BoxRec

I'm just stating my opinion in a technical sense.


Maybe the question should be broken up into different times in the fighters careers.

Could the Mike Tyson (post Holyfield) of beaten current Vladimir Klitschko?

Could current Vladimir Klitschko of beaten the Tyson (post Douglas-Pre Holyfield)?

Could Vladimir Klitschko (prior to Sanders-Brewster) of beaten Tyson in the eras mentioned above?

And of course..... could current Vladimir Klitschko of beaten prime Mike Tyson?

Ok, nothing technical about comparing how one fights against an old Cruiserweight and how they would fight against a prime Mike Tyson. To be fair to you, I didn't read your whole post, way too long without breaking it up.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:Tyson was always troubled with particularly tall guys, even if they weren't all that skilled. He'd be troubled by Wladimir too, Wladimir's chin would obviously have him in dangerous territory in the early going. He would have to jab and grab in the first 4 rounds to wear Mike down, if he were able to successfully do this without getting caught (a big if) he'd stand a great chance of breaking him down and either stopping him late or taking a close decision. I'd pick Wladimir

Weathering the storm is one thing, having the gumption to mount the offense to break Mike down is another thing all together. You're talking about a guy who was hesitant to attack Eddie Chambers & Hasim Rahman. Tyson had many flaws, taking punishment wasn't one of them. Wlad would never open up enough to "break him down".

Ditto. Wlad's response to quick aggression isn't to fight back, but to clinch and hope his opponent gets frustrated/fatigued enough to become a stationary target, which is when he finally starts firing more than jabs. Tyson showed in numerous fights at his peak (Smith, Tucker) that he could be easily tied up but also that he could stick to an aggressive gameplan for 12 rounds and not become the flat-footed sitting duck that a Sam Peter is after 2 rounds of fighting. Tyson also had much better skills at getting to the inside than a David Haye or Sultan Ibragimov (both of whom wouldn't last 3 rounds with Tyson), and those guys managed to win rounds vs Wlad simply by threatening to be aggressive and landing a few power shots while Wlad did nothing. If Wlad manages to survive the first 5 rounds, which is a big if, his best hope is losing an ugly decision.

Once a fight was signed against Tyson back then, the fear factor thereafter played havoc with the oppostions mind. That was part of the genius of 'the baddest man on the planet' package and it worked really well. Wlad would have been as worried as the rest and Tyson would have smelt blood straight away as he often did. I can only see it panning out in the same way as the Spink's fight - mentally defeated prior to the match and taken out early.

HomicideHenry wrote:

Flump wrote:

HomicideHenry wrote:Why the shocked expression?

Who did Tyson exactly beat that makes people think he was superior to Klitschko? When you put it altogether, the two men are evenly matched in terms of opposition. Biggs, Tubbs, Seldon, Mathis, McNeeley, Berbick, etc. do not exactly come to me as being any better than the likes of Mormeck, Wach, Peter, etc. Tyson failed against Holyfield and Douglas (a 42-1 underdog), which is comparable to Vladimir's losses to Sanders and Brewster. How can you argue 18 title defenses, against a man who beat mediocre bums to the top, and fought slightly better opponents as champion? Tyson never fought a man who had the combination of size, skill, ring generalship, power that Vladimir has. Vladimir on the other hand has fought men who were better skilled and/or faster than Tyson, fought men the same size as Tyson, etc. What made Tyson great wasn't the fact of who he beat, but how he beat them. This is true, but even at that, all the physical advantages falls on Vladimir and the skill and power levels are evenly matched. I didn't say it would come easy for Vladimir, I just raised the question of how would Tyson fair against such a man, when he had problems with Pinklon Thomas who was skilled and taller, etc.

I'm shocked that you would use Mormeck as an example of how Wlad could beat Tyson Hank, the guy hardly threw a punch, that's certainly one thing that you couldn't accuse Tyson of. Who do you think Wlad has beaten who was faster and more skilled than Tyson?

