Tyson Fury vs Joe Fraizer

badabing106 · 16-12-2014 9:57pm #1

I know that if this was posted on an American forum, every post would be Frazier by early ko.

I think if being realistic, Tyson would win every time. He has the skills, heart and versatility of th smaller man, and the power height weight advantages of being the massively bigger man.

Frazier has no advantage

Tyson is 6 ft 9 and 18 stone 7

Frazier is 5ft 10 and 14 stone 7

Molester Stallone II · 16-12-2014 10:02pm

True enough, but if you're going to look at it logically, and have both boxers fighting in the modern era, with all the technology and training methods at his disposal, then Joe Frazier would have been fighting at cruiserweight, or maybe even super middle

badabing106 · 16-12-2014 10:12pm

I would agree with that fully! but I think most people would still believe Joe Frazier would beat Tyson fury if they were fighting at heavyweight.

HigginsJ · 16-12-2014 11:03pm

I'm not sure if this is a serious thread or not. Tyson Fury is a fringe world level fighter (realistically nothing more than European level), Frazier is one of the all time great heavyweights (5"11).

Frazier wins this by TKO nice & early every single time. He beat a number of much taller fighters during his career.

It's beyond ridiculous or even give Fury a shot against Frazier.

badabing106 · 16-12-2014 11:28pm

Very serious. l think the top cruiserweight today, Huck, would beat Frazier. It would be a very difficult task for man who is 4 stone lighter, almost 12 inches shorter, and considerably less versatile, to beat someone like Fury. How would he beat him? With a telegraphed left hook that Tyson couldn't forsee coming? I think Tyson would give him a more severe beating than Foreman did

Henno30 · 17-12-2014 3:47am

Steve Cunningham laid Tyson Fury out. Watch Frazier-Ali 1 and think about that.

Deiseboy01 · 17-12-2014 9:59am

badabing106 wrote: »

Very serious. l think the top cruiserweight today, Huck, would beat Frazier. It would be a very difficult task for man who is 4 stone lighter, almost 12 inches shorter, and considerably less versatile, to beat someone like Fury. How would he beat him? With a telegraphed left hook that Tyson couldn't forsee coming? I think Tyson would give him a more severe beating than Foreman did

Huck beats Joe Frazier! Obvious WUM, end of thread right there.

walshb · 17-12-2014 10:42am

HigginsJ wrote: »

I'm not sure if this is a serious thread or not. Tyson Fury is a fringe world level fighter (realistically nothing more than European level), Frazier is one of the all time great heavyweights (5"11).

Frazier wins this by TKO nice & early every single time. He beat a number of much taller fighters during his career.

It's beyond ridiculous or even give Fury a shot against Frazier.

It is not at all ridiculous to give a pro today that is 9-10 inches taller and 30-40 lbs heavier a chance. Frazier has to land to win. He has to land to the head as well. No way his body attack does the job. He will also have to eat a lot of leather before he even gets within striking range. If Joe does land as clean as he can to the head with his one only shot, the left hook, do folks think it has the same effect as it would against a man 5-6 inches shorter than Fury?

HigginsJ · 17-12-2014 2:18pm

walshb wrote: »

It is not at all ridiculous to give a pro today that is 9-10 inches taller and 30-40 lbs heavier a chance. Frazier has to land to win. He has to land to the head as well. No way his body attack does the job. He will also have to eat a lot of leather before he even gets within striking range. If Joe does land as clean as he can to the head with his one only shot, the left hook, do folks think it has the same effect as it would against a man 5-6 inches shorter than Fury?

I see your point and I agree that height and reach advantage can be telling but it's just that Fury is not anywhere near that level (to date, maybe I'll be wrong about him)

You could replace Fury with anyone like Wilder, Price, Joshua, Brown and my point would remain the same. Until these guys prove they are World class fighters in their own time then this is not a debate.

walshb · 17-12-2014 2:39pm

HigginsJ wrote: »

I see your point and I agree that height and reach advantage can be telling but it's just that Fury is not anywhere near that level (to date, maybe I'll be wrong about him)

You could replace Fury with anyone like Wilder, Price, Joshua, Brown and my point would remain the same. Until these guys prove they are World class fighters in their own time then this is not a debate.

It is a debate. They may not have set the world on fire, but if you pit it man vs. man then it's well up for debate. These SHW men today don't have to be extraordinarily brilliant or even great to still be too much for HW men from the 70s, like a 5 feet 10 Frazier. Sure, a Foreman from the 70s would probabaly be too good, but not someone like Frazier, who would giving up far too much in physicality. Joe was really just a one handed wrecking machine.

walshb · 17-12-2014 2:48pm

Henno30 wrote: »

Steve Cunningham laid Tyson Fury out. Watch Frazier-Ali 1 and think about that.

