Can anyone take 88-89 Mike Tyson?

I don't really agree with the an.alogy you used but I agree it was a fight the fans wanted because of their history. The PPV numbers alone show that this was the fight the fans likely wanted the most at the time, despite Holyfield being a 6-1 underdog.

But even before the Seldon fight was over it seems Tyson was fighting Holyfield next and not Lewis. As the articles show below, Holyfield was all ready signed up to face Tyson so there was never really any intention to even negotiate a fight with Lewis at that time.

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/05/sports/boxing-notebook-respect-humility-in-a-title-fight.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/03/sports/sports-people-boxing-a-few-punches-between-bites.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/09/09/sports/tyson-strikes-quickly-in-hurry-to-fight-holyfield.html

 

Tyson did not have his head movement or combos...he had a strong chin because he was determined to bury Ruddock he fought more with anger than skill,though his skill in the Ruddock fight still looks impressive because he was that good,anyone can see two version s of Tyson post prison its clear as day.He would k.o Ruddock in 4 rounds in the 80's.I wouldn't say shot but clearly his best days were gone.

 

Love how you left out from that same article Lewis originally turning down the fight with Tyson twice for a career high 10 and then 14million ..Lewis had a offer and date on the table for July of 96 from Showtime and Tyson which again HE turned down, the fight was there if he wanted it, who then or now was getting 45 million? not even Tyson who was by far the biggest draw in sports and damn sure wasnt Lewis who never drew anywhere close to that at any point in his career, the only fighter to ever get close to that was Mayweather and that was just this year...Tyson only dropped the belts for the Holyfield fights which were by far more lucrative b/c the anticipation from 92 fight and because Holyfield was by far a bigger name than Lewis in 96..

 

Muhammed Ali, would whoop any version of Mike Tyson. So would Lennox Lewis, probably both Klitshcko's, a prime Larry Holmes I think beats him also.

 

Fastest Heavyweight in History. I think not. Cassius Clay holds that title.

 

As i've said, Holy was considered at the time as a walking corpse by the vast majority of experts, bookies included:

 

Holyfield will destroy any version of Tyson, any, 100 of 100. Foreman would probably win as well.
Lewis would probably win 80 of 100 times against Tyson. Tyson 20 win would be a 1 lucky punch KO or Lewis doing some **** and miss some shot.
Vitali is all wrong for Tyson and would beat any version of him as well.
2006-2012 version of Wladimir also have great chance for beating Tyson. Not as great as Lewis, cause Wlad lack Lewis uppercut and that is a huge weapon against going low opponent.
And the real truth is Tyson is overrated as hell. As well as the first smart opponent with good tactic beats him.
And i hate when someone complain about fighter prime when he lose, and they start oh dear he was not prime ....
He take Carl Williams in 1 round, oh he looks great, he was destroyed in his next match and oh dear he is not prime ....

 

I think a prime George Foreman would knock out a prime Mike Tyson. He's just too big and strong for him.

A fight between a prime Tyson and a prime Clay (pre-Ali,) would've been a helluva match. Ali would've been dancing around the ring throwing those beautiful jabs of his while Tyson would be trying to catch up to him, reduce the distance, and attempt to rough him up inside the pocket. I still think Ali could've beat him by decision just by keeping him on the end of his jab all night long.

 

The comeback foreman of the 80s would have beaten tyson. Thats why tyson ducke dhim

 

Tyson had exited his peak effectiveness (youth & Rooney put him over the edge in those early days) but wasn't shot against Ruddock by any means. Still tail end of his prime.

 

Eh...very hard to envision that. Foreman had a close fight with Shannon Briggs. Yes he got robbed but that fact that it was close, period, tells me he probably doesn't take a very clear decision over a contemporaneous Tyson, whose speed and skill eclipse Briggs' wholesale. Could the old man have scored a Moorer style kibosh? Maybe. I'd favor Tyson, however, on points.

 

IMO the foreman of 95 is not the same as foreman of 86(?)-90.

He did beat top contenders then sprinkled with bums. He looked good IMO.

 

Sorry, misread your original post. I thought it said 90's.

But still if we are talking comeback Foreman of the 80's, then we're still matching him with a proportionately much better (peak) Tyson of the 80's, so I still favor Tyson.

Now, the 80's George versus the 90's Mike...

 

80s vs 80s I'd only slightly favor Foreman because I think tyson would be more afraid of him. However it all depends IMO on the uppercut. If foreman thinks tyson is going to duck into it like quawi and frazier did hed be mistaken. On the same note, if Tyson gets too confident and crouches without movement hes going to get hit with it (left upper prob) and hes going to get dropped.

80s vs 90s tyson I give an even greater edge to Foreman, based on what I said above along with mikes deteiorating head movement at that point.

 

Tyson actually learned a lot from Joe's mistakes. He refined the bob-and-weave peekaboo to where uppercut only grazed the side of the helmet, usually taken partly on the backs of his gloves.

Major student of the game. :good