Mormeck had the same style as Tyson, and same size. In no way, shape or form, does Mormeck compare to Tyson in skill and ability even at his best (Mormeck's best) HOWEVER that is just a glimpse of what could be the strategy Vladimir would use on Tyson. Tactically it would be the method Vladimir would use on Tyson. As for faster than Tyson, simple: Chris Byrd. Harder puncher than Mike Tyson? One can argue Lamon Brewster. More skilled than Tyson? So far no one yet. Guys like Tyson come every thirty-forty years. Klitschko handled Mormeck easily, and maybe this is more due to Mormeck's age than anything, but possibly it is because of the tactics Vladimir employed on Mormeck. One must wonder of the latter, and whether that method would have been effective against Tyson. Vladimir 9/10 x's is jabbing and moving, following up with right crosses; then he clinches and leans. Its boxing that comes first with him. Could Tyson get passed that piston jab that has a force of a battering ram? Vladimir has a high work rate for such a big man; he softens, tenderizes his opponents, and then goes for the kill. Tyson of the Berbick-Spinks time was untouchable, but from Bruno onwards I think he was dropping the things that made him great, replying solely on head hunting and brute power. A man who fights like that would get murdered by a Klitschko. Tyson minus the head movement and combinations= the poor sap who got beat by Douglas. I think I would favor Tyson to beat Vladimir, but it is by far one of the hardest fights I could make a prediction on. Why? Because imho, Vladimir's career is a repeat of Lewis and Holmes; two dominant men who were never appreciated, did not have entertaining styles, were not characters, etc. Vladimir is by all accounts the undisputed champion of the world (RING, IBF, WBO, etc) and has 18 title defenses, and if no suitable man comes along he will tie Larry Holmes and presumably surpass Joe Louis. Knock him for the era, they did the same to Larry. Knock him for having lost in fights he shouldn't have lost, they did the same to Lewis. The man's improved by a quantum leap and there's no one in sight, save his brother Vitali who has a chance of beating him. This isn't the same guy of five years, or even ten years ago. If Vladimir could fight Sanders and Brewster, as he is now, on the days he lost he would defeat them. I would argue he could also of given Lennox Lewis one of his hardest fights. At the end of the day, this is all speculative. Jesus only knows who would win, and Jesus bless you all.

I think the Mormeck Wlad fought would have lost to Alfredo Evangelista to be honest. The biggest problem I have with Klitschko beating Tyson is his mentality. He fights scared, he never opens up until he's absolutely sure his opponent is non threatening, anytime an opponent is aggressive he just grabs hold of them. And these are usually lumbering opponents who look like they've been shot with a tranquiliser dart before the bell even rings, a marauding peak Tyson would set him far too many problems IMO. I can see him offering a similar performance to what Bruno did in the rematch with a fading Tyson, clueless.

He's good for his era, he's a good role model, always in shape but his era is plainly rubbish. Not his fault, and he's good at what he does, and what docile opponents allow him to get away with but I can only see a quick blowout, a DQ for holding or a dull points win for Tyson. But as you say, who knows, but it's fun to speculate!

Tyson should win but I don't see it as a blow out. I think Wlad has a small chance.

Tyson could be easily tied up and frustrated. Wlad can carry out the first part of the plan. I just feel that when he opens up he's in trouble.

I wouldn't totally count him out though

I think possibly sheer volume would dictate the pace. Show the averages of the punch rates between the two men in their primes (say three continuous fights) and figure from there how it would go. Compubox shows that Klitschko throws nearly 40-50 jabs a round, then throw in the power punches. I think by sheer volume alone, Klitschko could keep Tyson off balance and constantly having to reset himself and replant his feet for power punches.

HomicideHenry wrote:I think possibly sheer volume would dictate the pace. Show the averages of the punch rates between the two men in their primes (say three continuous fights) and figure from there how it would go. Compubox shows that Klitschko throws nearly 40-50 jabs a round, then throw in the power punches. I think by sheer volume alone, Klitschko could keep Tyson off balance and constantly having to reset himself and replant his feet for power punches.

I dont find it that funny, cus technically that how ANY big man fights a smaller man; keeping the jab constant to keep them off balance and having to reset themselves in order to plant their feet, and let's be honest here, Tyson and infighting wasn't his great strength.

I have no doubt that the humor was unintentional, that doesn't make it any less hilarious. Tyson was pretty clueless on the inside, you didn't mention that as you mused about compubox and Wlad out-working Mike. Wlad has ZERO inside game, so it's yet another moot point. Mike's lack of inside prowess might allow Wlad to last the distance, but he would never commit enough to win.

