I think in all sports, the modern generation is better than previous generations due to better training and greater participation. I think a lot of great athletes from the 80s would be average athletes today. Each generation is bigger, faster and stronger than the last. That being said, Tyson was a beast before prison when he was in shape (against Buster he was out of shape).
portsea57 wrote:
Avocado's Number wrote:
Iron White?
I didn't see anything about Frazier being more dangerous than Tyson. But Frazier didn't need to knock Ali down or out in a few rounds. Frazier could last fifteen punishing rounds against Ali, which gave him some options and chances that Tyson might not have had.
I assume, of course, that these hypothetical match-ups involve athletes at their respective peaks. For me, that always makes Ali difficult to assess, because Ali was prevented from competing for almost four years during his late twenties, when the arc of his career suggested that he might have been at his peak. Ali in 1971 was not the same boxer that he was in 1967.
Well, in 1971 Ali was still in his 20s! And, surely, the perception that Ali was better before he was banned from boxing is to do with the opposition! Apart from Liston ( and there are big question marks about Ali's first win over Liston), who did he beat? Talk about a weak period in heavyweight boxing!
Well, in 1995, when Tyson was released from prison, he was still in his twenties. Do you really want to compare the Tyson who fought Holyfield and Lewis with the Ali who fought Frazier and Foreman?
It sounds as though you may not be very familiar with the Ali who fought Liston, Patterson, and everyone else willing to take him on. (I'm not sure why you say that "there are big question marks about Ali's first win over Liston." There may still be questions about whether Liston's team intentionally put oinment on his gloves to blind Ali during the fight, buty there's no question that Ali dominated the whole fight, aside from the brief period during which his eyes were stinging. Perhaps you're confusing the first fight with the second, in which Ali floored Liston with the so-called "phantom punch.") Ali in his mid-twenties was extremely quick and nimble, not like any other heavyweight that I recall, and he was generally very serious in the ring, although he may have carried some opponents longer than necessary. After he was permitted to return to competition, he was slower, constantly having weight problems, and often clowning around in the ring. He could still take an awful lot of punishment, though.
I don't have real strong views about whether Tyson or Ali would win in a match at their respective peaks. Maybe a quick win for Tyson; maybe a more extended bout favoring Ali. I'm fairly confident that I would pick Ali, and I would guess that most people who know much more than I do about the sport would do the same.
Awsi Dooger wrote:
I've told this story here and on many other sites but it always fits this myth of early Tyson invincibility.
The first time I saw Mike Tyson in person was late summer 1988 at the Sands casino in Las Vegas. I was standing near the sportsbook when there was a commotion behind me. I turned and there was Mike Tyson, walking in the center of a ring fans, and coming straight toward us. My mouth opened in disbelief. Mike Tyson was so short he was like a mini human being. It was difficult not to fall over in a seizure of laughter.
And I was hardly the only one with that impression. There was a British couple standing next to me. The husband saw Tyson first and said to his wife, "Lookee there, it's Mike Tyson."
If I live forever I'll never forget her immediate response: "Why...he can't be more than 5 feet tall."
I erupted in laughter and smiled at her. I told her she had the right idea but he's definitely more than 5 feet tall. The three of us agreed on 5 foot 6.
I was working at the Horseshoe sportsbook late the next year and told the story. None of them wanted to believe it until we were again at the Sands, this time for a Christmas function involving sportsbook employees all over town. I was again standing near the sportsbook when Mike Tyson approached. But this time I had our sportsbook manager Tommy George alongside. Like myself a year earlier, Tommy's jaw was wide in shock as Tyson approached. "Okay, I said to him, how tall is he?"
Tommy turned to me wide eyed. "5-6. You were right all along. He's 5-6. Unbelievable."
Then we talked a bit and agreed on maybe 5-7. But Tommy emphasized. "Tops...absolute tops."
At Little Caesar's casino in the same time frame I met a former boxer who was now the working odds jobs at Johnny Tocco's gym in Las Vegas. When he heard the topic he immediately interrupted me. "You're not telling me anything I don't know. Mike is 5 foot 7. It's common knowledge at the gym. Everybody knows it."
Now, a year or so later a friend of mine nicknamed Boxing Mike said we were wrong. He said he knew we were wrong because he was 5-7 himself and he has stood next to Tyson at several weigh ins. Boxing Mike loved to attend weigh ins.
But Boxing Mike agreed that Tyson was much shorter than listed. "He's got me by an inch...maybe 3/4 of an inch."
Regardless, once I saw how tiny he was I immediately lost any belief that Mike Tyson was invincible or even an all time great. From that point forth I was never surprised at how his career unfolded, included being effortlessly shoved backwards by a bloated light heavyweight in Evander Holyfield. Other famous heavyweights like Muhammad Ali are huge human beings. Mike Tyson is a comparative shrimp.
After seeing him the second time I made a wager with a friend that Tyson would lose in the ring within 2 full years. I was getting massacred on college basketball wagers on the February Saturday that Tyson lost to Douglas, so I stupidly left the Horseshoe without taking the 38/1 on Douglass across the street at the Golden Nugget, as intended and announced to friends. I still am annoyed at that. But at least I collected on that 2-year wager.
It would be difficult for Mike Tyson to be more overrated.
Nope, I sat next to Tyson during a whole basketball game at Rucker Park in NYC back in the early 90s. We both got up several times, I shook his hand. I'm 5"9, he looked exactly tall as me. However, he is easily twice wide. A very big man. No part of his body looked vulnerable.
Bottom line, I'm sure he's no shorter than 5"9
fhefh wrote:
the only one who would have stood a chance is pre-incarceration Ali.
When Cus was alive, Tyson was stronger and faster than Frazier or Foreman. He was a newer, better version of those fighters. He obviously did not have it between the ears to stay n top for long, but at his best, he would have killed those guys.
