Joe Louis vs. Mike Tyson

[Counter-puncher]

Everyone knows Tyson was at his peak for the Michael Spinks fight.... And was tailing off badly with the Holyfield fights..

don't be like kalan, kids

kalan ignores context when it suits him- he pretends that leonard wasn't past his peak when he lost to Camacho, so he can denigrate Leonard- but when kalan wants to defend one of the little idols that make his teenage heart beat faster he cries 'but he was past his peak! but he was past his peak!'



don't be like kalan, kids

kalan likes to defend Tyson, by pretending Holyfield was at his peak when they fought. this was a man of 35 years of age, who had lost THREE TIMES before he fought Tyson. This was a man who took more punishment in the first Bowe fight than Tyson took in his career up until that point, then had another two wars with Bowe, and lost to Michael fking Moorer- and its this man kalan likes to try to pretend was in his prime- a 35 year old who had lost three times in the four years preceding the Tyson fight



don't be like kalan, kids.

[paddy chavez]

While you can't compare their careers and reigns stylistically Tyson would be a problem for Louis , Louis didn't have the quickest feet and he would take shots off Tyson just as Tyson would from Louis . I would go Tyson myself around about the 4th/5th ,we all know tyon could fade in a fight and Louis could well do a Douglas and break Tyson down over the RDS for a late KO but this has always been one fantasy fight that I see the less accomplished fighter winning.

[Counter-puncher]

Everyone knows Tyson was at his peak for the Michael Spinks fight.... And was tailing off badly with the Holyfield fights..

don't be like kalan, kids

kalan ignores context when it suits him- he pretends that leonard wasn't past his peak when he lost to Camacho, so he can denigrate Leonard- but when kalan wants to defend one of the little idols that make his teenage heart beat faster he cries 'but he was past his peak! but he was past his peak!'



don't be like kalan, kids

kalan likes to defend Tyson, by pretending Holyfield was at his peak when they fought. this was a man of 35 years of age, who had lost THREE TIMES before he fought Tyson. This was a man who took more punishment in the first Bowe fight than Tyson took in his career up until that point, then had another two wars with Bowe, and lost to Michael fking Moorer- and its this man kalan likes to try to pretend was in his prime- a 35 year old who had lost three times in the four years preceding the Tyson fight



don't be like kalan, kids.

Not to mention the abysmal showing against Bobby Czyz, which many claim was the reason Tyson took the Holy fight in the first place.

indeed. before the first Tyson fight, many people feared for Holyfield's long-term health.

that is the fighter kalan claims was at his peak for Tyson.

don't be like kalan, kids.

[Counter-puncher]

You may also have noticed kolon only has 2 descriptions of fighters.

SHOT or PRIME. There is no inbetween as far as he is concerned.

that isn't even the worst of it

he only even acknowledges 'peak' or 'shot', if it suits his agenda, his bile-spewing demeaning or his pomp-pom waving cheerleading, if he wishes to defend the 'shot' fighter or demean the 'peak' fighter.

if it suits his agenda more he refuses to acknowledge a 38 year old man with a history of cocaine abuse may not be at his peak.

I only hope impressionable children heed my warnings



don't be like kalan, kids.

[Kalan]

Not to mention the abysmal showing against Bobby Czyz,

BULLCRAP Old-N-Moldie... The only thing abysmal about Holyfield's victory was the beating Bobby Czyz took...

Czyz stopped undefeated 200-pounder Richard Jackson (19-0) easy as pie in his previous fight... He claimed he would beat Holyfield with artistry and mastery... A lot of talk from Czyz, but all he did was make a fool out of himself by quitting after taking a beating by refusing to come out for the sixth round.

New York Times.... "Evander Holyfield stopped a game but terribly overmatched Bobby Czyz before the sixth round started .....
Referee Alan Sugar halted the bout, declaring Holyfield the winner by a technical knockout after the fifth round .....
For the 34-year-old Holyfield, it was another comeback step ..... on the card that attracted a crowd of 17,041.

