Tyson - Ali

abigbeaner · Post by **abigbeaner** » 02 Jul 2004, 19:21

I'm pretty new here so amuse me , who wins Prime Tyson or Prime Ali ?

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 03 Jul 2004, 02:35

..big beanie...this one has been kicked around a lot already, before you logged on. my opinion....ali in one of his easiest fights.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 09 Jul 2004, 22:41

Ali would've whooped him soooooooo bad. Ali had a better boxing brain. Even Prime Tyson was like -bam bam bam bam bam, win- Ali changed his tactics to suit an opponent, and managed to change his tactics past he was primed.

I repeat, and quote myself Ali would've whooped him soooooooo bad.

Slapsie Maxie · Post by **Slapsie Maxie** » 10 Jul 2004, 06:57

Tyson the strongest ever? Liston would have swatted him with an eyelid.

Tyson too fast for Ali? Even the post suspension Ali would have given Tyson twisted blood.

It would have been a decent fight, but Ali for sure
Slapsie

Slapsie Maxie · Post by **Slapsie Maxie** » 10 Jul 2004, 07:28

So what you are saying is that the only ALi Tyson could catch is one with Parkinson's?

Yeah, I'd agree with that

S

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 10 Jul 2004, 12:24

Yeah, but I thought we were comparing Prime Ali to Prime Tyson. Not Tyson when was at his absolute best vs Ali when he was past it. What would've been the point?

Jukejar · Post by **Jukejar** » 11 Jul 2004, 22:06

I'd say that the Ali who fought from the first Liston fight through the third Frazier fight would have found a away to beat Tyson at his very best. I would pick the Ali circa 1965-67 to out-think and out-fight & thereby beat a prime Tyson handily, and the early 70s Ali to out-think, outpsych, and out-tough Tyson to win a decision or possibly score a late-round TKO. The Ali who fought after Manila would probably have trouble beating a prime Tyson, but I'd pick the Ali who fought Leon Spinks--either time--to beat the Tyson of 2004. (For that matter, I'd also pick the Trevor Berbick who outpointed Ali to beat the Tyson of 2004.)

One thing these two greats have in common is the dramatic transformation each made stylistically as his career progressed, not just getting older--the difference being that Ali's transformations were primarily conscious adaptions to compensate for age while Tyson's were more akin to random deteriorations.

babulous · Post by **babulous** » 12 Jul 2004, 11:06

STYLES MAKE FIGHTS. I know that a prime Cassius Clay would have lost to a prime Tyson. Clay never exp. a fighter at that time whose was very quick & agile w/ power like Tyson was, Clay would have gotten caught w/ a bomb sooner or later & dropped, there's no getting up from those. Tyson was much quicker & more power w/ a better chin than Frazier ever was, he would have given Clay much more trouble than Frazier. But, after Ali came back........ Ali would have embarrassed Tyson, he knew more about the game & relied more on his brain rather his deminshing skills that's y he was the G.O.A.T. Take notes Jones jr.

dan1030 · Post by **dan1030** » 12 Jul 2004, 11:10

Pre-suspension Ali was so much quicker and slicker than anyone from Tyson's era that it's almost impossible to look at any of Tyson's fights for a valid comparision--the difference is just too great. And an early to mid 70s Ali, while a bit slower, was also a bit stronger. Speed, reach (and knowing how to use it), overall skill level, and most importantly mental toughness and will all favor Ali.
Of course--in the interest of full disclosure--I do fell Tyson is one of the most over-rated fighters in history, so it isn't just Ali that I'd pick to beat him

Tantum · Post by **Tantum** » 12 Jul 2004, 12:38

dan1030 wrote:I do fell Tyson is one of the most over-rated fighters in history, so it isn't just Ali that I'd pick to beat him

Holmes - Tyson is a pathetic sham.

Anyone who tries to base the fact that Ali getting whooped by Holmes (going easy, but..) in his prime... Has anything to do with an aging Holmes taking the fight with Tyson on 2 weeks notice after 2 years off means that Ali would lose... Is a complete jackass who knows nothing about boxing.

An in shape Holmes would have beat Tyson on that night... At age 38.

