BoxRec

Where would be his place on the HW scene today ?

In 1989 he had already been a bit declined, his prime had been over after Spinks, with the departure of Kevin Rooney.

Anyway prime Tyson would have been at the very top for sure. He could have outfought Povetkin and Ortiz, maybe even KOed/TKOed them, he was faster and more skilled, than those two. He would have KOed Wilder as well, Deontay had no tools to keep Tyson away and Tyson's killer instinct was better, than Ortiz's one. I'd also pick Tyson to either decision or KO/TKO Joshua late in a pretty competetive, probably a bit Bruno-like fight. Only Fury has enough tools to handle Iron Mike. The Gypsy King would have been able to stay away from Tyson (a Mike one ), to frustrate him and to outbox him from the outside.

1986/87 Tyson would have been the better fighter. IMHO.

oogiebe wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 11:38 1986/87 Tyson would have been the better fighter. IMHO.

Today, I watched (randomly) on You Tube the fight Tyson-Williams (1989). Tyson had been fast, strong (and brutal, too)......
And he had been in his prime until 1990, absolutely.

ValMar wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 13:25

oogiebe wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 11:38 1986/87 Tyson would have been the better fighter. IMHO.

Today, I watched (randomly) on You Tube the fight Tyson-Williams (1989). Tyson had been fast, strong (and brutal, too)......
And he had been in his prime until 1990, absolutely.

It's amazing every time I watch those vids of early Tyson. He was just so ridiculously efficient! His foot work was amazing. His defense was amazing, etc. Switching stances; angles; combinations; fury.

oogiebe wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 13:27

ValMar wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 13:25

oogiebe wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 11:38 1986/87 Tyson would have been the better fighter. IMHO.

Today, I watched (randomly) on You Tube the fight Tyson-Williams (1989). Tyson had been fast, strong (and brutal, too)......
And he had been in his prime until 1990, absolutely.

It's amazing every time I watch those vids of early Tyson. He was just so ridiculously efficient! His foot work was amazing. His defense was amazing, etc. Switching stances; angles; combinations; fury.

Power !

ValMar wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 13:50

oogiebe wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 13:27

ValMar wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 13:25

Today, I watched (randomly) on You Tube the fight Tyson-Williams (1989). Tyson had been fast, strong (and brutal, too)......
And he had been in his prime until 1990, absolutely.

It's amazing every time I watch those vids of early Tyson. He was just so ridiculously efficient! His foot work was amazing. His defense was amazing, etc. Switching stances; angles; combinations; fury.

Power !

Both hands!

The only danger would be Fury, but i'd favour Mike

dagilechia wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:04 The only danger would be Fury, but i'd favour Mike

Yeah, Fury's length would be a lot for Tyson to overcome. Fury's shear size could tucker the little guy out.

oogiebe wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:06

dagilechia wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:04 The only danger would be Fury, but i'd favour Mike

Yeah, Fury's length would be a lot for Tyson to overcome. Fury's shear size could tucker the little guy out.

anyway, Wilder and even Cunningham managed to knock him down, so i think that Mike would knock Fury out... but yes, styles make fight and Fury's style and size would be a lot to overcome for Mike

dagilechia wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:11

oogiebe wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:06

dagilechia wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:04 The only danger would be Fury, but i'd favour Mike

Yeah, Fury's length would be a lot for Tyson to overcome. Fury's shear size could tucker the little guy out.

anyway, Wilder and even Cunningham managed to knock him down, so i think that Mike would knock Fury out... but yes, styles make fight and Fury's style and size would be a lot to overcome for Mike

Wilder has great length too. The Cunningham knockdown was inexcusable and was more a lack of focus for Fury than Cunninghams ability. It's difficult for me to see Tyson beating any of the top three guys today. Tyson always had trouble with the bigger guys. When they would try to clinch, Tyson always seemed to oblige, probably due to his lack of inside prowess. But AJ and Wilder are much bigger and can hit just as hard.

oogiebe wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:14

dagilechia wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:11

oogiebe wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:06

Yeah, Fury's length would be a lot for Tyson to overcome. Fury's shear size could tucker the little guy out.

anyway, Wilder and even Cunningham managed to knock him down, so i think that Mike would knock Fury out... but yes, styles make fight and Fury's style and size would be a lot to overcome for Mike

