BoxRec

bennie wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I cannot think of another heavyweight in history who combined Tyson's speed and combination punching technique, and lest we forget, his defensive skills were very impressive in his brief prime

You really feel Tyson combined speed and combination punching better than any other heavyweight in history!

]

Not with the power with which mike delivered it. Ali had the edge in combination punching, but I cannot think of anyone who hit as hard and as fast in combination as Tyson. Most top combination punchers don't have much in the way of power. I think Tyson has a better four punch salvo than any heavyweight in history.

Can anyone else think of a combination puncher who had Tyson's handspeed and power?

And yes, that's a good point about Frazier, his chin wasn't the greatest, he was determined enough to fight through it, but as I said before, he didn't face many big punchers. I would have liked to have seen what chinny bangers Lyle and Frazier might have done against him, or how he would have fared against the Liston Ali beat. Frazier's level of competition, outside of Ali, wasn't that fantastic.

Joe Louis?

DavidPayne wrote:Anyone who could hold a shot and wouldn't be intimidated had chances against Tyson.

Riddick Bowe, Lennox Lewis, George Foreman (even in 1995), Sonny Liston, Larry Holmes, Joe Frazier, Evander Holyfield would all have beaten him in his prime.

Fighters like Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey, Marciano and Tunney would be giving away plenty of weight but Tunney outboxed the swarming Dempsey and could have done it to Tyson too (weight differential aside) and you do wonder if Marciano fires back and refuses to be budge what Tyson would have done.

Of course, Archie Moore dropped Marciano so you do wonder whether Marciano could have come through the bombs but....

Whilst I do not rate Tyson highly in my roster of heavyweight champions, I do think you are dismissing his chances a bit too easily. For instance, who did Dempsey or Tunney ever face who hit like Tyson? Who did Marciano face who hit like Tyson? The Foreman of 1995 wouldn't have beaten a prime Tyson at all, he would have been outworked and lost on points, Foreman got by Moorer, because Moorer had a terrible defence and was chinny at heavyweight.

Anyone who gets through the initial onslaught has a shot, but that initial onslaught made Tyson in my opinion the most deadly 3 round fighter in the heavyweight division. Dempsey had 1 more knockout in the first round, but he used to stand over his opponents and batter them as soon as they got up. Dempsey was a pretty open guy, I've seen some of his video's and he was hardly hard to hit, you really think he could have taken a flush 4 punch combo from Mike, because Tyson would most certainly have been able to tag him, and I have grave doubts about Dempsey's ability to hurt Tyson.

I would have favoured Bowe over Tyson due to his great inside work, punishing jab, physical presence, and ability to take a shot. He also had great hands for a big man. That is the one fight more than any other I wish we had seen....Marciano, a lot of questions about Marciano, as he never really faced anyone too special, certainly not in their primes. His level of competition was possibly worse than Tyson's first run at the title.

bennie wrote:Joe Louis?

Yeah Joe is right up there with Tyson in terms of power and speed. But could he have taken Tyson's best shots? He was always vunerable early, especialy when you consider the low level of competition that managed to put Joe over.

You provide notging to dispute Bowe, Lewis, Holyfield, Holmes then?

I know what your saying abotu Dempsey, but I compare him as the most merciless puncher of his time. The weight is a factor and must be factored in and to be fair they are probably to far removed physically to be a correct comparison.

I include Tunney because he outboxed Dempsey with aplomb and I suspect he could have repeated the feat against Tyson but again the weight factor must be considered and I'm prepared to sacrifice him.

The Foreman of 1995 could have taken Tyson's best shots and comeback firing. Tyson never knocked anyone out late and was stunned and rocked against James Smith in the final round. I think Foreman has a legit chance to land similarly heavy blows late in the fight - remember Foreman was more economic in his second career, absorbed punishment and could knock you out at any point.

And he laughs at Tyson's attempts to intimidate. He wouldn't be buying.

