ALI VS. TYSON: WHO WINS

Ali wins, probably by knockout.

I do think that Tyson would beat Ali if the contest was to see who could knock out second rate fighters the quickest. Tyson was awesome at that.

But if it's the best against the best - that's Ali's game.

I also think that Tyson came along at a "weak" time for the Heavyweight division. Ali was Champion while many great fighters were in the game and it was a popular sport.

RunDaddy wrote:

dingles dongle wrote:

No one could beat Tyson in his prime, no one.

How can you say that? When was Tyson's "prime"? In 1988 he was on top of the world, but by early 1990 he was past his prime while still in his 20s?

In 1988 Tyson trained very hard and was coached by Kevin Rooney. Then he fired Kevin Rooney and stopped training seriously, gained a buttload of weight, started abusing substances, and was never the same again.

RunDaddy knows the deal. Tyson was in his prime when he was knocked cold by a very mediocre to poor fighter named Buster Douglas. Ali would have WHUPPED up on that mindless brawler Tyson like it was no one's business. Tyson was fighting tomato cans and stiffs and people past their prime, while Ali fought bad, good and great fighters all.

Many of you who voted for Tyson have no idea how absolutely FEARED a fighter was George Foreman. Foreman was as feared as Tyson and had better boxing skills. Ali knew what to do. He would have done similar things to Tyson.

Ok people, do any of you know Ali's greatest asset, his greatest quality as a boxer, according to Foreman (hardest hitter in the history of boxing), Frazier, and Dundee all said that his toughness, his ability to take hard and heavy punches for several rounds set him apart from all the contenders.

Tyson v Ali? Ali was fearless, he would have won in 5

Gonchar; RunDaddy; Crazy Jersey - spot on. Ali would have won.

Ali dismantled Sonny Liston (ok, no one ever really has gotten to the bottom of the lightning quick punch), the Mike Tyson in many respects of the day.

And in addition to Crazy Jersey's point re taking punches, there has never been anyone Ali's size with that kind of quickness - footspeed - handspeed, agility - you name it.

My father - a much better all around athlete than I could ever dream of being - and a roommate in college of a track world record holder and immersed in the world of top athletics, is absolutely convinced that Ali is the best athlete he has seen. Debatable, but the depth of his belief is considerable.

I was thinking about this very same question about a week ago. The young Tyson was ferocious, very exciting to watch, and (in my opinion) better in his pre-Buster Douglas days than some people now give him credit for. It has become conventional wisdom that he was an overrated brawler and puffed-up light-heavyweight who couldn't handle the best of the big men. That strikes me as an unduly dismissive assessment. When Tyson was the champion, I remember Ali himself saying that Tyson was the greatest, and I don't think it was just false modesty in the part of Ali. Still, I agree with the majority here -- Ali wins, and I'd probably give odds of around four-to-one. Not only was Ali bigger and faster, but he also defended well, and had excellent endurance. If Tyson didn't knock Ali out in the first three rounds -- a very tall order! -- Ali would probably destroy Tyson and win by knockout within eight rounds.

For the youngsters out there, take the opportunity to watch some of Ali's early fights on ESPN Classic or event rent a DVD. For a heavyweight, his style was revolutionary. His quickness was jaw-dropping. He fought some very good fighters before he even got to Liston, guys like Lamar Clark who had won his previous 40 fights by knockout. Ali also beat Archie Moore enroute to Liston (although Moore was past his prime by then).

The Liston fight was very interesting too. Liston was (and still is) suspected of using a foreign substance on his gloves to temporarily blind the opposing fighter. Ali claims he couldn't see for most of the 4th round of the Liston fight, a round where Liston really makes an effort to try and finish Ali. But Ali was so quick that he was able to stay away from Liston until he regained his vision.

Tyson would win. He was Pre's roommate at UofO!

Nobody on here has more respect & admiration for Ali than I do. BUT--Liston most likely took a dive in both fights with Muhammad Ali/Cassius Clay. First fight, he was being humiliated and quit, bum shoulder or not. Second fight, he was most likely ordered to take a dive or get shot by the Muslims surrounding Ali, or the Mob, or both. Was Ali/Clay in on the fix? I try not to think so.

Ali at his best takes Tyson by a Knockout. Much to his later detriment, Ali took a punch better than any boxer of the modern era....he'd have been hurt by Tyson, but he'd have gotten Tyson into the later rounds and toyed with him worse than he did with Foreman---he would have knocked him out at his leisure in the 10th or 11th round.

I think I've seen every fight that both men fought. The Ali fights I watched with my dad, who was a pretty good amateur boxer from upstate NY in the late 40s. He taught me a lot, and Ali was his favorite subject.

I think Ali would have destroyed Tyson, but I think he would have done so by running him to death and then putting him out or crushing him on points in the latter rounds.

Ali was like a master starting pitcher able to throw four or five different styles and finish complete games, who also adapted later on to extend his career based upon his versatility. Tyson was like a powerful fastball relief pitcher that got "figured out" after a relatively short while and could never dominate again.

Ali in his prime was unbelievable, and IMO would've won. But Tyson was unbelievable himself and would've had a great chance, with Ali holding his hands low. Tyson's fists in his prime was 98% as quick as Ali's. Tyson was also very fundamentally sound.

Deviating a bit, but the biggest travesty in boxing is all the holding allowed. Remember Klitchko-S.Peter?? Guaranteed Peter would've KO'd Wlad in 1 round, if Wlad wasn't allowed to hold during EVERY exchange. Guaranteed.

ttc wrote:

Ali in his prime was unbelievable, and IMO would've won. But Tyson was unbelievable himself and would've had a great chance, with Ali holding his hands low. Tyson's fists in his prime was 98% as quick as Ali's. Tyson was also very fundamentally sound.

Deviating a bit, but the biggest travesty in boxing is all the holding allowed. Remember Klitchko-S.Peter?? Guaranteed Peter would've KO'd Wlad in 1 round, if Wlad wasn't allowed to hold during EVERY exchange. Guaranteed.

I completely agree. The holding in boxing has gotten out of hand. I'm not going to criticize a strategic move by a boxer but you have to believe that all the holding is why people are turning away from boxing and going towards MMA.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand. I really think this fight is 60-40 Ali. While I agree with most in regards to Ali being the smarter and more technically sound fighter, you can't overlook Tyson's shear power, speed, and (most importantly) insanity. Also, you have to believe that Tyson was one of the most physically gifted boxer and if he got the right trainer he'd come in to the fight as an even more intimidating beast. If Ali could survive the first five rounds he'd probably win the fight. That, however, is a big if.

Also, as a side note, I do believe that Foreman was a harder hitter, you cannot overlook the insanity and aggressiveness factors with Tyson. When you got in the ring with Foreman, you knew that you were going to get your ass kicked. With Tyson you never knew what would happen to you (see: Holyfield, Evander).