Tyson in the all time P4P

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 07 Aug 2004, 10:54

bennie wrote:
stujones wrote:
bennie wrote: You think a prime Mike Tyson would have beaten a prime Joe Louis?
Yep, I rank Louis alot higher on achievement, but his chin wasn't his strongest point and Tyson's hand speed and power you'd have to give him a chance on catching him. Tommy Farr caught him on numerous occasions, Tony Galletto did aswell - both not even in Tyson's league.
Tyson wasn't fit to carry Joe Louis' jockstrap.

As a person I would agree, as I fighter I wouldn't - always thought that was a horrible thing to say about any fighter. As I said lesser fighters than Tyson gave Louis problems, or do you think the likes of Farr are better than Mike.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 07 Aug 2004, 11:20

stujones wrote:
bennie wrote:
stujones wrote: Yep, I rank Louis alot higher on achievement, but his chin wasn't his strongest point and Tyson's hand speed and power you'd have to give him a chance on catching him. Tommy Farr caught him on numerous occasions, Tony Galletto did aswell - both not even in Tyson's league.
Tyson wasn't fit to carry Joe Louis' jockstrap.
As a person I would agree, as I fighter I wouldn't - always thought that was a horrible thing to say about any fighter. As I said lesser fighters than Tyson gave Louis problems, or do you think the likes of Farr are better than Mike.

What's horrible is you saying Tyson would have beaten Joe Louis.
You seem to think that because Louis was floored a few times, he was beatable. But when Louis went down, he climbed up and - bar his very last fight against the great Rocky Marciano - climbed up to win.
More than that, he climbed up to half kill the likes of Tami Mauriello, Buddy Baer and Tony Galento (not Galletto, as you embarrassingly put it and which suggests to me you don't really know much about the era Joe Louis fought in).
"Two Ton" Galento had to be dragged on to his stool after the four-round beating at the hands of Louis.
Now, what did Tyson do when he was put down? Did he climb up to win? Did he show courage? Did he still prevail?
When Tyson went down against Holyfield, Douglas and Williams, it was all over bar the shouting. No climbing up for him to win. That's because Tyson was the ultimate 'on top' fighter. Back him up, stand up to him, and even a fat Buster Douglas - just as fat as Galento - could smash him to pieces.
Louis was braver, more accomplished, a harder hitter and a better combination puncher than Tyson. His short hooks would have destroyed Tyson.

beduff · Post by **beduff** » 07 Aug 2004, 11:22

shavers would of beat tyson

beduff · Post by **beduff** » 07 Aug 2004, 11:23

tyson aint in the same league as george foreman

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 07 Aug 2004, 11:24

beduff wrote:shavers would of beat tyson

Of course he would. Shavers wouldn't have been scared of Tyson, so the fight was already won.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 07 Aug 2004, 17:36

Nobody spotted my deliberate oversight by the way.

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 07 Aug 2004, 21:11

Neri1983 wrote:I wouldnt say Danny Williams is a journeyman

No, that's over-rating him a bit....

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 07 Aug 2004, 21:13

I still can never understand how anybody can place Holyfield above Lewis in an all-time Heavyweight list. As a P4P fighter perhaps but as a Heavyweight it just doesn't add up, even aside from the 2 fights they actually had.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 08 Aug 2004, 10:08

Victory over a prime Bowe and a far less shot Tyson than Lewis beat. It's razor thin between those two for me, but the fact that he didn't lose to McCall and Rahman helps his case. Sure he lost to Moorer and Bowe, and later on Lewis, but the last loss came when he was past his prime, and there's no disgrace losing to Moorer and Bowe.

I used to rate Lewis ahead, but I now favour Holyfield. In his prime would have beaten any version of Lewis .