I know what you mean about Foreman, but I don't think he would have worked hard enough to win a decision, and I don't think his power was that great on his comeback. I also think he would have had more trouble tagging the more defensively astute Tyson than the wide open Moorer. Tyson also had a hell of a lot better chin than Moorer. Foreman never knocked out anyone with a decent chin in his second career, he was an awesome specimen, and his skills were excellent, but he didn't have the fearsome power he had in his prime.

I think Tyson would have done Lewis up like a kipper in his prime. Even the best Lewis was hittable, and Tyson was so much quicker in his prime than the version that fought Lewis, and much harder to hit. Lewis had a habit of leaving his jab out to dry, which is disaster against the constantly moving target that Mike was in his prime. I rate Lewis as by far the better champion, but head to head would pick Mike 7 times out of 10.

Joe Louis would have had a chance if he could survive the early onslaught he would have taken Tyson late on, but Joe did have a shaky chin at times. Louis was comparable in terms of speed and power, but he didn't have the best defence in the world, quite a flat footed fighter, and definetly there to be countered, however, Joe was tough and aggressive, and he knocked out some huge men in his time.

Original foreman would have just shoved Tyson out of the way whenever he tried to set himself, and then bombed him. It would have gone a while though, as Mike wasn't too easy to tag, but Tyson would not have been able to bomb George out of there.

Liston had a great chin, but could be a slow starter, but boy would he have put some licks on Tyson late on. My dad said he thought Liston was too slow to live with Mike, and maybe he has a point. I figure Liston would have shaken Mike's confidence at the weigh in. Nobody ever intimidated liston, Ali confused him, but not intimidated him.

I dont want to go around the Lewis v Tyson maypole.

Lewis schools Tyson every time. OK Tyson might get him once in 10.

But Lennox Lewis is the perfect antidote to Tyson.

Here's one for you - the best version of Ray Mercer versus Tyson.

They wouldn't let the relic version of Mercer near Tyson in 2000, would they have let the 1995 version near the 1985 Tyson.

I'd have liked to see Tyson's face when Mercer grinned through the first three rounds....what then?

Thing is, would Mercer had proven that bullet-proof? Probably, and yes, that would have terrified Tyson. However, remember, in his prime, Tyson could fight the distance as he did against Green, Tucker and Bonecrusher, and hardly lost a round in the process.

I think a prime Mercer is pretty close to bullet proof. And that jab, resolve and right hand give him chances down the stretch when even in his prime Tyson proved predictable and one paced.

i think Neilson was the latest he ever stopped anyone. From memory.

Yep, you're right I think, and yes Mercer's jab was the key.

It's amazing that a 45 year old Holmes beat Mercer with east when you think of the murders he gave Lewis.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Thing is, would Mercer had proven that bullet-proof? Probably, and yes, that would have terrified Tyson. However, remember, in his prime, Tyson could fight the distance as he did against Green, Tucker and Bonecrusher, and hardly lost a round in the process.

green didn;t win many rounds in that fight, but he sure made tyson look pretty foolish for large sections - the iron-fisted banger didn;t make much of a dent in green with his gloves on. the tucker fight was much closer than the scorecards suggest and if tucker had carried a bit more pop in his punches that one could've got interesting too. and while boneclutcher held and spoiled his way to a complete shut-out loss, had he landed that huge right hand a round or two earlier instead of in the last five seconds of the bout, the tyson myth may well have been exploded before it had begun.

Tucker fought with a broken hand, from memory?

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Yep, you're right I think, and yes Mercer's jab was the key.

It's amazing that a 45 year old Holmes beat Mercer with east when you think of the murders he gave Lewis.

And took McCall to the limit too.

A prime Larry Holmes would have beaten the shit out of Tyson IMO.

DavidPayne wrote:Tucker fought with a broken hand, from memory?

rings a bell, but i'm not 100% either.

He supposedly broke it during the fight, very early on, I think he landed an uppercut which broke the right hand, and he basically had to fight one handed.

Tucker was a very good fighter at that stage, and seemed well up for the job too, perhaps the hand of fate intervened at that stage. It's always hard to take injury stories at face value though.