I dont know if that is true. I think Vladimir has just not yet faced a man who can bring that out of him, to make him rise to the occasion. The one time he did do it was against Samuel Peter, with so much heart getting off the canvas three times to win the fight. Since that time, Vladimir has improved greatly, but I don't question his commitment. He just needs someone to put him to the grind. Problem is, who out there can do it?

When you're using Mormeck & Sam Peter as rationale, you've already lost. Wlad was quite squeamish against Peter anyway.

Nobody can bring out of him what isn't there. Look at his pathetic effort against Haye. He talked all that shit and then landed 5 jabs against a guy who wouldn't punch. That Wlad doesn't exist.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:When you're using Mormeck & Sam Peter as rationale, you've already lost. Wlad was quite squeamish against Peter anyway.

Nobody can bring out of him what isn't there. Look at his pathetic effort against Haye. He talked all that shit and then landed 5 jabs against a guy who wouldn't punch. That Wlad doesn't exist.

Hard to knock out someone when they are constantly running away. Sort of like when Pacquiao fought that African fighter who blocked the entire night. Hard to knock out someone when they are in a shell the entire time. Had Haye manned up and tried to make a fight of it, Vladimir would of kayoed him. To say it doesn't exist in him, is to pretend you are omniescent (all knowing). To knock Vladimir because of the opposition that is out there, is to knock Holmes as well and to a lesser degree Lennox Lewis whose greatest wins were against a faded Mike Tyson and aged Holyfield. Tyson, for the most part, didnt fight nobody until he was already out of prison.

HomicideHenry wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:When you're using Mormeck & Sam Peter as rationale, you've already lost. Wlad was quite squeamish against Peter anyway.

Nobody can bring out of him what isn't there. Look at his pathetic effort against Haye. He talked all that shit and then landed 5 jabs against a guy who wouldn't punch. That Wlad doesn't exist.

Hard to knock out someone when they are constantly running away. Sort of like when Pacquiao fought that African fighter who blocked the entire night. Hard to knock out someone when they are in a shell the entire time. Had Haye manned up and tried to make a fight of it, Vladimir would of kayoed him. To say it doesn't exist in him, is to pretend you are omniescent (all knowing). To knock Vladimir because of the opposition that is out there, is to knock Holmes as well and to a lesser degree Lennox Lewis whose greatest wins were against a faded Mike Tyson and aged Holyfield. Tyson, for the most part, didnt fight nobody until he was already out of prison.

Haye was right in front of him for large portions of that fight. Wlad wasn't willing to open up and risk getting caught with a counter. He doesn't open up against anyone until they practically beg him to. He definitely wouldn't against someone like Tyson. Neither of them manned up in the slightest.

Wlad's opposition is much worse than the other guys you mentioned. You're searching for omniscient, and that's not a valid criticism. You're the one grasping that a guy is going to do something that goes against every fiber of his being, not me. If you're right and Wlad goes offensive, Tyson knocks him out.

I just don't see it. Tyson struggled with Bonecrusher Smith, Tony Tucker and Pinklon Thomas, guys who were much taller and heavier than him. They leaned and clinched him at will and he could do little in response. Tyson caught them when they made a mistake; Vladimir is much taller, stronger, heavier and more skilled than those men. As good as Tyson was at his peak, its hard for me seeing him get passed that 85" reach; and when Vladimir does let his hands go, that right hand behind the jab is pulverising. I aint saying it would come easy for Vladimir, because even the faded Tyson stunned Lewis in round one; but I can see Vladimir wearing Tyson out with the clinches, leans, and busting open Tyson's eyes with those jabs and counter right hands. If Tyson was going to get Vladimir it would have to be in the first four or five rounds; the longer it goes the more I favor Vladimir and I think he has that heart and ability to survive the test and possibly win on points.

HomicideHenry wrote:I just don't see it. Tyson struggled with Bonecrusher Smith, Tony Tucker and Pinklon Thomas, guys who were much taller and heavier than him. They leaned and clinched him at will and he could do little in response. Tyson caught them when they made a mistake; Vladimir is much taller, stronger, heavier and more skilled than those men. As good as Tyson was at his peak, its hard for me seeing him get passed that 85" reach; and when Vladimir does let his hands go, that right hand behind the jab is pulverising. I aint saying it would come easy for Vladimir, because even the faded Tyson stunned Lewis in round one; but I can see Vladimir wearing Tyson out with the clinches, leans, and busting open Tyson's eyes with those jabs and counter right hands. If Tyson was going to get Vladimir it would have to be in the first four or five rounds; the longer it goes the more I favor Vladimir and I think he has that heart and ability to survive the test and possibly win on points.