Wilder has great length too. The Cunningham knockdown was inexcusable and was more a lack of focus for Fury than Cunninghams ability. It's difficult for me to see Tyson beating any of the top three guys today. Tyson always had trouble with the bigger guys. When they would try to clinch, Tyson always seemed to oblige, probably due to his lack of inside prowess. But AJ and Wilder are much bigger and can hit just as hard.

i think that even if Mike would land on Wilders hands it would be too much for DW, Wilder is tall but not physically strong

dagilechia wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:16

oogiebe wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:14

dagilechia wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:11

anyway, Wilder and even Cunningham managed to knock him down, so i think that Mike would knock Fury out... but yes, styles make fight and Fury's style and size would be a lot to overcome for Mike

Wilder has great length too. The Cunningham knockdown was inexcusable and was more a lack of focus for Fury than Cunninghams ability. It's difficult for me to see Tyson beating any of the top three guys today. Tyson always had trouble with the bigger guys. When they would try to clinch, Tyson always seemed to oblige, probably due to his lack of inside prowess. But AJ and Wilder are much bigger and can hit just as hard.

i think that even if Mike would land on Wilders hands it would be too much for DW, Wilder is tall but not physically strong

Could you please explain how Wilder is not physically strong?

tiny_acres wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 22:12

dagilechia wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:16

oogiebe wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:14
Wilder has great length too. The Cunningham knockdown was inexcusable and was more a lack of focus for Fury than Cunninghams ability. It's difficult for me to see Tyson beating any of the top three guys today. Tyson always had trouble with the bigger guys. When they would try to clinch, Tyson always seemed to oblige, probably due to his lack of inside prowess. But AJ and Wilder are much bigger and can hit just as hard.

i think that even if Mike would land on Wilders hands it would be too much for DW, Wilder is tall but not physically strong

Could you please explain how Wilder is not physically strong?

Wha??? I must've missed that! LMAO!

tiny_acres wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 22:12

dagilechia wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:16

oogiebe wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:14
Wilder has great length too. The Cunningham knockdown was inexcusable and was more a lack of focus for Fury than Cunninghams ability. It's difficult for me to see Tyson beating any of the top three guys today. Tyson always had trouble with the bigger guys. When they would try to clinch, Tyson always seemed to oblige, probably due to his lack of inside prowess. But AJ and Wilder are much bigger and can hit just as hard.

i think that even if Mike would land on Wilders hands it would be too much for DW, Wilder is tall but not physically strong

Could you please explain how Wilder is not physically strong?

He's tall but skinny, almost a cruiserweight in the ring

dagilechia wrote: ↑07 Jan 2019, 04:26

tiny_acres wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 22:12

dagilechia wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 21:16
i think that even if Mike would land on Wilders hands it would be too much for DW, Wilder is tall but not physically strong

Could you please explain how Wilder is not physically strong?

He's tall but skinny, almost a cruiserweight in the ring

And arguably the hardest hitting fighter in the world

tiny_acres wrote: ↑07 Jan 2019, 07:06

dagilechia wrote: ↑07 Jan 2019, 04:26

tiny_acres wrote: ↑06 Jan 2019, 22:12

Could you please explain how Wilder is not physically strong?

He's tall but skinny, almost a cruiserweight in the ring

And arguably the hardest hitting fighter in the world

hard hitting doesn't mean physically strong. he hits much harder than Fury but Fury was obviously the stronger man

I hate to be pedantic, but Mike Tyson’s prime was 1988.

During 1989, even though he was stopping opponents, he also started adopting several bad habits, such as less head movement, throwing fewer jabs/combos and being inclined to load-up his shots, his talents were declining, hence the Buster Douglas defeat a year later.

The 1988 version of Tyson would have been a top-five ranked heavyweight if he were competing today, for sure. Even though his general lack of size (being 5’10” tall and 218lbs) would result in him having to overcome huge physical disadvantages. And I also believe the bravery of the likes Wilder, Joshua, Whyte and Fury would present a challenge for ‘Iron’ Mike, since the New York legend never managed to overcome any adversity throughout the entirety of his career.