Czyz, who was shut out on one judge's scorecard and captured only one round on each of the other two, also contended he never should have been given a standing eight-count when he was pummeled in the third round ......

Holyfield's victory swelled his record to 32-3, with 23 knockouts. The 34-year-old Czyz, a former cruiserweight title-holder who was attempting to fight at the highest artistic and weight level of his career, fell to 44-7."

You clowns are reaching for straws.... Holyfield peaked against Tyson.

Tyson peaked as a 21-year-old versus UNDEFEATED LINEAL HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION MICHAEL SPINKS

Some idiot claimed I said he peaked against Holyfield.... I said Holyfield peaked against Tyson.... Mike never got back in the groove after taking 4 years off.... Prior to Holyfield he only saw 8 rounds of action in over 5 years.... He was rusted out.

[Counter-puncher]

To be honest I don't even mind that as it proves his cretinous logic. What I do object to is his constant slating of the sports true icons, such as Ali, SRR, Robinson, Armstrong, Joe Louis. Anyone can claim " a fighter " is over rated, but he slags off ALL the ATG's at any and every opportunity. Offering up the likes of Vitali Klitchko and Joshua, as credible alternatives, the fukkin div.

you're right. that is worse.

don't be like kalan, kids

[Kalan]

"True icons, such as Ali, SRR, Robinson, Armstrong, Joe Louis."

Those were great fighters .... all of them.

However, Ali was beaten to trash .and Robinson was beaten to trash..... It's not even funny what happened to them....they took too many head punches... Archie Moore had many more fights than either one, but he could defend himself better.

Armstrong lost 10 fights in his first 10 years as a pro - constantly fouling his opponents with shoving and head butting.

Louis was one of the best.... Much better than the more vulnerable Ali, Robinson, and Armstrong.... But Louis was a Cruiserweight by today's standards.... A guy who 174-pound Billy Conn had no problem tagging up for 12 rounds.... He could never compete against the likes of much bigger ATG's like Mike Tyson or Anthony Joshua...

Tyson would be in trouble vs Anthony Joshua... But against Louis??? Peak Mike would run over JL like he did Spinks.

[Counter-puncher]

I said Holyfield peaked against Tyson....

yes, you did.

that's what makes you so misguided and deluded.

you are saying a 35 year old man with 3 quite recent losses and several wars behind him was at his peak. aged 35. not long after losing to Michael Moorer. can you name another top heavyweight Michael Moorer beat, kalan?

can you name many 35 year old heavyweights with considerable ring wear after a quite long and tough career, who was at his peak at that age?

and how many of those top heavyweights would have lost to Riddick Bowe- a fighter you routinely disparage- TWICE.

so, Holyfield lost to Bowe, twice, kalan always says Bowe was a terrible fighter. and yet Holyfield was at his peak a couple of years after losing to Bowe, twice.

its a very strange sort of peak kalan understands, kids, please don't take him seriously.

can you actually unpick the multitude of contradictions that your silly, kneejerk dogmatism gets you into?

do you even realise that sometimes your silly agendas conflict, and make you look even sillier?

don't be like kalan, kids

[Counter-puncher]

"True icons, such as Ali, SRR, Robinson, Armstrong, Joe Louis."

Those were great fighters .... all of them.

However, Ali was beaten to trash .and Robinson was beaten to trash..... It's not even funny what happened to them....they took too many head punches... A

the way you argue your points, and the points you make, I sometimes actually believe you may have boxed, you show many of the symptoms of a man who's had his brains beaten in once too often.

however I remind myself you're a fantasist and internet wnnabe, and you have no such excuse for the drivel you post

kids:



don't be like kalan

[Counter-puncher]

Not to mention the abysmal showing against Bobby Czyz,

The only thing abysmal about Holyfield's victory was the beating Bobby Czyz took...

Yet another case of bothering with your pure, unadulterated moronic hore shite, or watching this and deciding for myself how poor Holyfields performance was.