DavidPayne wrote:I think a prime Mercer is pretty close to bullet proof. And that jab, resolve and right hand give him chances down the stretch when even in his prime Tyson proved predictable and one paced.

i think Neilson was the latest he ever stopped anyone. From memory.

apparently mercer did enough in sparring with tyson to make sure that fight would never happen.

btw, the latest tyson ko victim was jose ribalto, stopped on his feet in the 10th after taking some hellacious shots.

DavidPayne wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Yep, you're right I think, and yes Mercer's jab was the key.

It's amazing that a 45 year old Holmes beat Mercer with east when you think of the murders he gave Lewis.

And took McCall to the limit too.

A prime Larry Holmes would have beaten the shit out of Tyson IMO.

Styles do make fights though, and it may be that Tyson's style would have been difficult for Larry to get a bead on. Tyson's greatest asset in his prime was his head movement, but I think Larry would have had a great chance of frustrating him later on.

I have to say, I think Holmes would have beaten Ali, certainly the second coming version of Ali. Holmes had a better jab, and that would have given Ali untold problems.

MightyWarrior wrote:

bennie wrote:Joe Louis?

Yeah Joe is right up there with Tyson in terms of power and speed. But could he have taken Tyson's best shots? He was always vunerable early, especialy when you consider the low level of competition that managed to put Joe over.

Are you telling me Tyson would have beaten Joe Louis now! My God, Louis would have ripped him apart inside a couple of rounds. Jack Dempsey, too. ANYONE with balls, would have half a chance with Tyson, let alone a world heavyweight champion with balls.
The Tyson myth continues. He bombs out Tony "Tubby" Tubbs and Mike "Scared" Spinks in his peak year - and all of a sudden he's beating Joe Louis.

Its vaguely interesting to contemplate what the heavyweight picture wold have looked like had someone like Tucker beaten Tyson before he got going.

If Tyson had been just another contender, like Tua.

We're better for his period of dominance and his arrival sustained the sport through a difficult time, but it still astonishes me that we're talking about his supposed greatness when he's been beaten by every decent fighter he faced.

Tracers work both ways though Bennie.

Tell me about Joe's hall of fame opponents?

It's a matter of styles Bennie. You have to give Tyson a good chance of getting to many of those guys early on. I don't see Louis battering Tyson inside two rounds, no way Tyson would be so easy to hit so early on.

Louis himself admitted that he hated being crowded by fighters, and Tyson would certainly have crowded him.

I have nothing but admiration for Louis, but he did prosper in a relatively weak era, and his chops could be suspect.

It's all so subjective, but i can certainly say that Tyson hit hard enough to put Louis on the deck, whether he could keep him there is another matter.

DavidPayne wrote:Tracers work both ways though Bennie.

Tell me about Joe's hall of fame opponents?

If people really believe Tyson is better than Joe Louis, it's a very sad day indeed.

It's seen as sacriledge to mention that Tyson would have a chance against Loius, but it is not that improbably. For what it is worth, i would have given Patterson a chance too, mainly because he had phenomenal punch power and was very very quick.

There is no way I am saying Tyson is as good a champ, Louis is #1 on my list, for achievement and longevity, nobody comes close, but he did prevail in a weakish era.

Bennie

I agree with you entirely. Totally. Louis hits #3 on my list and Tyson is struggling to make the top 10.

But on the criteria you demolish Tyson, an equally complete assination of Louis is possible. His best wins were versus Light-Heavyweights and his 25 fight streak was built on patsies.

But under no circumstances am I defending Tyson just the integrity of the debate, you have to judge both on the criteria to discredit one against the other.

bennie wrote:

DavidPayne wrote:Tracers work both ways though Bennie.

Tell me about Joe's hall of fame opponents?

If people really believe Tyson is better than Joe Louis, it's a very sad day indeed.

i always find those arguments pretty pointless - how can we ever know whether tyson would've blown louis out of the water in a couple of rounds or whether louis would put a painful humiliation on the brooklyn banger. what we can be certain of though is that louis achieved more in and out of the ring than tyson could even dream of emulating. surely that's all that really matters.