You'd think it would lose it's humor as you repeat yourself, but nope....

HomicideHenry wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:When you're using Mormeck & Sam Peter as rationale, you've already lost. Wlad was quite squeamish against Peter anyway.

Nobody can bring out of him what isn't there. Look at his pathetic effort against Haye. He talked all that shit and then landed 5 jabs against a guy who wouldn't punch. That Wlad doesn't exist.

Hard to knock out someone when they are constantly running away. Sort of like when Pacquiao fought that African fighter who blocked the entire night. Hard to knock out someone when they are in a shell the entire time. Had Haye manned up and tried to make a fight of it, Vladimir would of kayoed him. To say it doesn't exist in him, is to pretend you are omniescent (all knowing). To knock Vladimir because of the opposition that is out there, is to knock Holmes as well and to a lesser degree Lennox Lewis whose greatest wins were against a faded Mike Tyson and aged Holyfield. Tyson, for the most part, didnt fight nobody until he was already out of prison.

Running away? Haye was standing still IN A CORNER for whole minutes of that fight, with his hands down, and Wlad just feinted and threw single jabs.

Showed heart vs Peter? In that 5th round he responded to getting his bull rung via some of the most excessive clinching and mauling you'll ever see. He never fired back to get Peter's respect and get him off . . that's just not the fighter he is, he never has been. You don't have to be all-knowing, just look at his entire career which is winding down now. Wlad was lucky that Peter gassed himself out so bad from throwing amateurish hayemakers that preceding round that he could barely put a punch together, and allowed Wlad to regain his own composure and jab and move the whole round. But it's not like Wlad ever came roaring back like Lewis did vs Mercer in their 4th round or Holyfield did to Bowe in the 10th or Bowe did to Golota in the 3rd of their rematch. He is a safety first guy.

As to Thomas, Smith, and Tucker, I think all of them are very dangerous fights for him. Ironically due to styles I'd see Smith giving him more issues than Thomas.

HomicideHenry wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:When you're using Mormeck & Sam Peter as rationale, you've already lost. Wlad was quite squeamish against Peter anyway.

Nobody can bring out of him what isn't there. Look at his pathetic effort against Haye. He talked all that shit and then landed 5 jabs against a guy who wouldn't punch. That Wlad doesn't exist.

Hard to knock out someone when they are constantly running away. Sort of like when Pacquiao fought that African fighter who blocked the entire night. Hard to knock out someone when they are in a shell the entire time. Had Haye manned up and tried to make a fight of it, Vladimir would of kayoed him. To say it doesn't exist in him, is to pretend you are omniescent (all knowing). To knock Vladimir because of the opposition that is out there, is to knock Holmes as well and to a lesser degree Lennox Lewis whose greatest wins were against a faded Mike Tyson and aged Holyfield. Tyson, for the most part, didnt fight nobody until he was already out of prison.

Running away? Haye was standing still IN A CORNER for whole minutes of that fight, with his hands down, and Wlad just feinted and threw single jabs.

Showed heart vs Peter? In that 5th round he responded to getting his bull rung via some of the most excessive clinching and mauling you'll ever see. He never fired back to get Peter's respect and get him off . . that's just not the fighter he is, he never has been. You don't have to be all-knowing, just look at his entire career which is winding down now. Wlad was lucky that Peter gassed himself out so bad from throwing amateurish hayemakers that preceding round that he could barely put a punch together, and allowed Wlad to regain his own composure and jab and move the whole round. But it's not like Wlad ever came roaring back like Lewis did vs Mercer in their 4th round or Holyfield did to Bowe in the 10th or Bowe did to Golota in the 3rd of their rematch. He is a safety first guy.

As to Thomas, Smith, and Tucker, I think all of them are very dangerous fights for Klitschko themselves. They're all superior to the crap he's faced, that's for sure. Ironically due to styles I'd see Smith giving him more issues than Thomas.

