Since George keeps talking about this lately, for some reason. Ive always thought George was way more dangerous in the early part of his comeback than he was by the time he got to the marquee fights with Morisson, Moorer. Big difference between 38 and 43, lets face it. By 89 Mike had slid into complacency, the rot beginning to set in. For talking sake, Carl Williams pulls out with an injury and HBO bring in George as late replacement. What happens?
I think Mike beats him. George tended to bust up and blow out his arse once he started throwing and not landing. He wasn't fast enough to land on Mike like Douglas did. George would be dangerous with that uppercut but I think Mike does enough landing and making George miss to get the job done.
I'd say that Tyson beats any version of Foreman, and I know it's unpopular to say that prime v prime. I think that prime Foreman was too wide open to beat Tyson, and comeback Foreman was too slow. But I'd actually give 89 Foreman much better odds of beating Mike than 73 Foreman.
73 Foreman is basically looking for a KO in the first 3 rounds. Once he doesn't get it, he get's laid out.
This. Plus, the rationale for Foreman beating Tyson is ALWAYS the Frazier fight, but Mike simply was not like Frazier. Mike proved that he had one helluva chin early in fights, and that it took a sustained beating him to take him out. Even when he was old and shot, it took Lewis 8 rounds of teeing off on him to stop him. I see Foreman getting countered and KO'd prime-for-prime.
People refuse to take into account how badly damaged he, Frazier, was coming out of the Ali fight. He spent 6 weeks in Hospital after that, and I think Ali took his chin in a way. Mike always had a good chin and was a naturally bigger man than Frazier.
It would depend if this fight gave Tyson a similar payday to the Spinks fight, because then Tyson would take the match seriously and win a lopsided UD. If he gets a fraction of what he got in the Spinks purse he won't take it as seriously and get TKO'd late on the stool
It's not a popular opinion, but ''prime'' foreman was a bit shitty. Great power and strenght, good decent jab and knew how to cut the ring, but he was a fucking caveman and had no stamina. If prime foreman fought like the old one, I think he would have a hell of a shot against tyson. But he didn't. And as we say in french, if Neil had testicles he wouldn't be used as the forum tampoon. in 1989? Forget about it. Tyson is way too dynamic for the old man.
Foreman can be competitive due to styles. Older big George was like a brick wall that could not only punch back, but had a lot of experience. That's going to provide problems for somebody is always moving forward looking to land. This is 1989 we're talking about though. Tyson not only has a big edge in hand speed but much more importantly he still utilized a lot of head movement and angles unlike later career Mike. Tyson would indeed get hit but not often enough. It wouldn't be a Foreman-Lyle repeat.
I used to favor Foreman but I agree with X. Prime for prime, Mike wins this. Speed and power is just too much of a lethal combination for George. It’s a fun brawl, though. Foreman would get some shots in.
He was. Those were my two favorite Tyson fights even though I did not agree with referee Richard Steele. He was a masterful fighter and those two guys did everything in their fights with incredible power like rock em sock em robots. Tyson was Super Tough and would have knocked out Foreman, IMO. I worked that Tyson - Tillman and Foreman - Rodriguez Doubleheader at the old Caesar's parking lot and that was set up for them to fight afterwards. It was the last time I saw John Derek with his wife Dark Bo Derek- a Bronze Sculpted Goddess Of The Desert as good as she looked in movies she was better in person - they always came to the big fights, good people that loved boxing. But I have always heard Tyson didn't want it and that would have generated massive money. Would have had some spectacular fights had he not gone up the river he was Immortal.
