BoxRec

tyson would of put haye straight on the ropes & belted him out.

SweetLikeSugar wrote:

tonyevs wrote:Prob showing my age and era I was brought up on boxing - but for me, Tyson at his best, would have beaten any prime heavyweight champion.

What other heavyweight champion could knock opponents out like a prime Tyson?

You don't have to KO your opponent to win the fight.

Correct

Point I was trying to make was, Tyson had the speed and power to turn the big guys legs to jelly like no other heavyweight I can think of. He also had the skills to land these punches on just about any opponent also. Guys that went the distance with a prime Tyson, did so with a negative safety 1st style ...

Tyson for me was the best ever. Skill, speed, power, great chin.
Just a real shame he fell out of love with the game when still so young. He was a real cluster-bomb of pugilistic pleasure when he was at his peak

Watch Haye vs Mormeck and I think it gives you an idea of how it would go, ie, not very good for our man.

superpunchout wrote:

MIG wrote:Prime Tyson would beat any fighter from any era in their prime - only Ali, Holmes and Lewis would offer any genuine challenge. Haye wouldn't last 3 rounds with prime Tyson

What about Liston, Evander & Foreman? Was Tyson really so good that these men could be ruled out entirely?

I cant see David Haye surviving the first round against Tyson. Total mismatch.

I see a prime Tyson beating prime Lewis and prime Ali.

I only see prime Louis, Holmes, and Liston beating Tyson.

tonyevs wrote:

SweetLikeSugar wrote:

tonyevs wrote:Prob showing my age and era I was brought up on boxing - but for me, Tyson at his best, would have beaten any prime heavyweight champion.

What other heavyweight champion could knock opponents out like a prime Tyson?

You don't have to KO your opponent to win the fight.

Correct

Point I was trying to make was, Tyson had the speed and power to turn the big guys legs to jelly like no other heavyweight I can think of. He also had the skills to land these punches on just about any opponent also. Guys that went the distance with a prime Tyson, did so with a negative safety 1st style ...

Tyson for me was the best ever. Skill, speed, power, great chin.
Just a real shame he fell out of love with the game when still so young. He was a real cluster-bomb of pugilistic pleasure when he was at his peak

Yes he was, but Tyson lacked a plan B. When someone got him on the back foot, which admittedly, was easier said than done, he unravelled. A classic on-top fighter. The likes of Holmes and Ali would have punished him in their primes, their speed, movement and output would have made it very hard for him to be the aggressor.

Evander Holyfield was some fighter and I think he'd have beaten Mike Tyson had they fought when they were both in their primes.

I think that a prime Tyson would've got to David Haye very quickly; in his prime Tyson was very intimidating and Haye has not really sought out the toughest matches at heavyweight (yet).

I've said this before but no other fighter is offered the excuses Tyson is. As Terry D rightly says Tyson is always judged by his 90 second peak against Spinks and his evident weaknesses are glossed over or excused, 'fell out of love with the game,' 'Don King', 'Robin Givens' etc etc. You rarely see the reasons given as 'Buster Douglas' or 'Evander Holyfield' or 'his own fault'.

If judged over the course of a career, as most fighters are, taking into account weaknessesas well as strengths, Tyson loses to many, indeed most of those highlighted here.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

tonyevs wrote:

SweetLikeSugar wrote: You don't have to KO your opponent to win the fight.

Correct

Point I was trying to make was, Tyson had the speed and power to turn the big guys legs to jelly like no other heavyweight I can think of. He also had the skills to land these punches on just about any opponent also. Guys that went the distance with a prime Tyson, did so with a negative safety 1st style ...

Tyson for me was the best ever. Skill, speed, power, great chin.
Just a real shame he fell out of love with the game when still so young. He was a real cluster-bomb of pugilistic pleasure when he was at his peak

Yes he was, but Tyson lacked a plan B. When someone got him on the back foot, which admittedly, was easier said than done, he unravelled. A classic on-top fighter. The likes of Holmes and Ali would have punished him in their primes, their speed, movement and output would have made it very hard for him to be the aggressor.