So, how does the fight pan out? How does Joe walk through Fury, bully him and catch him clean with his left hook? I see Joe being man handled and tossed around by a far far bigger man. 40 lbs heavier and 10 inches taller. I see Joe eating too much on the way in, and when he does finally get close, what real damage will he do against such a big and tall and heavy man? Fury makes Foreman look small, and look at the trouble Joe had trying to get to work vs Foreman.

HigginsJ · 17-12-2014 2:56pm

walshb wrote: »

It is a debate. They may not have set the world on fire, but if you pit it man vs. man then it's well up for debate. These SHW men today don't have to be extraordinarily brilliant or even great to still be too much for HW men from the 70s, like a 5 feet 10 Frazier. Sure, a Foreman from the 70s would probabaly be too good, but not someone like Frazier, who would giving up far too much in physicality. Joe was really just a one handed wrecking machine.

Fair enough, out of interest would you have the same thoughts on Iron Mike against these guys. He was an inch shorter and had a shorter reach than Joe?

Do you think that Tyson's skill set would have allowed him to overcome these guys?

walshb · 17-12-2014 3:06pm

HigginsJ wrote: »

Fair enough, out of interest would you have the same thoughts on Iron Mike against these guys. He was an inch shorter and had a shorter reach than Joe?

Do you think that Tyson's skill set would have allowed him to overcome these guys?

Tyson for me had a far better skill set than Joe. He was a far deadlier overall puncher, and proved that he could mix it and beat big men. Tucker and Biggs were big dudes, ones I would rate a lot higher than Wilder and Fury. Yes, Wilder and Fury are even bigger, but Tyson was a wicked and deadly body-head hitter. I don't believe that Mike was an inch shorter. Tyson is listed as 5 feet 10 and 5 feet 11. Joe and Tyson were about the same height. Tyson also had much faster attacking feet and great upper body movement. He wouldn't be taking near as much on the way in as Joe.

All goes back to styles and strengths and weaknesses. Joe has a much better chance to beat Tyson than he does at beating Fury.

HigginsJ · 17-12-2014 4:03pm

walshb wrote: »

Tyson for me had a far better skill set than Joe. He was a far deadlier overall puncher, and proved that he could mix it and beat big men. Tucker and Biggs were big dudes, ones I would rate a lot higher than Wilder and Fury. Yes, Wilder and Fury are even bigger, but Tyson was a wicked and deadly body-head hitter. I don't believe that Mike was an inch shorter. Tyson is listed as 5 feet 10 and 5 feet 11. Joe and Tyson were about the same height. Tyson also had much faster attacking feet and great upper body movement. He wouldn't be taking near as much on the way in as Joe.

All goes back to styles and strengths and weaknesses. Joe has a much better chance to beat Tyson than he does at beating Fury.

I agree with all of that, don't think Joe beats Tyson but I know what your saying (even though I still disagree with you on Joe vs Fury)

walshb · 17-12-2014 4:05pm

HigginsJ wrote: »

I agree with all of that, don't think Joe beats Tyson but I know what your saying (even though I still disagree with you on Joe vs Fury)

I think Joe comes up short vs. Tyson, but he does match up well with him stylistically and physically.

Mantis Toboggan · 17-12-2014 4:46pm

Fellas, this isn't even a contest...

walshb · 17-12-2014 4:59pm

Tyson Fury wrote: »

Fellas, this isn't even a contest...

Is that it? Maybe elaborate a bit.....?

Mantis Toboggan · 17-12-2014 5:52pm

walshb wrote: »

Is that it? Maybe elaborate a bit.....?

OK while Tyson is the ultimate gypsy warrior it really is difficult to compare both fighters. They've a complete different skill set and fighting style not to mention they come from different generations.

If I was to think in terms of celebrity death match mtv style then I'd have to come to the conclusion that Tyson, fighting to a game plan and under supervision from Peter Fury would jab his head off all night. The man is just too big and powerful.

The man in red and black · 18-12-2014 3:47am

I am not the most knowledgeable about the finer details of boxing and will admit that right away. I think I am right in saying Frazier would have been more a brawler than a boxer? So perhaps he could not get inside the jab to beat Fury up?

However it can be done surely? Why is it all being put down to size, this is surely similar to Haye Vs Valuev in terms of height and weight differences and Haye won that. We should not be arguing just based on the size difference!