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 12 Jul 2004, 13:22

The idea of an 'indestructable prime Tyson" is a myth. Tony Tucker, who was basically a bigger yet more clumsy imitation of Ali took Tyson's best shots without blinking. Tyson looked very ordinary in many rds vs guys like James Tillis, Bonecrusher Smith, Pinklon Thomas, Frank Bruno, and yes James Douglas (which was a PRIME Tyson). He was the most shrewdly marketed HW in boxing history. Tyson fans always go back to the highlight reels of him knocking out guys like Michael Johnson and Eddie Richardson . . .so what??? One could make highlight films of guys like Lamon Brewster knocking out bums and he'd look indestructable (actually, http://www.lamonbrewster.com did just that-you'd think he was the 2nd coming of Foreman by their little video). Tyson was no doubt a very good fighter but he could get easily frustrated and could not change the gameplan when things wern't working out for him. He wasn't even in the class of Ali, who not only had enourmous physical talent but was extreamly smart in the ring and could adapt to an opponent and his style when it initially gave him problems. The only thing that could save Tyson when the going got touch was his punch and quickness, and against guys like Bruno that was enough. But against the real elite fighters it would not be enough. He not only got beat but got dominated by Douglas and Holyfield. When faced with a stiff left, movement, angles, counter-punching and heart he'd crumble like a deck of cards.

dan1030 · Post by **dan1030** » 13 Jul 2004, 16:21

dempseyfire wrote: Tony Tucker, who was basically a bigger yet more clumsy imitation of Ali took Tyson's best shots without blinking.

And did so with a broken right hand after the second round (after having rocked Tyson several times--especially in the first). Between the solid chin of Tucker that you point out, and the early offensive success he had aginst Tyson while he still had two working hands, it wouldn't have surprised me at all to see Tucker win a re-match. Of course, it comes as no surprise at all that he never got a re-match.

TheRiverCityHippy · Post by **TheRiverCityHippy** » 14 Jul 2004, 17:43

dempseyfire wrote:The idea of an 'indestructable prime Tyson" is a myth. Tony Tucker, who was basically a bigger yet more clumsy imitation of Ali took Tyson's best shots without blinking. Tyson looked very ordinary in many rds vs guys like James Tillis, Bonecrusher Smith, Pinklon Thomas, Frank Bruno, and yes James Douglas (which was a PRIME Tyson). He was the most shrewdly marketed HW in boxing history. Tyson fans always go back to the highlight reels of him knocking out guys like Michael Johnson and Eddie Richardson . . .so what??? One could make highlight films of guys like Lamon Brewster knocking out bums and he'd look indestructable (actually, http://www.lamonbrewster.com did just that-you'd think he was the 2nd coming of Foreman by their little video). Tyson was no doubt a very good fighter but he could get easily frustrated and could not change the gameplan when things wern't working out for him. He wasn't even in the class of Ali, who not only had enourmous physical talent but was extreamly smart in the ring and could adapt to an opponent and his style when it initially gave him problems. The only thing that could save Tyson when the going got touch was his punch and quickness, and against guys like Bruno that was enough. But against the real elite fighters it would not be enough. He not only got beat but got dominated by Douglas and Holyfield. When faced with a stiff left, movement, angles, counter-punching and heart he'd crumble like a deck of cards.

agree with every word, good post mate.

mrbassie · Post by **mrbassie** » 14 Jul 2004, 18:17

I don't. People do overrate Tyson, but then they overrate Ali as well. That's all to do with this mythical matchup bullshit; it can be fun but the attitude taken is always that boxer A is better than boxer B so he'd win and to hell with the intagibles.

As for the fights you mention, I think it should be borne in mind that they're examples of Tyson at his worst. When people speak of a "prime" Tyson, they don't mean his physical prime/his youth. They mean when he was with Kevin Rooney, because let's face it without him he was not the same fighter. Tyson wasn't in good shape when he fought Douglas (his own fault of course but true) and he hasn't been in good shape since, which encompasses the Holyfield fights. I'm not a Tyson fanatic, far from it but I do respect the ability he had.
I think Ali would beat him on points comfortably (the young Ali is the one I'm thinking of, the one who really did float like a butterfly) but Tyson was better than just good, he was fornicating brilliant.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 16 Jul 2004, 02:36

If there is any doubt, just watch the Tyson-Douglass fight film...then imagine a young Ali in place of Douglass....A NO BRAINER...Ali wins BIG!!!

dan1030 · Post by **dan1030** » 16 Jul 2004, 07:07

I agree that Ali would win, and probably easily. But to be fair to Tyson, the guy was already past his prime by the time of the Douglas fight...which is one of the saddest commentaries that can be made regarding his "all-time great" status--a has-been by his early 20s.

