Good post.. I couldn't help to think of what would happen to Fury and Wilder fighting Mike at his best. Wlad is the only one with a decent chance, and we know it would just take one shot from Tyson.:good
Wlad would hit him with that big Jab and land that thunderous Right all night. The distance he would have to close would be too much. Wlad by 10th rd KO
uncletermite, Yes, Mike was all muscle. But a HW who is only 5'10, with a reach of only 71' is a small HW. What do you mean when you say Spinks and Holmes would have no chance in any year? So you think that Holmes looked great against Mercer, and if he'd have looked as great against Spinks, he'd have beaten him in 5 rounds? Well, can't you give Spinks credit, for not allowing Holmes to look as great as he did against Mercer? I agree about Tucker and Ruddock. I left out out Ruddock because I was just concentrating on his 80's wins. But Wylan doesn't believe that if Tony Tucker was active today, he'd be able to make the top ten.
We know that Holmes was faded, but it still took a very good fighter in Spinks to get the decisions over him. What don't you understand about that? I'd pick that faded version of Holmes to beat the majority of today's HW's. Again, Holmes proved that he still had something left in the tank AFTER he'd lost to Spinks and Tyson. I don't think Tony Thompson would have beaten Spinks. Again, Spinks was an established HW when Tyson took him out. Why can't you accept that? I like debating with you, but not when you're ignorant. And you saying that Mike had no wins of significance, is completely ignorant.
Mike wasn't big in his own era. He was 5'10, with a 71" reach. You say that Spinks couldn't cut it against Thompson because he was too small, yet don't give any credit to Mike for beating guys who were a lot bigger than him, and who were either as good as, or better than the likes of Tony Thompson. You are completely biased.
Spinks wouldn't beat Tyson at any year and neither would Holmes...spinks for Tyson is a great win just on how he defeated him,but I never put Spinks too high ..maybe number 5 on his list that Tyson beat.,Spinks ducked Tucker and lost BOTH Holmes fights,that is clear as day. This is just another example of how out of touch the ring magize/boxing experts/sports writers really were and are today,guys like Bert Sugar actually thought Tyson was all wrong for spinks and guys like Frazier called Tyson average. Tucker would definatly be getting a title shot somewhere in this era...he would school most guys...Maybe all of them other than the name Klitchko.the thing is the 80's guys were more technical than today but they are also harder to hurt now because they are bigger and stronger.I think if Holmes at 42 that night fought Holmes at 35...i'll take the 42 year old Holmes to win.Mercer was far more formidable than Spinks,even when he looked bad at times.
I would think that Mike would have gotten on the inside and hurt them both with body shots and uppercuts. I think he'd have beaten both of them.
Wilder would get crushed! Fury would last maybe a bit if he danced around,he is 6'8 and has decent skill,but his lack of power would not be able to hold off Tyson for more than 3 rounds I think. Wlad is a 50/50 fight for me ,but I like Tyson right now...Wlad at his very best would be difficult for any 5'10 guy,even Tyson,but Tyson had a rock chin when he was focued I cant really go against that.If Wlad steam rolls Fury and breaks Louis's record we will see?Hes actually already is the longest HW champ ever...Louis took a 3/4 year layoff and never had to give the title up. My personal pick would be Vitali to upset Tyson!
Great post. I don't mind people disagreeing with me, as long as their points are both logical and objective. Wylan is just being ignorant in saying that Tyson never had any noteworthy wins. If you don't mind, I'd like to ask something of you. I don't know if you've been following my debate with Wylan or not, but I'd like you to name all of the guys who Mike beat, who you think would be rated in today's top ten if they were currently active. According to Wylan, only Holmes and Bruno may possibly have scr*ped in. In my opinion, that's ridiculous, considering as though we've got the likes of Thompson, Tarver, Teper, and Stiverne in today's top ten. Also, Wilder and Fury are considered the 3rd/4th best HW's on the planet. Finally, if you don't mind, how many of today's top ten do you think would have been rated during Mike's peak years? Thanks. :good
Frazier may have been fat and untrained, but any version of Foreman beats any version of Frazier. Frazier was absolutely made to order for him.
Top 5 guys from the 80's for me other than Bruno ,tucker and Holmes since they were mentioned...would be in order 1/ Ruddock...a solid 230/240 pounder at his peak who was on a 15/16 win streak..14 k.os and no one wanted him but Tyson.He was also a former Holmes sparring partner who was fired for getting the better of Holmes a little to much. 2/ Berbick...on a 9 win streak and Tyson fought this guy only in his second year..Berbick gave holmes tough fights. 3/ Thomas on a 26 win streak and only one loss prior to Tyson was Berbick who was on his 9 win streak.Also Dundee regarded his jab better than Ali or listons.His chin was also legendary. 4/ Green ..This guy was not really stable but he only had one loss prior to Tyson and that was Berbick.Very quick hands and chin,i believe he was on pain killers when he fought Tyson or some illegal substance.I actually know someone from special unit NYPD that had a run in with this guy and had to tear gass him,but that's another story. 5/ Tubbs...a big slick boxer.. had only one loss prior to Tyson a nd out of his prime he took Bowe the distance in a ten rounder. I can see all these guys somewhere in the HW picture today all were big/lean technical guys who could take a punch,where?Well that's hard to call,the most frustrating thiong about todays Hws I see they are all talented but just don't fight one another so its hard to gauge. Todays top HW's..... 1/ Povetkin 2/ Joshua 3/ Fury 4/ Wach 5/ Pulev I think would also be ranked and a handful for the 80's fighters... Haye would be a top guy for sure ,he is fast strong and skilled,i would think hes over Tubbs or Berbick.Guys like Ustinov/Thomas/Wilder/Leapai/Jennings are also in there..again its hard to figure them out if they do not fight each other. I did include Wach for the same reasons I included some Tyson guys...hes only lost once and I think hes better than what issled to believe hes a technical giant much like a Bonecrusher smith type fighter was but hes sharper.I think its pretty clear how both era are and should be viewed ads formidable when you throw away the popularity ****!I could have also included Buster Dougls ...in shape he was under Tucker level but would be in the mix..Tyson didn't beat him but that's what is called a fluke..:good Again this is just my view!
Great post mate! Thanks a lot for taking the time out to type it. I really appreciate it. Very interesting, and I enjoyed reading it. I'll look forward to Wylan's response. :good