I reckon we will all have to agree to disagree then. Am sorry though, but just because a man uses a 'safety first' approach doesn't mean they are shit. Max Schmeling was very much the same way and he defeated the lethal Joe Louis. Tyson was only 5'10" (if he was lucky there are those who say at his peak Tyson was barely above 5'8") and 210 pounds; gifted as he was, I don't see him being this great giant killer that others think he would be against Vladimir. The only smaller man in history I could ever see beating men of that size who are that skilled is Jack Dempsey because he made it a constant in his life defeating much bigger men and Dempsey did it not just by brute power but because he could actually box. Tyson, in truth, was a defensive fighter who used his momentum against opponents. Vladimir, with his reach, skills, and "safety first" mentality would constantly be moving, firing jabs and countering, leaning and clinching when need be; Tyson wouldn't ever be presented with much opprotunity to do the damage needed to win on a knock out.

HomicideHenry wrote:I reckon we will all have to agree to disagree then. Am sorry though, but just because a man uses a 'safety first' approach doesn't mean they are shit. Max Schmeling was very much the same way and he defeated the lethal Joe Louis. Tyson was only 5'10" (if he was lucky there are those who say at his peak Tyson was barely above 5'8") and 210 pounds; gifted as he was, I don't see him being this great giant killer that others think he would be against Vladimir. The only smaller man in history I could ever see beating men of that size who are that skilled is Jack Dempsey because he made it a constant in his life defeating much bigger men and Dempsey did it not just by brute power but because he could actually box. Tyson, in truth, was a defensive fighter who used his momentum against opponents. Vladimir, with his reach, skills, and "safety first" mentality would constantly be moving, firing jabs and countering, leaning and clinching when need be; Tyson wouldn't ever be presented with much opprotunity to do the damage needed to win on a knock out.

I'm hard pressed to think of one thing you've said in this thread that makes a bit of sense. We'll just have to agree that you don't know what you're talking about.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

HomicideHenry wrote:I reckon we will all have to agree to disagree then. Am sorry though, but just because a man uses a 'safety first' approach doesn't mean they are shit. Max Schmeling was very much the same way and he defeated the lethal Joe Louis. Tyson was only 5'10" (if he was lucky there are those who say at his peak Tyson was barely above 5'8") and 210 pounds; gifted as he was, I don't see him being this great giant killer that others think he would be against Vladimir. The only smaller man in history I could ever see beating men of that size who are that skilled is Jack Dempsey because he made it a constant in his life defeating much bigger men and Dempsey did it not just by brute power but because he could actually box. who used his momentum against opponents. Vladimir, with his reach, skills, and "safety first" mentality would constantly be moving, firing jabs and countering, leaning and clinching when need be; Tyson wouldn't ever be presented with much opprotunity to do the damage needed to win on a knock out.

I'm hard pressed to think of one thing you've said in this thread that makes a bit of sense. We'll just have to agree that you don't know what you're talking about.

I have followed this from the start and my opinion is that HomoHenry is talking rubbish LMAO at Tyson, in truth, was a defensive fighter.........and Dempsey was a better boxer than mike tyson

Again, here goes the ego let's go by your logic and say 99% of people in the IBHOF dont belong there either and that Tyson was the ultimate heavyweight and would have even beaten Muhammad Ali, etc. let's forget Tyson's weak psyche, his lack of infighting skills, the fact he was never the same following the death of Cus, and the fact that the majority of the people he defeated Tyson admits were tomato cans with such inferior abilities that he looked better than he was. He NEVER fought a giant like this until Lewis and was squashed like a bug. He couldn't handle Holyfield who was a blown up light heavyweight (in the minds of people then), his greatest wins were against an inactive Larry Holmes and a scared shitless Michael Spinks. PERIOD. He was overated and still is. Let's go down the list shall we, hmm? Biggs, an admitted drug user and average at best pro. Tubbs, a feather fisted fat guy who was so out of shape that they had Ribalta as a stand by opponent. Bruno, by no stretch of the imagination got to where he was at by beating up echoes of Bugner and limited muscle heads like Jumo Cummings. Berbick, who cares he went fifteen with Holmes, outside of that he beat up a Parkinson's riddled Ali and was so limited and awkward. Bonecrusher Smith, just a big strong man and tied Tyson up all night and the best punch of the night was from Smith. Thomas and Tucker were legit, but Thomas broke his hand early. Holmes hadn't fought in years, and with no tune ups fought Tyson and got caught in the ropes (literally). And lets not go on about his post-prison opponents, complete stinkers all the way around. He beat AVERAGE AT BEST guys.