Czyz a guy who had had 11 fights over 175, and only managed to stop 4 of his opponents. However he did manage to get dropped and stopped by 15 fight novice Izegwire.

The fact that he couldn't puch worth shite, but was hitting Holyfield at will, is EXACTLY the reason people " feared for his long term health " ( Holy's ) against Tyson you imbecilic fool.

If you must insist on revisionist horse shite, stick to Audey Murphy single handedly winning WW2 or John Wayne wiping out the " injuns " all on his own. That way you might not look such a dickhead.

kalan actually taught Audie murphy how to shoot, saved his life in WW2, Murphy always credited him with that.

then, remember when he had those legal problems over divorcing his second wife? kalan handled the case for free. and once he was in hollywood Kalan said 'hey kid, don't worry, i've got the straight dope for ya pal' and introduced him to all the starlets

kalan had, of course, got a little tired of Bette Davis's attentions by then, so was happy audie murphy was there to take her of his hands.

[Kalan]

"True icons, such as Ali, SRR, Robinson, Armstrong, Joe Louis."

Those were great fighters .... all of them.

However, Ali was beaten to trash .and Robinson was beaten to trash..... It's not even funny what happened to them....they took too many head punches... A

the way you argue your points, and the points you make, I sometimes actually believe you may have boxed, you show many of the symptoms of a man who's had his brains beaten in once too often.

however I remind myself you're a fantasist and internet wnnabe, and you have no such excuse for the drivel you post

You have no observations and nothing worthwhile to post... Anything insightful goes over your head so you can't argue,... all you can to is sit behind your keyboard and try to be a tough guy when you're a lowly piece of mindless dung.

[Counter-puncher]

"True icons, such as Ali, SRR, Robinson, Armstrong, Joe Louis."

Those were great fighters .... all of them.

However, Ali was beaten to trash .and Robinson was beaten to trash..... It's not even funny what happened to them....they took too many head punches... A

the way you argue your points, and the points you make, I sometimes actually believe you may have boxed, you show many of the symptoms of a man who's had his brains beaten in once too often.

however I remind myself you're a fantasist and internet wnnabe, and you have no such excuse for the drivel you post

You have no observations and nothing worthwhile to post... Anything insightful goes over your head so you can't argue,... all you can to is sit behind your keyboard and try to be a tough guy when you're a lowly piece of mindless dung.

kalan accuses other people of trying to be a tough guy

kalan says things like 'Tommy Hearns couldn't knock me out with his best shot', and 'I would kill him with one punch'



counter-puncher has never once made such a claim about himself.

kalan however claims to have floored ranked heavyweights, and claims he could take Tommy Hearns's best punch with ease.

can you see the hypocrisy, children? accusing someone else of trying to be a tough guy, when he himself laughably claims he could take the best punch of Tommy Hearns?



it isn't just the sickening lies and made-up claims- trying to be a tough guy', kalan's words not mine- its not just that, children, although thats bad enough



its the fact he is then hypocritical enough to accuse other people of 'trying to be a tough guy'

don't be like kalan, kids

[Kalan]

Stupid A-Hole says

"All time greats DON'T get KTFO by the likes of Danny Williams, or Kevin McBride, no matter how old they are. And as for Joshua, being an ATG.

Tyson wasn't KTFO Old-N-Moldie.... He quit because he had a bum knee in both fights.... That's why he retired.

And you don't get to decide who's an ATG and who isn't.... The public decides that and peak Tyson easily made the grade of ATG.... He made 300 million dollars in his career and without talent that doesn't happen.... How much did you make???

[Counter-puncher]

so how was it, laying Joan Crawford, kalan? was it copacetic buddy? give me the straight dope on her daddio, in between knocking out legendary boxers and humping all those dames, you musta had a helluva time back the 50s.

[HomicideHenry]

Tyson was too much for Louis.

Tyson wasn't " enough " for any Heavyweight who seriously wanted to fight him, even the little Marciano might capitalise on Tyson's mental fragility ( see retardedness ) and he was never in Joe Louis class.