Ali was different. Before prison he was a better athlete than anything we've seen in the division. He would have been tough for Tyson.
But after prison? No way. if he would have pulled any of that 70s rope-a-dope crap on '88 tyson, he would have been knocked out cold with a hook and an uppercut. Tyson was never given enough credit for how ACCURATE his punches were. He'd have gotten though ali's defense in the 70s.
Unlike Tyson, Ali was never in prison.
I think Ali benefitted from at least a few fixed fights. I think both Ali-Liston fights were fixed. Liston was a mob co trolled fighter. In addition it’s possible the Ali-Norton fight was fixed, no one could understand the decision. Finally, Larry Holmes was approached before the fight with Ali and beseeched not to hurt him too badly. Holmes was merciful and agreed; he was a very skilled fighter and was able to easily win the fight, and induce Ali to quit.
Avocado's Number wrote:
portsea57 wrote:
Well, in 1971 Ali was still in his 20s! And, surely, the perception that Ali was better before he was banned from boxing is to do with the opposition! Apart from Liston ( and there are big question marks about Ali's first win over Liston), who did he beat? Talk about a weak period in heavyweight boxing!
Well, in 1995, when Tyson was released from prison, he was still in his twenties. Do you really want to compare the Tyson who fought Holyfield and Lewis with the Ali who fought Frazier and Foreman?
It sounds as though you may not be very familiar with the Ali who fought Liston, Patterson, and everyone else willing to take him on. (I'm not sure why you say that "there are big question marks about Ali's first win over Liston." There may still be questions about whether Liston's team intentionally put oinment on his gloves to blind Ali during the fight, buty there's no question that Ali dominated the whole fight, aside from the brief period during which his eyes were stinging. Perhaps you're confusing the first fight with the second, in which Ali floored Liston with the so-called "phantom punch.") Ali in his mid-twenties was extremely quick and nimble, not like any other heavyweight that I recall, and he was generally very serious in the ring, although he may have carried some opponents longer than necessary. After he was permitted to return to competition, he was slower, constantly having weight problems, and often clowning around in the ring. He could still take an awful lot of punishment, though.
I don't have real strong views about whether Tyson or Ali would win in a match at their respective peaks. Maybe a quick win for Tyson; maybe a more extended bout favoring Ali. I'm fairly confident that I would pick Ali, and I would guess that most people who know much more than I do about the sport would do the same.
For Christ sake, if you can not be bothered reading the "facts" about the TWO Liston/Ali fights, please keep your mouth shut! For example, Liston was carrying a bad shoulder injury going into the first fight but the boxing authorities - desperate to get rid of Sonny - refused to postpone the fight.
How can anybody say Ali could have beaten a prime Mike Tyson when he, Ali, had so much trouble with Smokin' Joe and got beaten by Norton. It doesn't make sense.
Tyson was good, like many boxers before and after, but in no way shape or form does he qualify as an all-time great.
His two most notable victories were over Holmes and Spinks. Holmes was coming off a two year layoff, having lost twice in a row before the layoff. Spinks was on his way out--it was his last fight, and that was simply a pay-day.
He lost decisively to two people who are arguably top-10 all time heavyweights, Lewis and Holyfield. He ducked anyone of note before his loss to Douglas, and things went off the rails after that.
All hype, no substance.
Ali or Leon Spinks on a good day.
Either of the Klitschko brothers or T. Fury. Too much for limited Tyson. There is a reason they dominated modern boxing.
belial wrote:
He lost decisively to two people who are arguably top-10 all time heavyweights, Lewis and Holyfield. He ducked anyone of note before his loss to Douglas, and things went off the rails after that.
All hype, no substance.
At his peak, Tyson would have gone straight through Lewis and Holyfield like a buzz saw just like he did with all his other opponents. Look at how Lewis struggled with Bruno as a frame of reference and compare that to the Tyson versus Bruno matches. A guy like Tucker went the distance with Tyson even though he was dominated in the later rounds but Tucker was well past his best when he also went the distance with an in-prime Lewis and Tucker was even landing multiple punch combinations onto Lewis in the later rounds - imagine if it was Tyson throwing those punches. I agree somewhat with your last sentence in that Tyson was hyped up in his later fights when he was past his best but that was because he was so good at his peak and this created a continued hype into his later years.
Apparently were divided between those who want to either give Tyson too much credit (invincible) or not enough. We see the same thing with regard to Ali.
Now for some perspective: Prime Tyson was indeed a physical phenomenon whose very educated punches, if you will, we’re delivered with hair trigger timing and deadly accuracy. He beat a lot of good fighters during that three to four year period, but no great ones other than the years past his prime Holmes who took the fight on short notice after 2 years of inactivity. And while Tyson wasn’t beating bums, Holyfield and Lewis were a lot better than any of those opponents.
Now most boxing fans say that the mid to late sixties version of Ali was the best heavyweight ever. And the tapes of those fights seem to confirm this (dazzling speed and reflexes, beautiful form). However, we can also say with near certainty that a prime Tyson would have anhialted any of those opponents (Liston included) in less than two rounds. The one exception is the iron-chinned George Chuvalo who wouldn’t have been a threat to win the fight but may have gone the distance and exposed some of Tyson’s flaws.
So what are we left with? Pure speculation and opinion.
"Pure speculation and personal opinion?"
Well, surely, that is the essence of this website!
Why are you bigging up a convicted rapist and woman beater? He deserves to be dragged into an alley and shot in the face.
portsea57 wrote:
"Pure speculation and personal opinion?"
Well, surely, that is the essence of this website!
I didn’t mean that critically. I enjoy speculating and giving my opinions about who would defeat whom myself.