I know what you will say next, "Who did Vladimir beat?", let's put it to the test. He avenged his loss to Lamon Brewster, and unfortunately didn't get a shot at Sanders again (he retired to the golf course). He defeated Chris Byrd twice, when Byrd made a reputation as a blown up middleweight who made giant heavyweights look foolish. He beat Jameel McCline, beat Mercer (albeit Mercer was old), he beat Samuel Peter (how many title holders is that so far? Yep four), he has made 18 title defenses and is two away from tying Holmes and seven away from Joe Louis' record. Don't forget he also dominated Chagaev, another man with that swarming style. That's five title holders. And without a threat in sight, he will surpass Joe Louis without question. I can't see Pevetkin, Fury, Price, Arreola, etc being able to upset him. You can call it the "Bum of The Month" and say Vladimir doesnt have that commitment to chasing the kayo and being aggressive, but since when has he ever been that guy to make complaints about? Nobody appreciated Lewis because his style was boring, until he retired and we were left with the John Ruiz types. Same deal with both Klitschko brothers, when they retire EVERYBODY will be wishing one or the other would come back. Tyson, by no means, was as dominate as these guys (if you factor in total defenses against top mandatories versus time schedules; Tyson doesn't come close). Style wise, Tyson can present them with problems, but it will take a big, strong, counter puncher whose very tough to be able to off set the Klitschko's. Not a small swarming type of opponent. Oh and throw in Imbragimov, that makes it six title holders. Oh, and I forgot Haye too, that's seven. What more do you need? The guy was also a gold medalist in the Olympics, he has that pedigree. Throw in the crucial training he had from Emmanuel Stewart, who even said the brothers would have possibly beaten Lennox Lewis, you have a dominate heavyweight whose capable of beating most any champion in history.

Maybe you need to think, "Gee maybe these guys are so good that they make everyone look like amateurs and dull as shit" as opposed to looking at them as being boring, safety first fighters. The objective to boxing is not to get hit sir, but to hit the other man without being hit. Maybe thats not the exciting way for the fans, but that is what boxing is about. To say Vladimir wouldn't fight like a big man, use his size and reach and ring generalship against Tyson to win, is ridiculous. Ali did the same, on the reatreat throwing high volume jabs, tiring opponents out with pushing down on opponent's heads, etc. What's the damn difference? Is he too being safety first? Is he fighting scared? No. He was being smart cus Ali wasn't a banger, and wouldn't win fights slugging. Neither is Klitschko a banger, and you need to seriously stop dictating opinions based on the fact he doesn't do it and figure in he would lose if he did. You do not know this any more than the man in the moon, he hasn't yet faced it.

I have followed this from the start and my opinion is that HomoHenry is talking rubbish LMAO at Tyson, in truth, was a defensive fighter.........and Dempsey was a better boxer than mike tyson

He was. Cus taught Tyson NOT to rely on offense, but focus on defense. Tyson had such great head movement, etc to avoid shots. Cus made him spar wleterweights and middleweights (not allowing Mike to throw back once, but to dodge shots). And when his opponents missed; their momentum was used against them, and Tyson would fire and this "walking into blows" would maximum Tyson's power. He had natural power, yes, but at his peak his strength wasn't offense, but defense. It was that defense that set up the power shots. And.... Dempsey was a better tactician than Mike, as was Joe Louis a better tactician than Ali.

HomicideHenry wrote:

I have followed this from the start and my opinion is that HomoHenry is talking rubbish LMAO at Tyson, in truth, was a defensive fighter.........and Dempsey was a better boxer than mike tyson

He was. Cus taught Tyson NOT to rely on offense, but focus on defense. Tyson had such great head movement, etc to avoid shots. Cus made him spar wleterweights and middleweights (not allowing Mike to throw back once, but to dodge shots). And when his opponents missed; their momentum was used against them, and Tyson would fire and this "walking into blows" would maximum Tyson's power. He had natural power, yes, but at his peak his strength wasn't offense, but defense. It was that defense that set up the power shots. And.... Dempsey was a better tactician than Mike, as was Joe Louis a better tactician than Ali.

Yes he had a good defense but that was part of a package Defense and offense combined that dont make him a defensive fighter like Pep or Sweet Pea............

