a Valuev don't forget how big Valuev was and how much of a small Heavyweight Tyson was, could he have even reached his head!? :O

Azania you arent taking into account the circumstances.

Foreman was a legend of the sport and one of the most fearsome punchers the sport has ever seen. Tyson had grown up watching and hearing about Foreman - one of the great heavyweights who existed in the golden era of heavyweight boxing.

Legends have an aura about them and when Foreman made his comeback there was nothing to suggest he didnt retain his destructive power or fearsome reputation. Tyson was faced with a legend of the sport and an alreay established all time great heavy. This is the Foreman that Tyson saw. Not the one that lost to Morrison years later. What could someone like Ruddock possibly have in comparison to this?

There can be arguments made that Tysons fear was unfounded or irrational in the circumstances but the bottom line is Foreman was a legend with a reputation for being a monster. This is what Tyson saw and accordingly did not want to face. He was afraid of what Foreman represented. Whether he actually represented it at the time or not is a sepeate question.

The Mighty Atom wrote:You can't provide any evidence on the contrary so you quite simply are clueless

Foreman while at his peak was beaten by Ali and beat Frazier, Norton and Chuvalo disregarding his comeback the wins he held are more than enough to see rated higher than Tyson or Holmes neither of whom have any top class wins.

You seem to be confusing different periods of time, we're talking about 1990 here so anything that occurs after isn't relevant to the regard that Tyson held Foreman, you can wriggle this way and that but doesn't change that fact.

We're not talking about a peak GF. Good grief.

GF's comback wins were against nondescript fighters (Moorer the exception). He lost to very average fighters. I am not confusing anything.

Colonial Lion wrote:Azania you arent taking into account the circumstances.

Foreman was a legend of the sport and one of the most fearsome punchers the sport has ever seen. Tyson had grown up watching and hearing about Foreman - one of the great heavyweights who existed in the golden era of heavyweight boxing.

Legends have an aura about them and when Foreman made his comeback there was nothing to suggest he didnt retain his destructive power or fearsome reputation. Tyson was faced with a legend of the sport and an alreay established all time great heavy. This is the Foreman that Tyson saw. Not the one that lost to Morrison years later. What could someone like Ruddock possibly have in comparison to this?

There can be arguments made that Tysons fear was unfounded or irrational in the circumstances but the bottom line is Foreman was a legend with a reputation for being a monster. This is what Tyson saw and accordingly did not want to face. He was afraid of what Foreman represented. Whether he actually represented it at the time or not is a sepeate question.

I am not denying that GF was a legend and fearsome puncher. Great boxer and top 10 Heavyweight ATG (horrible grills though). But that was the 1970s version. The 1990s version was anything but. The 1990s version was very beatable and no-where near the calibre of the 1970s version.

Ruddock was live. GF was even slower than the 1970s guy who was slow.

Whatever way you cut it, the 1990 version was still a fearsome puncher and a legend.

Tyson himslef benefited from an aura and a persona similar to what Foreman had. This followed him even when it became apparent he was beatable and past his best.

You are looking at Foreman with the benefit of 20 years hindsight. Tyson was looking at it a very different way without this hindsight.

He was looking at it from the perspective that Foreman was a legend with a terrifying reputation that was still knocking out opponents with ease.

Colonial Lion wrote:Whatever way you cut it, the 1990 version was still a fearsome puncher and a legend.

Tyson himslef benefited from an aura and a persona similar to what Foreman had. This followed him even when it became apparent he was beatable and past his best.

You are looking at Foreman with the benefit of 20 years hindsight. Tyson was looking at it a very different way without this hindsight.

He was looking at it from the perspective that Foreman was a legend with a terrifying reputation that was still knocking out opponents with ease.

Agreed. The 2011 guy is still a legend and fearsome puncher.

azania wrote:

Colonial Lion wrote:Whatever way you cut it, the 1990 version was still a fearsome puncher and a legend.

Tyson himslef benefited from an aura and a persona similar to what Foreman had. This followed him even when it became apparent he was beatable and past his best.

You are looking at Foreman with the benefit of 20 years hindsight. Tyson was looking at it a very different way without this hindsight.

He was looking at it from the perspective that Foreman was a legend with a terrifying reputation that was still knocking out opponents with ease.

Agreed. The 2011 guy is still a legend and fearsome puncher.

Yes and I doubt the 2011 Mike Tyson would be rushing to face him either.

Colonial Lion wrote:

azania wrote:

Colonial Lion wrote:Whatever way you cut it, the 1990 version was still a fearsome puncher and a legend.