T-K-O · 18-12-2014 4:04am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdFP-R_LYSM

FTA69 · 18-12-2014 3:09pm

walshb wrote: »

Tyson for me had a far better skill set than Joe. He was a far deadlier overall puncher, and proved that he could mix it and beat big men. Tucker and Biggs were big dudes, ones I would rate a lot higher than Wilder and Fury. Yes, Wilder and Fury are even bigger, but Tyson was a wicked and deadly body-head hitter. I don't believe that Mike was an inch shorter. Tyson is listed as 5 feet 10 and 5 feet 11. Joe and Tyson were about the same height. Tyson also had much faster attacking feet and great upper body movement. He wouldn't be taking near as much on the way in as Joe.

All goes back to styles and strengths and weaknesses. Joe has a much better chance to beat Tyson than he does at beating Fury.

Tyson is like a superman version of Frazier. He had a better physique and was a lot stronger for a start. Secondly, he was lightening fast, as in one of the fastest heavyweights ever. He matched Frazier's left hook in terms of power and also superceded Frazier with his overall skillset in terms of offensive punching. Instead of trying to land the big punch he threw lightening combinations, any of whose punches had the possibility to spark you out no matter who you are.

On top of this his defense was way out of Frazier's league. Joe did a bit of bobbing and weaving but Tyson's game was far, far more developed and involved crazy amounts of lateral movement on top of the weaving and general inside game.

Big Ears · 19-12-2014 12:32am

The man in red and black wrote: »

I am not the most knowledgeable about the finer details of boxing and will admit that right away. I think I am right in saying Frazier would have been more a brawler than a boxer? So perhaps he could not get inside the jab to beat Fury up?

However it can be done surely? Why is it all being put down to size, this is surely similar to Haye Vs Valuev in terms of height and weight differences and Haye won that. We should not be arguing just based on the size difference!

He did, but Haye is technically on another stratosphere to Valuev, he's monumentally quicker, actually hits far harder and yet, yet he only won a close decision. Simply because fighting a man who is 9 inches taller, has a huge weight advantage, and has a 7 inch reach advantage is extremely difficult.
Nikolay Valuev was 6-2 in title fights, and he was an extremely ordinary fighter. That alone shows what a big advantage size can be.

thierry14 · 19-12-2014 3:52am

walshb wrote: »

I think Joe comes up short vs. Tyson, but he does match up well with him stylistically and physically.

I'm thinking Tyson. This has been debated on this forum before, and alot of posters believe Tyson would knock out Frazier early because of what Foreman did to him.

Tyson and Frazier are so different. They both come forward but other than that not a lot of similarities, Tyson blows Frazier out of the water in every physical way.

I favor Tyson here but I do have some questions about Tyson handling all time great shorter fighters.

Tyson was made to fight larger opponents.

He just needs one clean shot to take Fury out, anyone who thinks he wouldn't beat Fury is mad.He's made to beat guys like Fury, big useless lumps that are 2 stone overweight.

Haye would have ko'd Fury if he was brave enough to fight that time.

thierry14 · 19-12-2014 4:01am

Big Ears wrote: »

He did, but Haye is technically on another stratosphere to Valuev, he's monumentally quicker, actually hits far harder and yet, yet he only won a close decision. Simply because fighting a man who is 9 inches taller, has a huge weight advantage, and has a 7 inch reach advantage is extremely difficult.
Nikolay Valuev was 6-2 in title fights, and he was an extremely ordinary fighter. That alone shows what a big advantage size can be.

Can't compare Valuev to Fury.

Valuev was a tank.

Only a handful of Heavyweight's in history had the power to put him down.

walshb · 19-12-2014 8:55am

thierry14 wrote: »

Tyson was made to fight larger opponents.

He just needs one clean shot to take Fury out, anyone who thinks he wouldn't beat Fury is mad.He's made to beat guys like Fury, big useless lumps that are 2 stone overweight.
.

The thread is asking if Frazier beats Fury. You are speaking here about Mike Tyson KOing Fury?

Do you believe that Joe Frazier beats Fury?

cowzerp · 19-12-2014 10:49am

Frazier while a legend would just be a journey man these day's, and thats regardless if he dropped a weight division or 2, some of the old Heavies would probably be competitive, Ali maybe, Foreman for sure, Holmes i think would be but not many more, Boxing has progressed both physically and tactically since the 70's and people need to leave the romantic notions behind

thierry14 · 19-12-2014 2:40pm

walshb wrote: »

Do you believe that Joe Frazier beats Fury?

I think he would, he has stayed with much punchers than Fury.