Or to put it another way, NO VERSION of Joe Louis possibly loses to either Danny Williams or Kevin McBride. Even the sad old greeter at Caesars Palace would have been enough for them.

Louis had a very soft chin for a heavyweight, and was a stalker. He admitted that men with the swarming style was his greatest weakness. Tyson was faster, stronger, and more explosive than Marciano: and I can say that as a lifelong Marciano fan. Louis, probably would have hit the deck in two-three rounds against Tyson. It'd be like the Holmes fight all over again, though Holmes had a better chin and better jab.

As for bringing up Tyson's losses at the very twilight of his career, what does that have to prove? I also seen Tyson do that exhibition with T-Rex Sanders, and could have knocked him out at any time he wanted and one can argue Sanders was better than McBride and Williams.

Had Louis had to contend with physically superior, younger men who were hungry at the tail end of his career, he'd of lost to them too. INSTEAD he fought either blown up 175-pounders, older veterans and guys who were damaged goods. Marciano and Charles were practically the only legit guys he fought at that time, and we know how that ended up.

We agree to disagree. But if Galento and others could deck Louis, there's no doubt in my mind Tyson keeps him down on the canvas.

[Tomasino]

The only thing abysmal about Holyfield's victory was the beating Bobby Czyz took...

Yet another case of bothering with your pure, unadulterated moronic hore shite, or watching this and deciding for myself how poor Holyfields performance was.



Czyz a guy who had had 11 fights over 175, and only managed to stop 4 of his opponents. However he did manage to get dropped and stopped by 15 fight novice Izegwire.

The fact that he couldn't puch worth shite, but was hitting Holyfield at will, is EXACTLY the reason people " feared for his long term health " ( Holy's ) against Tyson you imbecilic fool.

If you must insist on revisionist horse shite, stick to Audey Murphy single handedly winning WW2 or John Wayne wiping out the " injuns " all on his own. That way you might not look such a dickhead.

kalan actually taught Audie murphy how to shoot, saved his life in WW2, Murphy always credited him with that.

then, remember when he had those legal problems over divorcing his second wife? kalan handled the case for free. and once he was in hollywood Kalan said 'hey kid, don't worry, i've got the straight dope for ya pal' and introduced him to all the starlets

kalan had, of course, got a little tired of Bette Davis's attentions by then, so was happy audie murphy was there to take her of his hands.

Makes sense

[HomicideHenry]

And i have absolutely no doubt that Joe Louis was a far better puncher than ANYONE Tyson ever faced, and would have little or no trouble finding Tysons chin early, and thoroughly disheartening him go on to score an easier stoppage win than Douglas Holyfield, or Lennox Lewis did.

As for my point about Williams and McBride, they are as but journeymen in comparison to Ezzard Charles, and even to an extent Marciano.

As you say, we agree to disagree.

EVER FACED... You cannot be serious? Lennox Lewis was a monster hitter, even when throwing jabs ffs. You have some interesting ideas about 6'0" 190 pound Louis hitting harder than 6'5" 250 pound Lewis. And Tyson was at the end of his career and took a brutal blasting before going down. Prime Tyson had not only an amazing chin, he had phenomenal head movement. Louis would have a helluva time finding the target, let alone "get lucky" and kayo Tyson with a single shot or combination like you're pretending.

As for McBride and Williams... The latter did go 8 rounds with Vitali Klitschko for the world championship, so he wasn't quite the shitcan bum you make him out to be... And are they really that much different than Lee Savold when Louis fought him? If they are it's minimal at best. Now imagine Lee Savold being 6'6" and 260 pounds, and hungry and young without all the wear and tear that he had at that time. Louis would have had issues with that, in my opinion.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

-This has always been one of the worst style nightmares for Louis, and anyone who says different is just a sissy who was bullied and was deathly in fear of the Tysons of the world. Kinda funny to see the payback after all the hardcore Tyson fans who used to rule the boxing roosts jumped the listing rusty hulk once it was clear he was finished in boxing.