Flabby* · Post by Flabby* » 17 Jul 2004, 01:03

So many people think ALi had quicker hand speed than Tyson, but in my opinion, there is no way Ali had faster hand speed, Tyson had a near perfect atheletic body. He lifted weights and posessed explosive movements, whereas Ali just had a normal body, his lack of muscle, and abdominal muscles (center of power) will have made his hand speed far slower than a prime Tyson. Not to mention Tyson had more muscle in a smaller area of arm space (shorter arms, more muscle) which would make his arm even more devastating.

With a speed advantage, Tyson would KO Ali.
If Ali tried to dance, Tyson would wear him down like he did with Tyrell Biggs and oh so many other tall opponents he faced. If Ali tried to jab, then Tyson would still KO him like he did with Holmes. If Ali tried to Clinch Tyson would do his trademark right to the body and upper cut to the head. If Ali tried to rope-a-dope, remember how Frazier banged his arms so hard he couldn't do it? Well imagine a Tyson banging on the arms, it would be many more times devastating.

As for the critics:

Tillis vs Tyson: It was the early part of his career, he had lack of experience.
Tucker vs Tyson: ?? Tyson led by a large points margin
Smith vs Tyson: Tyson led by a large points margin
Thomas vs Tyson: Tyson dodged Thomas's punches with ease and KO'ed him brutally.

Everyone has bad fights, i got just name a few of ALi's:

Ali vs Cooper: Ali was in good shape and in the early part of his career, cooper dropped him, tyson was never dropped in the early part of his career.
Light heavyweight Doug Jones vs Ali: Jones hit Ali with many hard punches.

A short heavyweight Joe Frazier beat ali, Tyson was a much better fighter than Frazier and the same type almost.

JC · Post by JC » 17 Jul 2004, 06:44

I you seem to have pick some odd reasons for why tyson would beat Ali.

Flabby* wrote:Not to mention Tyson had more muscle in a smaller area of arm space (shorter arms, more muscle) which would make his arm even more devastating.

Shorter arms "more muscle" does not equal more punching power Tommy Hearns had much longer thinner arms than most of his opponents I don't remember many beating him for punch power

Flabby wrote:So many people think ALi had quicker hand speed than Tyson, but in my opinion, there is no way Ali had faster hand speed

I agree Tyson had faster hand than Ali but when people speak about Ali's speed they are usually talking about his foot speed

Flabby* wrote:With a speed advantage, Tyson would KO Ali.
If Ali tried to dance, Tyson would wear him down like he did with Tyrell Biggs and oh so many other tall opponents he faced. If Ali tried to jab, then Tyson would still KO him like he did with Holmes.

I think the Holmes issue has been addressed enough in the past

I'm not one of the people who feel tyson would have no chance against Ali, but i don't think it's worth making a case that Tyson was a suprior super athlete. How exactly did Ali have a normal body with lack of muscle? I think to assume the bigger more musclar heavyweight is the better Heavyweight is wrong, Bruno was the best conditioned heavyweight I ever saw and we all saw what Tyson did to him.

mrbassie · Post by **mrbassie** » 17 Jul 2004, 08:36

Flabby* wrote:So many people think ALi had quicker hand speed than Tyson, but in my opinion, there is no way Ali had faster hand speed, Tyson had a near perfect atheletic body. He lifted weights and posessed explosive movements, whereas Ali just had a normal body, his lack of muscle, and abdominal muscles (center of power) will have made his hand speed far slower than a prime Tyson. Not to mention Tyson had more muscle in a smaller area of arm space (shorter arms, more muscle) which would make his arm even more devastating.

With a speed advantage, Tyson would KO Ali.
If Ali tried to dance, Tyson would wear him down like he did with Tyrell Biggs and oh so many other tall opponents he faced. If Ali tried to jab, then Tyson would still KO him like he did with Holmes. If Ali tried to Clinch Tyson would do his trademark right to the body and upper cut to the head. If Ali tried to rope-a-dope, remember how Frazier banged his arms so hard he couldn't do it? Well imagine a Tyson banging on the arms, it would be many more times devastating.

As for the critics:

Tillis vs Tyson: It was the early part of his career, he had lack of experience.
Tucker vs Tyson: ?? Tyson led by a large points margin
Smith vs Tyson: Tyson led by a large points margin
Thomas vs Tyson: Tyson dodged Thomas's punches with ease and KO'ed him brutally.

Everyone has bad fights, i got just name a few of ALi's:

Ali vs Cooper: Ali was in good shape and in the early part of his career, cooper dropped him, tyson was never dropped in the early part of his career.
Light heavyweight Doug Jones vs Ali: Jones hit Ali with many hard punches.

A short heavyweight Joe Frazier beat ali, Tyson was a much better fighter than Frazier and the same type almost.