Peak Tyson beats any Wlad Klitschko within 3 Rounds as soon as Wlad hesitates Tyson takes him OUT

HomicideHenry wrote:Again, here goes the ego let's go by your logic and say 99% of people in the IBHOF dont belong there either and that Tyson was the ultimate heavyweight and would have even beaten Muhammad Ali, etc. let's forget Tyson's weak psyche, his lack of infighting skills, the fact he was never the same following the death of Cus, and the fact that the majority of the people he defeated Tyson admits were tomato cans with such inferior abilities that he looked better than he was. He NEVER fought a giant like this until Lewis and was squashed like a bug. He couldn't handle Holyfield who was a blown up light heavyweight (in the minds of people then), his greatest wins were against an inactive Larry Holmes and a scared shitless Michael Spinks. PERIOD. He was overated and still is. Let's go down the list shall we, hmm? Biggs, an admitted drug user and average at best pro. Tubbs, a feather fisted fat guy who was so out of shape that they had Ribalta as a stand by opponent. Bruno, by no stretch of the imagination got to where he was at by beating up echoes of Bugner and limited muscle heads like Jumo Cummings. Berbick, who cares he went fifteen with Holmes, outside of that he beat up a Parkinson's riddled Ali and was so limited and awkward. Bonecrusher Smith, just a big strong man and tied Tyson up all night and the best punch of the night was from Smith. Thomas and Tucker were legit, but Thomas broke his hand early. Holmes hadn't fought in years, and with no tune ups fought Tyson and got caught in the ropes (literally). And lets not go on about his post-prison opponents, complete stinkers all the way around. He beat AVERAGE AT BEST guys.

I know what you will say next, "Who did Vladimir beat?", let's put it to the test. He avenged his loss to Lamon Brewster, and unfortunately didn't get a shot at Sanders again (he retired to the golf course). He defeated Chris Byrd twice, when Byrd made a reputation as a blown up middleweight who made giant heavyweights look foolish. He beat Jameel McCline, beat Mercer (albeit Mercer was old), he beat Samuel Peter (how many title holders is that so far? Yep four), he has made 18 title defenses and is two away from tying Holmes and seven away from Joe Louis' record. Don't forget he also dominated Chagaev, another man with that swarming style. That's five title holders. And without a threat in sight, he will surpass Joe Louis without question. I can't see Pevetkin, Fury, Price, Arreola, etc being able to upset him. You can call it the "Bum of The Month" and say Vladimir doesnt have that commitment to chasing the kayo and being aggressive, but since when has he ever been that guy to make complaints about? Nobody appreciated Lewis because his style was boring, until he retired and we were left with the John Ruiz types. Same deal with both Klitschko brothers, when they retire EVERYBODY will be wishing one or the other would come back. Tyson, by no means, was as dominate as these guys (if you factor in total defenses against top mandatories versus time schedules; Tyson doesn't come close). Style wise, Tyson can present them with problems, but it will take a big, strong, counter puncher whose very tough to be able to off set the Klitschko's. Not a small swarming type of opponent. Oh and throw in Imbragimov, that makes it six title holders. Oh, and I forgot Haye too, that's seven. What more do you need? The guy was also a gold medalist in the Olympics, he has that pedigree. Throw in the crucial training he had from Emmanuel Stewart, who even said the brothers would have possibly beaten Lennox Lewis, you have a dominate heavyweight whose capable of beating most any champion in history.

Maybe you need to think, "Gee maybe these guys are so good that they make everyone look like amateurs and dull as shit" as opposed to looking at them as being boring, safety first fighters. The objective to boxing is not to get hit sir, but to hit the other man without being hit. Maybe thats not the exciting way for the fans, but that is what boxing is about. To say Vladimir wouldn't fight like a big man, use his size and reach and ring generalship against Tyson to win, is ridiculous. Ali did the same, on the reatreat throwing high volume jabs, tiring opponents out with pushing down on opponent's heads, etc. What's the damn difference? Is he too being safety first? Is he fighting scared? No. He was being smart cus Ali wasn't a banger, and wouldn't win fights slugging. Neither is Klitschko a banger, and you need to seriously stop dictating opinions based on the fact he doesn't do it and figure in he would lose if he did. You do not know this any more than the man in the moon, he hasn't yet faced it.

if you think I read this novel. I hope the whole thing wasn't about me.

FWIW, "We'll just have to agree that you don't know what you're talking about" was a joke. Nothing to do with ego, killer.