Tyson wasn't always a bully though. When Cus inculcated him with some ethics, morality, and education, he was highly respectful, and the way he dominated his first 5 yrs in boxing has never been close to being matched, and then the age in the heavy division he was doing it at, just a kid, has never been matched. Even on his psych sedatives and booze his shooting star shot past his boxing prime under King like nobody's business, but he was still the deadliest 4 round fighter in history even if he had abandoned his boxing skills for pure slugging because he was so damn fast and awkward punching. Louis could never find a spar to come close to prepare him, however if Louis could extend the diminished King version of Tyson 6 rounds, Louis could probably reel him in, but damn, in 6 oz gloves Louis fought in Tyson might have killed a few fighters.

And like his hero before him, Jack Dempsey, Tyson was robbed with 14 sec long count by one of the dirtiest refs who let Douglas cold cock him on every break. This was the sleepwalking version of Tyson who for the first time showed no defense, no offense, just plodding forward on his psych sedatives soaking up punishment.

OK, now all is safe for you little sweetums to come out of your preschool romper rooms for some playground time.

[HomicideHenry]

I'm sorry but IF the Buster Douglas who fought Tyson fought Joe Louis, there's no way Louis would have won a 12 round decision. Buster Douglas fought virtually a perfect fight and probably could have beaten any heavyweight in history that night.

Lennox Lewis WAS a greater puncher than Joe Louis. Lennox Lewis was also a greater boxer than Joe Louis. He was also bigger and more athletic than Joe Louis. His resume of wins is comparable to anything Louis done: Holyfield (2xs), Tua, Botha, Klitschko, Bruno, Ruddock, Tucker, etc. Those names alone are better than the "Bum of the Month" that Louis defeated. Outside of Billy Conn and Walcott, the majority of the people Louis defeated were "passed their prime" or were fringe contenders at best who'd of gotten eaten up in most eras: and when you figure Conn nearly defeated Louis, and Joe got a gift decision over Jersey Joe, it puts things into perspective quite a bit.

And Tyson did take a brutal blasting at the hands of Lennox Lewis before ever going down, and that was when he was a ghost of who he once was. His losses to Williams was due to a knee blowing out, and the McBride loss... Well, Mike just didn't want it no more. He said it right after he lost, "I'm doing it for the money," and that he didn't want to box anymore anyways. In the post fight press conference he added, "Man, my career was over when I lost to Buster Douglas in 1990." That tells alot about a man's mentality and drive because post Douglas anyone could tell he wasn't the same.

And... Again... Imagine Savold being nearly a foot taller and 80 pounds heavier... Without all the wear and tear that he had... And that's Williams and McBride: I have a hard time imagining the slower, less powerful, balding, pudge bellied Louis beating that. He could beat men his own size and smaller who were crapped out, limited, etc. but I don't think he could bull around men that big.

[HomicideHenry]

The Louis who beat Buddy Baer, Abe Simon, Primo Carnera, etc was in his prime and in the case of Carnera was already a full blown alcoholic and would have one of his kidneys removed not long after the fact. Louis facing men of similar proportions, in their primes, when he made his come back would have been disastrous as far as I'm concerned.

Evander Holyfield said it himself, recently on ESPN, that he's glad he fought Tyson WHEN he did because he isn't sure he could have beaten Tyson from the 1980s. You tend to completely skip the fact that Tyson, mentally and emotionally, was his own worst enemy and the way he fought in the 80s bares little resemblance to the 90s and early 2000s version. We're talking prime for prime, and Tony Tucker was soundly beaten by Tyson (who you brought up when speaking of Douglas) so when Mike was in his right frame of mind and had the right team surrounding him he was unbeatable. His success relied heavily on men such as Clayton, Jacobs, Atlas, D'Amato, Rooney who programmed Tyson to be a perfect machine in the ring. THAT I WILL CONCEDE is a universe of difference between Louis and Tyson, that Louis was a fighter by instinct whereas Tyson followed a system.

