Does Tyson run through Marcianos resume unbeaten ?

Douglas also had 82" in reach and he knew how to use every inch.

 

Tokyo Tyson is a lot better than past prime Charles, Moore and Walcott.

Walcott has the best chance out of the 3 but even he will struggle to keep Tyson off him.

 

I take that as your concession.

 

No, a statement of the obvious. Who do you think you are fooling?

 

Tell us more about your credentials while you present no real argument to the counter.

 

Argue an obvious attempt to discredit Marciano? Again who do you think you are fooling? Your alterior motives are quite clear. Very immature of you.

 

"But Tyson didn't weigh 185 lbs."

No, Marciano did. Which made him an ordinary sized heavyweight for his era and contrasting with his contemporaries (actually, perhaps a bit smallish)

Tyson at 215 to 220 was an ordinary sized heavyweight for his era (actually, perhaps a bit smallish),

but he would be huge if flipped back thirty years into the fifties, and would probably outweigh all the rated heavyweights of the fifties more often than not, although the very biggest, Louis, Valdes, and Baker, might weigh as much at their heaviest. The bulk of the heavyweights and the best of them would be much smaller.

The same is true if one compares the best of the last 15 years with the heavyweights of the eighties when Tyson came up. Lewis, the Klitschkos, and now Fury are much bigger, perhaps even larger relatively than the Tyson era heavyweights to the 1950's.

I don't profess to understand what is happening generation to generation with the size thing, but I do think it makes these cross-generational comparisons in heavyweight boxing too much of an abstraction to be meaningful on any basis but records.

The definition of the heavyweight champion is the man who can beat any man walking the Earth. Marciano did that and did not lose against the guys walking the Earth in his era.

Tyson did lose, if to men much bigger than the men Marciano faced--well, Tyson was much bigger than the men of Marciano's era also.

 

"Tyson was 5' 10""

But Tyson weighed 215 to 220 or more pounds.

Boxing has weight divisions not height divisions.

Bobby D-ykes was listed at 6' feet when he challenged Kid Gavilan for the welterweight title. Does this make it fair to match him with shorter men like Tyson (or a contemporary such as Marciano).

"This is a GIANT vs. SMALL guys deal."

Actually, it pretty much is. Tyson's weight of about 220 is closer to the weight Wlad Klitschko generally fought at than the weight Marciano or Charles generally fought at.

"You don't have to shrink Mike Tyson"

I wouldn't be able to shrink Vitali either, but the size factor makes any comparison too abstract to be meaningful other than to say that the modern big fellows have grown too big for the old-timers.

 

Thank you.

Your expert opinion is that 8 to 9 inches in height, about a foot in reach, and 50 to 60 pounds in weight will not matter.

I'll take that under consideration.

 

Right, BUT THERE AREN'T weight divisions WITHIN the heavyweight division. It's one division.

Now Tyson is a GIANT and it's not a fair comparison because he was shorter than those guys but he was stronger, faster and had more body weight? :roll: Jesus Christ.

Mike Tyson was 5'!0" and 218 for his best fights. Hell, when Marciano fought Louis, Joe was 6'2" and weighed 213.

How the hell is Tyson a GIANT?

Mike Tyson beats Rocky's competition because there is no one on Rocky's ledger with the size or style that we saw Tyson lose to.

It's not Mike Tyson's fault that Rocky's team picked guys to fight who didn't have the size and styles that would trouble Tyson.

Marciano's team didn't pick those guys because they'd have given Rocky trouble, too.

Tyson gave up size and weight to everyone. If he got to fight guys Marciano fought who weren't giants ... and were Tyson's size ... Tyson would've beaten all of them, too.

 

No, next will be the inevitable, "if you disagree with me follow a different sport".

 

Man, Perry has got to be the most pretentious and condescending ******* I've seen on this board.

 

I think that it is more a case of the Tyson worship cult being alive and well to be honest.

Some people here are so blinded by Tyson’s aura, that they think that he could stop training, and abandon everything he knew, and still go through another all-time great’s opposition!

That is truly blind faith.

 

The explanation that leaves most of the surrounding evidence intact is that Tyson simply wasn’t a head to head monster anymore.

 

But Tyson did lose to a cruiserweight in Holyfield.

One who was considerably less defensively adept than the men listed I might add.