TheRiverCityHippy · Post by **TheRiverCityHippy** » 08 Aug 2004, 10:30

bennie wrote:Nobody spotted my deliberate oversight by the way.

yeah, a young joe got knocked out by schmelling in their first bout.
i must admit ben i think your hyping up louis`s opposition a bit. two ton tony was a journeyman bar owner who was more famous for his "i`ll moider da bum" than anything he achieved in the ring. even in those less cynical times the press dubbed his opposition the bum of the month club.
names like jack roper, nathan mann, red burman, tony musto, lou nova, gus dorazio, bob pastor, jonny paychek etc litter joe`s record and yeah, joe made them do spectacular things when he tagged them like 360`s and backflips but most big punchers have decent highlight tapes to look back on.
joe will always be in the mix because he was such a dominant champ and for so long but imo i dont think he would have handled the bigger guys that came along much later in mythical head to head match ups (ali, tyson, foreman, holmes, lewis etc).
but joe had too much for the other fighters of his day, and thats all a fighter can control. not wether he has enough for the fighters that come along in 50 years time.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 08 Aug 2004, 11:17

Well, Bennie - The Louis vs Galento fight stands proudly on my video collection (alongside, a futher half dozen Louis fights). Just because I spelt the guys name wrong doesn't mean I don't know shit about the era. Christ, my spelling of the word fought was picked up by Goz and Mighty Warrior not so long ago - fair enough, but does that mean I know Jack shit about the sport generally.

We are going to agree to disagree, you make some valid points, but my main one is that Louis could get tagged, could fall and never (apart from Marciano) fought a fighter as powerful as Mike.

Whilst, Tyson never physically went down against Botha, he was getting beat up and showed then he can get out of jail. Not using that as a defence, because I agree with your points on that respect.

I just think he would be poweful, and quick enough to tag and keep Louis down.

Obviously there are biasness' with me and bias with your views, firstly to call Buster Douglas fat in his clash with Tyson is harsh, secondly I did laugh when you said that Gallento would KO Tyson. Gallento was the original "Bum of the month", and thats not my view thats also the view of Boxing Monthly.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 08 Aug 2004, 11:29

Bennie,

Well the only oversight I spotted was that you forgot to mention Max Schmeling (spelling is probably wrong) KO'ing your man before he won the title.

Onto the Holyfield vs Lewis debate - I think James has it spot on. IMO Holyfield and Lewis are 1-1 in head to head battles, add this to the fact that Holyfield fought Bowe, Moorer and Foreman (who were #1 champions in the 90's) and also fought a somewhat younger Tyson who was a two version champion at the time. The only one of these Lewis fought was a shot Tyson.

Lewis first reign as WBC champion was somewhat flawed because he was awarded the title, didn't win the title - not his fault, but it still happend. Then the second time he won the belt, it was only a vacant belt against an unfit McCall.

Even shot, Holyfield still managed to beat Rahman in his first attempt.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 08 Aug 2004, 11:51

Louis was the original monster: the man who beat opponents before they even stepped into a ring. Tyson did the same for a long while, and could undoubtedly fight. But he wasn't a complete fighter like Louis. His weakness, as James McDonnell pointed out, was that he went into a shell when hurt by an opponent.
Louis, on the other hand, went into overdrive.

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 08 Aug 2004, 13:34

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Victory over a prime Bowe and a far less shot Tyson than Lewis beat. It's razor thin between those two for me, but the fact that he didn't lose to McCall and Rahman helps his case. Sure he lost to Moorer and Bowe, and later on Lewis, but the last loss came when he was past his prime, and there's no disgrace losing to Moorer and Bowe.

I used to rate Lewis ahead, but I now favour Holyfield. In his prime would have beaten any version of Lewis .

Victory over a lethargic Bowe, also outweighed by 2 brave thrashings he received.

Lewis's defeats against Rahman and Mcall can be looked at from either sidee of the fence, positives in that Lewis avenged both comprehensively or negatively in that he lost them in the first place. I choose the former, many choose the latter.

Fact is as a Heavyweight Holyfield was bettered by 2 men, (lost 2-1 to Bowe and 1-0 to Lewis), you can say he was past is best when he fought Lewis but to me he was coming of the run of his Heavyweight career and was the WBA/IBF champion walking into the ring. Nothing too shot about that.

For me Lewis beats any incarnation of Holyfield and even Tyson.

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 09 Aug 2004, 04:43

I've always had Holyfield above Lewis in my all-time list because the prime Holyfield would have been far more effective against Lewis, his timing was better, his work-rate better and his stamina better.

He would have punished any lethargy from Lewis.

Its a close fight but when I factor in the Bowe and Tyson victories I have to give Evander the #4 spot.