Tyson faced a lot of opponents that wholeheartedly bought into the frenzied media hype, to the point they were already “defeated” fighters before they’d even stepped foot inside the ring. The elite level heavyweights that are competing today seem fearless in comparison to their late eighties counterparts.

With the exception of the rather limited Frans Botha, Tyson always seemed to struggle really badly against highly-ambitious opponents that were durable enough to survive his early onslaughts, whilst also being able to return fire of their own.

We also need to take into consideration the significant improvement in modern diet and training methods in comparison to the time period Tyson competed in.

It's other people’s prerogative to perceive history through nostalgic rose-tinted glasses, where their naivety blinds them from questioning accomplishments that have been embellished to the point they've become myths, but the actual objective truths of reality is the fact that Tyson would be undersized compared to today's heavyweight behemoths and he would also be far less effective today than he was thirty years ago.

I feel that Tyson would be capable of beating ANY heavyweight competing today, but I don’t think he’d be able to rule the division. I don’t believe he’d have the prerequisite mental strength or size to do that. He’d inevitably suffer far more losses today than he would thirty years ago.

On a side note: Mike Tyson would find it fairly easy to make today’s cruiserweight limit. And I suspect his handlers and trainer would do their upmost to persuade him to compete as a 200lb-er.

I know there’s more money to be made as a heavyweight, but ‘Iron’ Mike would enjoy more success and also have a longer career if he chose to compete against cruiserweights.

In reality, any fighter that small would prefer to compete against men their own size, since Tyson’s opponents thirty years ago were a lot smaller than today’s heavyweight behemoths (i.e. a lot of them should be considered as being the equivalent of today's rehydrated cruiserweights, due to them typically weighing 212lbs, based on Mike's first 37 bouts).

Prime Mike Tyson vs Prime Dillian Whyte, imagine the pressers! You can see how it goes too, in your head.

TheGingerBomber wrote: ↑07 Jan 2019, 08:26 Prime Mike Tyson vs Prime Dillian Whyte, imagine the pressers! You can see how it goes too, in your head.

I wouldn't call Whyte a serious threat to Tyson. Whyte is good, but not really special.

TheGingerBomber wrote: ↑07 Jan 2019, 08:26 Prime Mike Tyson vs Prime Dillian Whyte, imagine the pressers! You can see how it goes too, in your head.

early KO by Tyson, easy fight, just mismatch i would say

dagilechia wrote: ↑07 Jan 2019, 08:55

TheGingerBomber wrote: ↑07 Jan 2019, 08:26 Prime Mike Tyson vs Prime Dillian Whyte, imagine the pressers! You can see how it goes too, in your head.

early KO by Tyson, easy fight, just mismatch i would say

Up until the end of 1989, Mike Tyson typically faced the modern-day equivalent of rehydrated cruiserweights and had never faced an athletic world-rated heavyweight that was as big or as heavy-handed as Dillian Whyte.

‘Iron’ Mike may have been the betting favourite to win this mythical bout, but the Brit would likely be an absolute nightmare for the New Yorker. It almost certainly wouldn’t have been a mismatch. Whyte would pose a huge threat to (the then unbeaten version of) Mike Tyson.

By the time he’d completed his 37th bout, Mike Tyson had never overcome a six-inch height and a 30lbs weight disadvantage over any of his world-rated opponents, as per the deficit he'd endure facing Dillian Whyte. The biggest physical handicap he faced was against the feather-fisted chubby Tony Tubbs, where he was 22lbs lighter.

We also need to remember that Tyson was either the same weight or heavier than 68% of the opponents he faced during the first 37 bouts of his career, which includes world title fights against the likes of Trevor Berbick, Carl Williams, Pinklon Thomas and Michael Spinks.

Based on the other 32% of fights, where Tyson was lighter than his opponents, he typically only had to overcome a 13lbs weight disadvantage.

There’s a reason why weight classes exist. How many times had the prime 1988 version of Mike Tyson beaten any world-rated opponent that was athletic and being of similar physical stature to Lennox Lewis? It didn't happen... and that's the reason why the imaginary bout against Dillian Whyte shouldn't be considered as being a mismatch.

I respect Whyte, but I would never put his name in the same sentence with young Tyson.

ValMar wrote: ↑07 Jan 2019, 11:26 I respect Whyte, but I would never put his name in the same sentence with young Tyson.