Holmes, i think, may have given Tyson more problems than Ali.
If you had to look at any Ali opponent to find a similar style to Tysons, it would have to be Joe Frazier.
And Frazier gave Ali fits .... Tyson was far superior in every dept than Smoking Joe.
Ali himself had problems with fast fighters, he also struggled with the big strong ones ....

But its all 'fantasy' stuff anyways .....

Matt W wrote:I've said this before but no other fighter is offered the excuses Tyson is. As Terry D rightly says Tyson is always judged by his 90 second peak against Spinks and his evident weaknesses are glossed over or excused, 'fell out of love with the game,' 'Don King', 'Robin Givens' etc etc. You rarely see the reasons given as 'Buster Douglas' or 'Evander Holyfield' or 'his own fault'.

If judged over the course of a career, as most fighters are, taking into account weaknessesas well as strengths, Tyson loses to many, indeed most of those highlighted here.

I think that's a tad unfair Matt. Young Tyson was a force to behold and he's not always judged by the Spinks fight, as this thread proves. I'm no mad fan of Tyson and share James' view of him being a great 'on top' fighter, but let's not gloss over the fact that at his peak (as opposed to judging him over his career), he had blistering speed for a heavyweight and great head movement. It was the loss of those two attributes that most contributed to his physical decline IMO.
I still think that while he'd have lost to several 'greats', in his prime he'd have had too much for both Holyfield and Douglas.

The point I was trying to make was that even in his prime Tyson wasn't always impressive or destructive. People gloss over this by narrowing his peak down to the Spinks fight and making excuses for his less impressive performances.

I don't mean to suggest Tyson wasn't a phenomenal fighter - he was - but people saying he would ko Ali or Bowe ignore the fact he didn't ko Tillis or Tucker for example. I know boxing isn't that simple but generally speaking you meet few people that are objective about Tyson.

And no version of Tyson beats Holyfield for me.

Holyfield whips any version of Tyson.

But he's easily superior to David ''The Excusemaker'' or ''The Ducker'' Haye

Matt W wrote:The point I was trying to make was that even in his prime Tyson wasn't always impressive or destructive. People gloss over this by narrowing his peak down to the Spinks fight and making excuses for his less impressive performances.

I don't mean to suggest Tyson wasn't a phenomenal fighter - he was - but people saying he would ko Ali or Bowe ignore the fact he didn't ko Tillis or Tucker for example. I know boxing isn't that simple but generally speaking you meet few people that are objective about Tyson.

But the two examples you cited as less impressive performances didn't relate to his peak. And while I'm not one of those people suggesting he would have KO'ed Ali or Bowe, you can't dismiss all those advocates on the basis of him not KO'ing Tillis and Tucker - you acknowledge yourself that's a flawed methodology.
Politely disagree re. prime Holyfield vs prime Tyson.

Tyson Ko1, styles make fights and in his prime Mike's style was, for his build, virtual perfection.

MachoMan09 wrote:I believe the following would have beaten Tyson on his best night and their best night:

Larry Holmes
Lennox Lewis
Vitali Klitschko
Riddick Bowe

Your kidding right Klit no chance, too static for a start

Top Dog wrote:

MachoMan09 wrote:I believe the following would have beaten Tyson on his best night and their best night:

Larry Holmes
Lennox Lewis
Vitali Klitschko
Riddick Bowe

Your kidding right Klit no chance, too static for a start

Klitschko would definitely have a chance. Styles make fights. Klit would have almost ten inches and 40 pounds on Tyson, which would be a very significant factor. Tyson would have to jump to connect flush with Klitschko's head. Vitali can take an excellent punch, has a great motor, and is very good at using his size against shorter opponents. He certainly has all the tools to give any version of Tyson hell.

SteveDow wrote: I think Vitali would have had a chance against Tyson but he'd have knocked Wladimir out.

I can't believe there are actually people outside of Eastern Europe who think Vitali would be a match for a peak Mike Tyson. Vitali couldn't dominate a fat 40 year old Lennox Lewis but would be better against a prime Iron Mike?

Un freaking believable.

LeedsLad wrote:Vitali Klitschko

Who did he ever beat to suggest he'd even compete with Tyson?

He'd be iced inside three rounds.

People bang on about the likes of Floyd being considered an ATG despite having a weakish slate.... yet Vitali is 10x worse. His biggest fight is a KO loss to an old, fat, shot Lewis.

