If Mike Tyson was around today, would he be a bigger star than Floyd?

Argue with boxrec, not me. Maybe I should have used ring magazine. But Tarver 2015 would school Tucker 1986, just my opinion. And in 86 Tyson wasn't really prime, I would give Wlad the 60 and Tyson aged 20, 40 tbh. I'd expect Wlad to control him like Smith did in 87 but land far more and out point him and school him, 86/87 version anyway. On that we're comparing scenes when Tyson won the title, not two years on.

 

You can't be serious !!!

28 yr old Tucker would kill the jumped up, 47 yr old LHW.




Tysons explosiveness at prime would spook Wlad and Mike would get inside, which would be bad news for Wlad.

Wlad might be able to keep him off but I doubt it.

 

Just about all of Mike's best opposition would be top ten today. Just look at today's top ten rankings. Tyson Fury is number 3 on most of them. That speaks volumes.

Micheal Spinks, Larry Holmes and Berbick etc would all be top ten.

Have a look at the current ratings by Ring magazine.

They have Takem and Thompson at 9 and 10.

http://ringtv.craveonline.com/ratings

 

We're not debating what would have happened between Wlad and Berbock though are we?

We're debating the ratings.

The current top ten is so weak, that if Trevor was around today, he'd more than likely make the top ten. Go and view the current rankings.

How the hell do you know what Spinks would or wouldn't have done? But if for arguments sake we say he definitely would have fought at HW, then he'd without doubt be in today's top ten.

Larry Holmes would have been 50/50 with Pulev?

 

Of course he would. Why?

1) He's exciting.

2) He backed up what he said.

3) He's a HW.

Floyd isn't exciting, his "promises" end as soon as he steps into the ring, and Mike was regarded as the baddest man on the planet. Floyd isn't the baddest man in his hometown, let alone the world.

Mike was earning FORTUNES when fortunes meant something. Multi-millionaire in the 80's? Make a hell of a lot of difference to now (look what you could do with your money then compared to now). Dude earned nearly half a billion by the 90's ended - 16 years ago!

 

The only person that's deluded on the HW scene, is you.

You don't know that Spinks wouldn't be a HW today, and the only reason you are adament that he wouldn't be, is to try and weaken my argument. But if he was, then you could bet your life he'd be in today's top ten. Seriously, go and look at today's top ten. Go and look at the ratings by the Ring, Boxrec and Boxing Monthly etc. You need a wake up call. The fact that Fury is at 3 tells you everything you need to know about today's scene.

I don't care if Larry was 38. Tony Thompson and Tarver are ranked in today's top ten by some publications. Did you not see Larry's fights with Mercer and Holyfield? Larry Holmes even at 38 would definitely be a top HW today.

Berbick wouldn't even get a shot? Why?

Bruno would cause many of today's guys trouble.

All Mike's opponents would be nobodies? When Fury is at number 3, with his best win being Chisora? With Jennings being in the top ten? Ha! That sh*t you've been smoking is too strong for you man. Give it a rest for a while.

Mike wouldn't last in today's division?

When Takam and Thomson etc are in it?

If Mike was at his best today, he'd absolutely rip through this division.

 

:deal

 

Out of those 3 guys , Tackam was the best and Povetkin was being out boxed by Tackam. He was easily handling Povetkin before he got tired and left himself open. Charr and Perez are non factors.

Smith has better wins against Weaver , Bruno , Witherspoon , Ferguson and stopped prime Evertt Martin in 1991.

Shot to bits Martin would take Wladimir the distance years later in 1998.

Tucker soaked up rounds of punishment from Douglas in 87 before grinding him down for a stoppage win.
He would walk straight through old Tarver like he wasn't even there.

Bruno would mangle Teper. Any and every version of Bruno

 

'Berbock' lol

 

You're entitled to your opinions (some of which I don't agree with) but you've only listed ten fights, when there's obviously many, many more to create from that list.

By the way, any particular reason for choosing 1986?

If I listed the best 20 fighters of the 80's, and the best 20 fighters of the last ten years, I'd bet my house that the 80's guys would prevail overall.

 

:good

 

:good

 

yes, tyson would get jab to death from distance

, when he tries to get close and spam punches. hed get clinched.

after some rounds, a frustrated tyson takes more risks than he should

and gets ktfo by klitshko right hand bazooka.

 

What makes you think that Mike couldn't have got inside and ripped him with body shots and uppercuts?

Mike had tremendous speed.

I don't see how Wlad could have clinched everytime he got close.