Tyson himslef benefited from an aura and a persona similar to what Foreman had. This followed him even when it became apparent he was beatable and past his best.

You are looking at Foreman with the benefit of 20 years hindsight. Tyson was looking at it a very different way without this hindsight.

He was looking at it from the perspective that Foreman was a legend with a terrifying reputation that was still knocking out opponents with ease.

Agreed. The 2011 guy is still a legend and fearsome puncher.

Yes and I doubt the 2011 Mike Tyson would be rushing to face him either.

Seeing as their both retired............

oxring wrote:Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?

Rather silly post.

Prove he paid him rather than using names like Teddy Atlas - who it is well known fellout with Tyson and allegedly held a gun to Tysons head.

A bunch of quotes doesn't prove anything unless it comes out of the mouths of Foreman or Tyson. To claim Tyson was scared of Foreman is laughable.

If it is true that Tyson did indeed duck Foreman during the early 90's, than I think that simply just sums up Tyson's mental fraility.

He was than clearly a man who lacked the psychological strength that would have allowed him to achieve the record and longevity his talent merited.

Because had they fought, Tyson would have used Foreman as heavy bag practice for the duration of the fight.
I'm glad the fight never took place as I would actually have been concerned for George's health.

J.Benson II wrote:If it is true that Tyson did indeed duck Foreman during the early 90's, than I think that simply just sums up Tyson's mental fraility.

He was than clearly a man who lacked the psychological strength that would have allowed him to achieve the record and longevity his talent merited.

Because had they fought, Tyson would have used Foreman as heavy bag practice for the duration of the fight.
I'm glad the fight never took place as I would actually have been concerned for George's health.

I doubt if it is true.

azania wrote:

J.Benson II wrote:If it is true that Tyson did indeed duck Foreman during the early 90's, than I think that simply just sums up Tyson's mental fraility.

He was than clearly a man who lacked the psychological strength that would have allowed him to achieve the record and longevity his talent merited.

Because had they fought, Tyson would have used Foreman as heavy bag practice for the duration of the fight.
I'm glad the fight never took place as I would actually have been concerned for George's health.

I doubt if it is true.

Don't think that is true. Tyson would have used Big George as a punching bag wouldn't have been nice to watch. An old man against prime Tyson who would have been ferocious just because of the name.

I have no doubt whatever that it is true, regardless of whom we believe would have won at the time.

Lotierzo is a giant among US boxing scribes, and a personal acquaintance of all those who were present. He's hardly going to risk his credibility and reputation on idle gossip and hearsay.

WelshDevilRob wrote:

oxring wrote:Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?

Rather silly post.

Prove he paid him rather than using names like Teddy Atlas - who it is well known fellout with Tyson and allegedly held a gun to Tysons head.

A bunch of quotes doesn't prove anything unless it comes out of the mouths of Foreman or Tyson. To claim Tyson was scared of Foreman is laughable.

Good grief.

Frankly, this is astounding.

We have Atlas, we have Lotierzo. Both highly respected. Both "not good enough witnesses" to you and azania.

We have Holyfield's book, which repeats the same claims. Read it. Claims are there in black and white.

Your argument is bereft of any validity. The one thing you have said "Goodman was Foreman's man" has been shown to be invalid. Yes, Goodman did work with big George, but he was with Don King and Tyson at the time.

Your statement "prove it" is also ridiculous. Your burden of proof is unnattainable. Tyson isn't going to damage his "legacy" as the "baddest man" around by admitting to fear. Yes - the fear wasn't nevessarily logical - but frankly - I would give Big George a chance against Tyson. He wouldn't be backed up, he had a good chin, he was bigger, he had a good jab and equalising power.

Your sold on a hype job.

Given you and azania intend to produce nothing of any substance and make frankly ludicrous posts to deny all the evidence before you, I will bow out of the debate at this point.

All the evidence points that Tyson was scared of Foreman. This statement is indisputable.

You can argue that Tysons fear was irrational and Foreman was slow all you want. Many people have irrational fears that make no sense to others.

Foreman was never known for his speed. His reputation was built on his ferocious punching power. In 1990 this hadnt changed. His power was still there. He was still a legend of the sport. We also know from his fights with Holyfield and Moorer that he still possessed a great chin and his power was still suffiecient to change a fight with one punch.

Foreman represented something to Tyson that he doesnt represent to you or I who never had to fight him and can look back with the benefit of hindsight. Nobody is saying Tyson couldnt or wouldnt have won but there is plenty of supporting evidence to say he never wanted to fight him. Tyson was not a mentally sound or strong indivisdual. In many interviews in later life he admits to fear. You are mixing up his media persona with his actual self. He was easily capable of being frightnened, childish, hysterical and vunerable as anyone who spent time with him will confirm - not just the likes of Atlas. Tyson is the first to admit now that his self style imaged was a far stetch from the insecure person beneath it.