The axiom that all it took to beat Tyson was to "take the fight to him" is bollocks. Just like people used the same axiom against George Foreman and Sonny Liston. What were the other 30, 40, etc people doing in fights but try and do the thing you suggest is all it'd take to win? No, fact is it took special people under certain circumstances and timing to defeat the likes of Tyson, Foreman and Liston. Just like it took certain times, circumstances and people to put away Joe Louis.

Lewis avenged his losses. Louis only avenged one of his three losses. It's a moot point to make, especially when you consider men like Galento, Farr and Gudoy made Louis look vulnerable and ordinary. I can see Oliver McCall beating either of those men, as well as Hasim Rahman winning some.

As for Louis and the IRS, and Tyson and his debts: I have little doubt that Tyson could have beaten Savold and Brion and others. Mind you heavyweights then were not much bigger than modern super middleweights and light heavies. And again, they weren't that good of competition (the men Louis beaten) and while they may be comparable in terms of skills and worth they were far bigger, stronger, younger, etc than the guys Louis beat in his come back.

Douglas defeated Tyson because for the first, and only time in his entire career, the man he always could have been showed up. He always had the talent, size, ability and IQ to have been a great fighter. He just didn't want it, which is why he tanked/quit against Bruno and Tucker. Just like Tyson tanked to McBride. Mentality is most everything in this business. But the Douglas who beat Tyson, could have potentially of been an all time great heavyweight who SHOULD have defeated Holyfield, etc. He was just magnificent for one fight.

[Kalan]

Buster Douglas was taught how to box by his father, pro boxer Billy "Dynamite" Douglas, from the time he was 4... It was a little like Mayweather, but he didn't work as hard... But that's why Douglas's stance and movement looked so natural and he looked so comfortable under fire... He became a really good boxer and he had really great size and speed for a Heavyweight... He could hit real good.. He could lead or counter well and rip off tight combinations.. He had most of it.

The only items Buster lacked where a strong work ethic and control of his eating habits -- which he would eat everything and anything and blow up to 300 pounds like Tyson Fury.... He was beating Tony Tucker on points during a World Title shot... You'd think for a World Title Fight you'd fight your best, but he was fat and out-of-shape as usual... Douglas was winning when he ran out of gas and got stopped again .... due to piss poor conditioning.

Douglas watched the Tucker-Tyson fight and reporters asked him who would win... "Tyson wins in 2 rounds" Buster said.

But the first round amazed Douglas... The 6'5" X 223 slender Tucker won it... He caught Tyson with a terrific left uppercut and rocked Mike right down to his booties... Tyson couldn't hurt Tucker... The fight went 12 and Tucker landed some more scoring punches... Tyson manage to outwork him... Douglas had a revelation watching that fight.. He knew he could beat Tyson if he were in perfect physical condition and never ran out of gas... He told everybody he knew he could beat Tyson and even his friends made fun of him... But he told everyone he wanted the fight and somehow he got on Tyson's list..

One day he gets a phone call... "Do you want to fight Mike Tyson???" ..... "YES!!! WHEN??" .... He trained his ass off.

[Kalan]

A universe of difference between Louis and Tyson, that Louis was a fighter by instinct whereas Tyson followed a system.

The axiom that all it took to beat Tyson was to "take the fight to him" is bollocks

I disagree with the first premise... Every boxer follows a system... Whether it's a system he invented like Naseem Hamed, or a system coached into him... Louis was pretty raw when he came out of the amateurs... Jack Blackburn called him "a blank slate" which is actually a very good situation for a trainer because he doesn't have to "unlearn" you.

Blackburn was one of the most systematic trainers in Boxing History... He started with the stance. the balance, the footwork, the jab, the feints, and built you from the ground up... Everything done his way and he would correct you for days or weeks... Within a year Louis was destroying Carnera, and soon afterwards Max Baer... Blackburn was training Louis all day every day... Louis got married like the day or the day after he knocked out Baer and he went on his honeymoon... That's the first time he ever relaxed since Blackburn got him.