Peak Frazier (around 205lbs) is not too small as most here think he is.

He was in shape,not like modern heavies todaywho would be 220lb+ with his build.

Frazier was a hard man who would have no fear of Fury, that alone gives him a massive advantage, as Fury is a coward imo.

cowzerp · 19-12-2014 2:55pm

thierry14 wrote: »

I think he would, he has stayed with much punchers than Fury.

Peak Frazier (around 205lbs) is not too small as most here think he is.

He was in shape,not like modern heavies todaywho would be 220lb+ with his build.

Frazier was a hard man who would have no fear of Fury, that alone gives him a massive advantage, as Fury is a coward imo.

staying with is fine, but he wouldn't land a good punch on furey most likely

FTA69 · 19-12-2014 3:22pm

thierry14 wrote: »

I think he would, he has stayed with much punchers than Fury.

Peak Frazier (around 205lbs) is not too small as most here think he is.

He was in shape,not like modern heavies todaywho would be 220lb+ with his build.

Frazier was a hard man who would have no fear of Fury, that alone gives him a massive advantage, as Fury is a coward imo.

No man who gets into a ring in front of thousands of people and fights for twelve plus rounds is a coward. Even the few fights I've had, I was sh*tting in my shorts the few hours before hand, never mind getting into the ring in front of a hostile American crowd on your own. Fury is far from a coward and has shown plenty of grit in the fights we've seen him in.

Mantis Toboggan · 19-12-2014 3:38pm

thierry14 wrote: »

as Fury is a coward imo.

Wow!

What possible evidence do you have that the man is a coward?

walshb · 19-12-2014 3:41pm

thierry14 wrote: »

I think he would, he has stayed with much punchers than Fury.

Peak Frazier (around 205lbs) is not too small as most here think he is.

He was in shape,not like modern heavies todaywho would be 220lb+ with his build.

Frazier was a hard man who would have no fear of Fury, that alone gives him a massive advantage, as Fury is a coward imo.

No fear will mean little in this match when one man is giving away a ridiculous amount of weight/reach and height.

Gringo180 · 19-12-2014 10:16pm

Is this the same Joe Frazier that sparked Muhammed Ali out? Frazier would have Fury dead and buried inside 3 rounds no doubt about it.

cowzerp · 19-12-2014 10:32pm

Gringo180 wrote: »

Is this the same Joe Frazier that sparked Muhammed Ali out? Frazier would have Fury dead and buried inside 3 rounds no doubt about it.

Yeah the romantic fairytale version would, in reality he probably wouldn't land 1 clean punch in a 12 round fight

Gringo180 · 19-12-2014 10:43pm

cowzerp wrote: »

Yeah the romantic fairytale version would, in reality he probably wouldn't land 1 clean punch in a 12 round fight

Frazier is one of the greatest heavyweights of all time. Fury is just a big freak show. Fury would be a journey man back in Fraziers day.

Littlehorny · 19-12-2014 10:48pm

Gringo180 wrote: »

Is this the same Joe Frazier that sparked Muhammed Ali out? Frazier would have Fury dead and buried inside 3 rounds no doubt about it.

I was thinking the same thing myself, Frazier went to hell and back for 44 rounds with the greatest heavy of all time (beating him once). Ali couldn't put him down but Fury would beat him?
All you have to look at is the pace that Ali and Frazier fought at in their wars to realise that Fury wouldn't be able to stand the heat of a prime Frazier.
Frazier was as tough and busy as they come with the heart of a lion, he was blind in one eye yet still held the world title during a time when there was plenty of quality fighters at heavyweight, unlike today.

Gringo180 · 19-12-2014 11:00pm

Littlehorny wrote: »

I was thinking the same thing myself, Frazier went to hell and back for 44 rounds with the greatest heavy of all time (beating him once). Ali couldn't put him down but Fury would beat him?
All you have to look at is the pace that Ali and Frazier fought at in their wars to realise that Fury wouldn't be able to stand the heat of a prime Frazier.
Frazier was as tough and busy as they come with the heart of a lion, he was blind in one eye yet still held the world title during a time when there was plenty of quality fighters at heavyweight, unlike today.

When I read the first post I honestly thought it was a wind up. Fury isn't fit to lace up Fraziers gloves!

Littlehorny · 19-12-2014 11:07pm

Gringo180 wrote: »

When I read the first post I honestly thought it was a wind up. Fury isn't fit to lace up Fraziers gloves!