Foreman was a legendary heavyweight with an auro of destructiveness which was real and not imagined. He could be outboxed, especially later in his career but Tyson was a KO artist who liked facing outgunned and outpsyched opponents that he could bully. Not legendary heavyweights with power to rival his own and fearsome reputations.

oxring wrote:

WelshDevilRob wrote:

oxring wrote:Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?

Rather silly post.

Prove he paid him rather than using names like Teddy Atlas - who it is well known fellout with Tyson and allegedly held a gun to Tysons head.

A bunch of quotes doesn't prove anything unless it comes out of the mouths of Foreman or Tyson. To claim Tyson was scared of Foreman is laughable.

Good grief.

Frankly, this is astounding.

We have Atlas, we have Lotierzo. Both highly respected. Both "not good enough witnesses" to you and azania.

We have Holyfield's book, which repeats the same claims. Read it. Claims are there in black and white.

Your argument is bereft of any validity. The one thing you have said "Goodman was Foreman's man" has been shown to be invalid. Yes, Goodman did work with big George, but he was with Don King and Tyson at the time.

Your statement "prove it" is also ridiculous. Your burden of proof is unnattainable. Tyson isn't going to damage his "legacy" as the "baddest man" around by admitting to fear. Yes - the fear wasn't nevessarily logical - but frankly - I would give Big George a chance against Tyson. He wouldn't be backed up, he had a good chin, he was bigger, he had a good jab and equalising power.

Your sold on a hype job.

Given you and azania intend to produce nothing of any substance and make frankly ludicrous posts to deny all the evidence before you, I will bow out of the debate at this point.

All the evidence points that Tyson was scared of Foreman. This statement is indisputable.

All I needed from your post was regarding proof. You posted multi times asking for it but then don't accept the same request to you. (Double standards?)

Indisputable in your world but not to everyone else. Your assuming things about me which are incorrect and it tickles me.

Nothing of substance, you say lol, you are producing facts? I don't think so. Your sources all have weaknesses that are well documented to boxing analysts.

Did I mention "Goodman" or are you putting words into my mouth that were never there. I lose all respect for people that are making things up, like you are doing and I'm sorry I have wasted time on this nonsensical arguement.

oxring wrote:

WelshDevilRob wrote:

oxring wrote:Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?
Why did Tyson pay Foreman not to talk about fighting him?

Rather silly post.

Prove he paid him rather than using names like Teddy Atlas - who it is well known fellout with Tyson and allegedly held a gun to Tysons head.

A bunch of quotes doesn't prove anything unless it comes out of the mouths of Foreman or Tyson. To claim Tyson was scared of Foreman is laughable.

Good grief.

Frankly, this is astounding.

We have Atlas, we have Lotierzo. Both highly respected. Both "not good enough witnesses" to you and azania.

We have Holyfield's book, which repeats the same claims. Read it. Claims are there in black and white.

Your argument is bereft of any validity. The one thing you have said "Goodman was Foreman's man" has been shown to be invalid. Yes, Goodman did work with big George, but he was with Don King and Tyson at the time.

Your statement "prove it" is also ridiculous. Your burden of proof is unnattainable. Tyson isn't going to damage his "legacy" as the "baddest man" around by admitting to fear. Yes - the fear wasn't nevessarily logical - but frankly - I would give Big George a chance against Tyson. He wouldn't be backed up, he had a good chin, he was bigger, he had a good jab and equalising power.

Your sold on a hype job.

Given you and azania intend to produce nothing of any substance and make frankly ludicrous posts to deny all the evidence before you, I will bow out of the debate at this point.

All the evidence points that Tyson was scared of Foreman. This statement is indisputable.

Atlas isn't a good source when it comes to Tyson they fell out years ago and Atlas has never had anything good to say about him.

What weaknesses about Lotierzo are well documented then?

The Mighty Atom wrote:What weaknesses about Lotierzo are well documented then?

Wasn't debating him just Atlas because I know their history and Atlas was always willing to put the boot into him. Although I think it's a joke of a statement. A prime Tyson not wanting to fight an old man in Foreman. It would have been a massacre and very hard to watch.

HumanWindmill wrote:I have no doubt whatever that it is true, regardless of whom we believe would have won at the time.

Lotierzo is a giant among US boxing scribes, and a personal acquaintance of all those who were present. He's hardly going to risk his credibility and reputation on idle gossip and hearsay.

Agreed. Nothing more to add.