In mythical matches against the top 20 or so of all time that version of Lewis might have a winning record...... might. And Vitlay still lost.

But he beats Tyson?

Thank Christ, a voice of sanity.

12 rounds teeing off on an old, fat, 40 year old blob Shannon Briggs, and now he beats Tyson?

Sh%t the bed!!

Tony Tucker would of ruled forever defending against the likes of Sam Peter, Shannon Briggs, Chris Areola, Danny Williams et al.

tonyevs wrote:If you had to look at any Ali opponent to find a similar style to Tysons, it would have to be Joe Frazier.
And Frazier gave Ali fits .... Tyson was far superior in every dept than Smoking Joe.

Erm, except heart & guts - more important than being 5 or 10 lbs heavier or having a bigger punch.

overhand_right wrote:

SteveDow wrote: I think Vitali would have had a chance against Tyson but he'd have knocked Wladimir out.

I can't believe there are actually people outside of Eastern Europe who think Vitali would be a match for a peak Mike Tyson. Vitali couldn't dominate a fat 40 year old Lennox Lewis but would be better against a prime Iron Mike?

Un freaking believable.

crusader wrote:

Top Dog wrote:

MachoMan09 wrote:I believe the following would have beaten Tyson on his best night and their best night:

Larry Holmes
Lennox Lewis
Vitali Klitschko
Riddick Bowe

Your kidding right Klit no chance, too static for a start

Klitschko would definitely have a chance. Styles make fights. Klit would have almost ten inches and 40 pounds on Tyson, which would be a very significant factor. Tyson would have to jump to connect flush with Klitschko's head. Vitali can take an excellent punch, has a great motor, and is very good at using his size against shorter opponents. He certainly has all the tools to give any version of Tyson hell.

Yes styles do make fights, Vitali has low hands and backs up in straight lines and leans back to defend himself. Against a combination thrower who covers distance fast this is a recipe for disaster. A slow jab that TYson would easily slip to throw brutal counters off. Tyson has beat/ko'd similar sized men to Vitali.

Vitali does stand a chance and much more than his chinny mentally unstable brother who's a better boxer but stylistically I lean towards Tyson.

Holmes never beats Tyson, Tyson's style was built on beating styles like Holmes. And Bowe just wasn't ever that good

I don't think I have ever heard Smith vs Tyson being called a tussle before.

I do generally agree with the point your making, regarding a prime Holmes. Although I think you might be bringing some extreme examples in your arguement. Carl "the Truth" Williams was doing okay for 90 seconds also. I think in some of the cases you could give Tyson some dues for changing his tactics, especially the Pinklon Thomas one (which was for me the best ever Tyson performance). You could add Biggs to the list of boxers who made Tyson "think" for a little while. Biggs had a good opener, it was pretty much one way traffic after then.

I think you don't give Tyson enough credit for finding ways past these styles. Against Thomas he was a little predicable at times, and Thomas was making a fight of it (albeit losing each round), but Tyson did go more to the body in the sixth and broke him down really effectively IMO.

Holmes though, in his pomp. Was 3/4 levels up on these. For me the 3rd best Heavyweight of all time and possibly would have beaten the lot in their prime. It would have been an intriguing fight, can see a case for both sides. I personally think Holmes did make some mistakes in fights and Tyson would have capatlised, but I do think at the time of the KO Holmes might have been up on the cards.

Tyson never fought any of the best guys in their prime. He didn't want know about Lewis, Holyfield or Bowe and was happy fighting the Frank Bruno's of this world.

He was a murderous puncher with a scary reputation, but there's a few heavyweights who could have or would have beaten him, even in his prime.

I think Vitali wears him down and stops him late by the way... Wlad gets stretched out in round 1.

Happy Slapper wrote:Tyson never fought any of the best guys in their prime. He didn't want know about Lewis, Holyfield or Bowe and was happy fighting the Frank Bruno's of this world.

He was a murderous puncher with a scary reputation, but there's a few heavyweights who could have or would have beaten him, even in his prime.

I think Vitali wears him down and stops him late by the way... Wlad gets stretched out in round 1.

When was Holyfield's prime? He did sign to fight him in 1991.