Too true Gringo, Frazier won and defended the title 9 times before losing to the legend that is George Foreman!

cowzerp · 20-12-2014 12:08am

Frazier would be a journey man now for gods sake, he's a small man with very limited skills and got obliterated when he fought a big man who isn't as big as todays big men, Ali wouldn't be the top now either but his title of greatest is fine by me, once in context

This romantic nonsense of old boxers shows up peoples actual understanding of Boxing, just like clowns who think Marciano would be a top 20 fighter theses days, total fairytales

Big Ears · 20-12-2014 1:07am

cowzerp wrote: »

Frazier would be a journey man now for gods sake, he's a small man with very limited skills and got obliterated when he fought a big man who isn't as big as todays big men, Ali wouldn't be the top now either but his title of greatest is fine by me, once in context

This romantic nonsense of old boxers shows up peoples actual understanding of Boxing, just like clowns who think Marciano would be a top 20 fighter theses days, total fairytales

What ?, you mean John L. Sullivan still couldn't ''Lick any son of a bitch in the house'' ?, blasphemy !!!

HigginsJ · 20-12-2014 9:19am

Big Ears wrote: »

What ?, you mean John L. Sullivan still couldn't ''Lick any son of a bitch in the house'' ?, blasphemy !!!

Has to look up this chap, moustache alone gives him a shot against any heavyweight

Love this report (if accurate) of his fight against an Irish fighter Paddy Ryan:

"In the 2nd round, Sullivan landed a perfectly timed counter punch to drop his fading opponent and, when Ryan got up, put him down twice more before the close of the round. Ryan fought a brave fight and came out for the 3rd, but had nothing left. He was devastated by a right hand and floored twice more before the police interrupted"

Big Ears · 20-12-2014 5:19pm

HigginsJ wrote: »

Has to look up this chap, moustache alone gives him a shot against any heavyweight

Love this report (if accurate) of his fight against an Irish fighter Paddy Ryan:

"In the 2nd round, Sullivan landed a perfectly timed counter punch to drop his fading opponent and, when Ryan got up, put him down twice more before the close of the round. Ryan fought a brave fight and came out for the 3rd, but had nothing left. He was devastated by a right hand and floored twice more before the police interrupted"

That'll be a newspaper report and probably won't have much reason for bias, so will likely be accurate. It was not uncommon for police to stop fights at the time, boxing was outright illegal in some states, while discouraged and considered unsocial in most others. Nevertheless its popularity meant laws against it were as unenforceable as prohibition became many years later.

Ryan was from Thurles, and was apparently a fine fighter during the days of London Prize-Ring Rules. The change to Marquess of Queensberry rules did not suit him very well, and despite being well known and getting big fights, he was no longer a top fighter.
So I think under London prize ring rules, Ryan beats both Frazier & Fury...

Halloween Jack · 20-12-2014 8:07pm

People mention haye-valuev, but what about a 98 year old Holyfield beating (imo) valuev? If a blown up cruiser, 45 years past his best can have a very competitive fight with an even bigger guy that surely proves it can be done?

I know fury is a much better fighter than valuev but he's smaller and definitely doesn't have the same chin.

As other people have said it was frazier's heart that really made him great, I'd say he'd relish getting in with fury...

barney4001 · 20-12-2014 9:01pm

I would consider this an insult to the memory of joe frazier to be compared with the likes of fury

Mantis Toboggan · 20-12-2014 10:51pm

barney4001 wrote: »

I would consider this an insult to the memory of joe frazier to be compared with the likes of fury

How so?

Molester Stallone II · 20-12-2014 10:57pm

Tyson Fury wrote: »

How so?

Hall of fame legend being compared to a journeyman I suppose would be what he's alluding to

Mantis Toboggan · 20-12-2014 11:03pm

Molester Stallone II wrote: »

Hall of fame legend being compared to a journeyman I suppose would be what he's alluding to

Nothing to do with it. This thread is about Fury v Frasier!

So how do you think the fight would go?

walshb · 20-12-2014 11:18pm

barney4001 wrote: »

I would consider this an insult to the memory of joe frazier to be compared with the likes of fury

Who's comparing them?

One_More_Mile · 21-12-2014 1:35am

Joe Frazier would destroy Fury.

walshb · 21-12-2014 3:10pm

One_More_Mile wrote: »

Joe Frazier would destroy Fury.

With those left hooks that would be missing by yards?

Diddley Squat · 21-12-2014 8:52pm

Joe Frazier -

I think he wins through attrition

walshb · 21-12-2014 9:13pm

Diddley Squat wrote: »

Joe Frazier -

I think he wins through attrition

Very vague reason!

Tyson Fury vs Joe Fraizer

Comments