De'Amato told Tyson... "We're going full throttle every day until you're Heavyweight Champion in 2 years or less... Get that into your noggin... When you're rich you can sit back and relax... What everybody does is relax and let somebody else take the prize... I'm telling you you're going to be Heavyweight Champion in 2 years... If you don't get there it's because you're damned lazy... Everything you need has been dropped into your lap like you won the lottery...We're going to fix the lottery and you're going to win." Patterson said D'Amato was the best motivator ever... He was a bit like Lombardi and Belichick.

The idea that you came at Tyson unless you were bigger and stronger than him IS bollocks... When Michael Spinks went down the first time he thought... "He's running me over.. I need to land something solid to get him off of me" .... Spinks got up and ripped a right hand at Mike.... Tyson's right hander got their first and flattened him for the full count.

[Tomasino]

Do you know what else Cus told Tyson? That he could never have beaten Joe Louis in his prime.

[elmersalsa]

The Louis who beat Buddy Baer, Abe Simon, Primo Carnera, etc was in his prime and in the case of Carnera was already a full blown alcoholic and would have one of his kidneys removed not long after the fact. Louis facing men of similar proportions, in their primes, when he made his come back would have been disastrous as far as I'm concerned.

Evander Holyfield said it himself, recently on ESPN, that he's glad he fought Tyson WHEN he did because he isn't sure he could have beaten Tyson from the 1980s. You tend to completely skip the fact that Tyson, mentally and emotionally, was his own worst enemy and the way he fought in the 80s bares little resemblance to the 90s and early 2000s version. We're talking prime for prime, and Tony Tucker was soundly beaten by Tyson (who you brought up when speaking of Douglas) so when Mike was in his right frame of mind and had the right team surrounding him he was unbeatable. His success relied heavily on men such as Clayton, Jacobs, Atlas, D'Amato, Rooney who programmed Tyson to be a perfect machine in the ring. THAT I WILL CONCEDE is a universe of difference between Louis and Tyson, that Louis was a fighter by instinct whereas Tyson followed a system.

The axiom that all it took to beat Tyson was to "take the fight to him" is bollocks. Just like people used the same axiom against George Foreman and Sonny Liston. What were the other 30, 40, etc people doing in fights but try and do the thing you suggest is all it'd take to win? No, fact is it took special people under certain circumstances and timing to defeat the likes of Tyson, Foreman and Liston. Just like it took certain times, circumstances and people to put away Joe Louis.

Lewis avenged his losses. Louis only avenged one of his three losses. It's a moot point to make, especially when you consider men like Galento, Farr and Gudoy made Louis look vulnerable and ordinary. I can see Oliver McCall beating either of those men, as well as Hasim Rahman winning some.

As for Louis and the IRS, and Tyson and his debts: I have little doubt that Tyson could have beaten Savold and Brion and others. Mind you heavyweights then were not much bigger than modern super middleweights and light heavies. And again, they weren't that good of competition (the men Louis beaten) and while they may be comparable in terms of skills and worth they were far bigger, stronger, younger, etc than the guys Louis beat in his come back.

Douglas defeated Tyson because for the first, and only time in his entire career, the man he always could have been showed up. He always had the talent, size, ability and IQ to have been a great fighter. He just didn't want it, which is why he tanked/quit against Bruno and Tucker. Just like Tyson tanked to McBride. Mentality is most everything in this business. But the Douglas who beat Tyson, could have potentially of been an all time great heavyweight who SHOULD have defeated Holyfield, etc. He was just magnificent for one fight.

You got it right. Not too many boxers would have beaten the great Mike Tyson at his very best. Tyson circa 1985-89 was a total fighting machine, with superb skills. He was the RARE COMBINATION of speed and power. Not too many fighters, let alone heavyweights had those two attributes at the same time.

[Tomasino]

When you have Broughton, Kolon and little Ruffie singing the same song, hilarity ensues

Three fûcking idiots.