You make some good points, but I don't agree that Tyson had faster hands.
Anyway, IMO Tyson would be befuddled by Ali's footwork the same as everybody else was. When the young Ali switched on he was amazing, Cooper only caught him because he was clowning. I won't comment on Jones because I haven't seen that one

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 17 Jul 2004, 15:30

Flabby* wrote:So many people think ALi had quicker hand speed than Tyson, but in my opinion, there is no way Ali had faster hand speed, Tyson had a near perfect atheletic body. He lifted weights and posessed explosive movements, whereas Ali just had a normal body, his lack of muscle, and abdominal muscles (center of power) will have made his hand speed far slower than a prime Tyson. Not to mention Tyson had more muscle in a smaller area of arm space (shorter arms, more muscle) which would make his arm even more devastating.

With a speed advantage, Tyson would KO Ali.
If Ali tried to dance, Tyson would wear him down like he did with Tyrell Biggs and oh so many other tall opponents he faced. If Ali tried to jab, then Tyson would still KO him like he did with Holmes. If Ali tried to Clinch Tyson would do his trademark right to the body and upper cut to the head. If Ali tried to rope-a-dope, remember how Frazier banged his arms so hard he couldn't do it? Well imagine a Tyson banging on the arms, it would be many more times devastating.

As for the critics:

Tillis vs Tyson: It was the early part of his career, he had lack of experience.
Tucker vs Tyson: ?? Tyson led by a large points margin
Smith vs Tyson: Tyson led by a large points margin
Thomas vs Tyson: Tyson dodged Thomas's punches with ease and KO'ed him brutally.

Everyone has bad fights, i got just name a few of ALi's:

Ali vs Cooper: Ali was in good shape and in the early part of his career, cooper dropped him, tyson was never dropped in the early part of his career.
Light heavyweight Doug Jones vs Ali: Jones hit Ali with many hard punches.

A short heavyweight Joe Frazier beat ali, Tyson was a much better fighter than Frazier and the same type almost.

Don't know how you throw out the Tillis fight to a young Tyson when you point to the Cooper fight (was Ali even over 200 lbs for the fight?, he hadn;t even filled out yet). Ali lacked abdominal muscles??? The guy let top HWs pound his stomach and he laughed. The guy had one of the strongest mid-sections in boxing history. You seem to think someone 'ripped' like Tyson must be a better athlete then Ali. Ali and Tyson were both phenomenal physical specimens. Ali was extreamly strong as well. And Tyson in his early years didn't lift many weights at all-that was the way his body was-he looks like that at 13 years old. When he did start hitting the weights big time in the 90s it just made him bulky and slowed him down.
Clinching-This was perhaps Tyson's greatest weakness. He was VERY easy to tie up.
The Frazier comparison-I strongly dis-agree Tyson was a better fighter then Frazier. He had an edge on Frazier in speed and power but that was it. Frazier had much better, consistant upper body and head movement, making him harder to hit. He got stronger as the fight went on, whereas Tyson's activity dwindled as the fight went on. Frazier worked the body much more then Tyson ever did, which would benefit Ali a great deal in a fight with Tyson. Plus perhaps most importantly there was no quit in Frazier. The guy would try to win with every ounce of himself until he collapsed. Tyson on the other hand got discouraged easily, he would stay in there but he tried in a futle way in which he knew he could not win, and the guy couldn't change strategy if his life depended on it. ( Holyfield 1, Lewis, Douglas). Against all those guys, he just kept plodding foward and getting hit with the jab. He was a sucker for counter-punchers.

alrightjim · Post by **alrightjim** » 17 Jul 2004, 19:42

DH-A: Many guys probably would like to compare Ali - Tyson with Ali - Foreman. But there is one important difference: Tyson is a harder body-puncher (so Ali would not have been able to stand at the ropes in order to let him tire).

Tyson was not a harder body puncher than the young Foreman. They were both fearsome body punchers. Ali in his prime (the 1966 Ali) would not have rope-a-doped Tyson. You are confusing the 1974 Ali for Ali. This is NOT the Ali that demolished the field in the mid-Sixties. That Ali dances around Tyson and punishes him for any and all mistakes.

It would have been an excellent fight! Mike Tyson is the best boxer in history.

It would be an excellent fight, but I don't agree Tyson is the best heavyweight in history, let alone the greatest boxer. On a given night, Tyson could have beaten any heavyweight in history, but if he fights Ali 10 times he loses 8 of those fights, and he NEVER knocks Ali out. If all those fighters over all those years didn't knock Muhammad out, it should start to dawn on a guy there was a reason for this.