1 Ali
2 Holmes
3 Louis
4 Holyfield
5 Lewis

BubiScholz · Post by **BubiScholz** » 09 Aug 2004, 06:49

Johnny Carwash wrote:
BubiScholz wrote:guys, think about the good old Max Schmeling. he is the only one who knocked Louis in the first round out. at his peak in his home country. in a time when everybody in the audiance was against Schmeling. he belongs in an all time top 15.
Schmeling actually knocked Louis out in the 12th or 13th round, not the 1st. Louis knocked Schmeling out in the 1st round in their rematch.

Schmeling still deserves credit for being the only one to beat Louis in his true prime...

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 09 Aug 2004, 07:02

And who told you that was Louis' prime? Based on what exactly? Louis was a young and fairly inexperienced fighter at that stage, and Schmelling was the veteran who was presumed to be over the hill. Louis punched himself out and got whacked out late in the fight. That was not Louis' prime.

It's convenient to label that his prime, but he was only 22, and was yet to win the title. He deserves credit yes, but that wasn't Louis' prime.

knockout artist · Post by **knockout artist** » 09 Aug 2004, 07:07

1. Louis
2. Holmes
3. Dempsey
4. Liston
5. Marciano
6. Tyson
7. Ali
8. Johnson
9. Frazier
10. Foreman

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 09 Aug 2004, 07:12

Christ, that is one of the strangest I've ever seen. Tyson above Ali!!! Please oh please explain how a guy whose best victory was over inactive Holmes and terrified spinks, rates higher than Ali, who ended the title reigns of monsters like Foreman and Liston, and took on just about every top flight heavyweight in his era.

I can only guess this is a 'who would have beat who list', actually no, this doesn't make sense, seeing as ali whupped Frazier and Liston.

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 09 Aug 2004, 07:19

Not to mention Frazier above Foreman - a man who dropped him 53 times when they met.

BTW James, you may wish to edit your post, I'm sure your incredulous about Tyson above Ali not visa versa.

And also if Dempsey is #3 why does Tunney not make the top ten? He beat him twice.

Not to mention Liston ABOVE Ali, who he lost to twice also.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 09 Aug 2004, 07:37

To be honest, I can understand why Tunny doesn't get rated in the top 10 by most. His career at heavyweight was too brief, so as a champion, it's hard to rate him. All Tunney really proved was that he had the number of an old and inactive Dempsey.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 09 Aug 2004, 07:51

bennie wrote:
beduff wrote:shavers would of beat tyson
Of course he would. Shavers wouldn't have been scared of Tyson, so the fight was already won.

I think you are being a little uncharitable to Mike here. Shavers wasn't the hardest in the world to hurt, and he didn't react too well to being hit hard himself. Not being scared of Mike was a big component of being able to beat him, but it wasn't the only one.

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 09 Aug 2004, 07:56

Losing to Quarry in a round negates any argument for SHavers beating Tyson.

For SHavers read Bruno.

knockout artist · Post by **knockout artist** » 09 Aug 2004, 08:01

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Christ, that is one of the strangest I've ever seen. Tyson above Ali!!! Please oh please explain how a guy whose best victory was over inactive Holmes and terrified spinks, rates higher than Ali, who ended the title reigns of monsters like Foreman and Liston, and took on just about every top flight heavyweight in his era.

I can only guess this is a 'who would have beat who list', actually no, this doesn't make sense, seeing as ali whupped Frazier and Liston.

Ali beat a washed up Frazier and a dinosaur in Liston.

I'm taking every fighter in their prime.

Tysons' victories over Holmes and Spinks are great performances.

You say Holmes was inactive. Hardly, when people are rating Tunney for his victory over Dempsey, who had been out of the ring for 3.5 years.

Although great, I think Ali is one of the most overrated fighters in history.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 09 Aug 2004, 08:05

Yes, that is why I don't rate Tunney as a heavyweight, Dempsey was bored and listless at that age, and fought as and when he pleased.

What about Ali's destruction of Foreman then? Liston may have been a dinosaur, but he was still regarded with fear and trepidation by everyone else in the division....

What about all the rest of Ali's competition, Shavers, Lyle, Norton, Young, Ellis, etc etc, he faced everyone around in his prime, far more than can be said for Tyson.

Spinks was a pot-bellied man terrified of Tyson when he entered the ring, he was beat before he climbed through the ropes, and Holmes hadn't been in training for 2 years. The way he mullered Holmes was impressive, but if that is Tyson's best victory, over a 39 year old man who had been out of the ring for 2 years, than that says it all.