Bring in your 1890-1915 heavyweight to accomplish this task

Under what rules?

 

Are we going gauntlet style, with one replacing the last one until it happens? Because, while I hold the era in higher repute than many around here, I can't think of one single person who's accomplishing this task more often than not, especially under modern rules.

 

Under their rules I think Jeffries and Johnson could do it.

 

In that case, I'll throw this lineup out there:

1.) Tom Sharkey - I want to give Tyson someone to begin with who will be able to survive his opening flurry, and Sharkey was as tough as anyone of the time frame, hopefully able to make him work.
2.) Sam McVea - Good size and power, able to go long distances in his bouts, McVea would hopefully get up after being floored and make Tyson put in more effort than he wants to in finishing him.
3) Jack Johnson - In baseball terms, I'm using Johnson as the setup man. If Tyson's slowing down, Johnson will likely drag things out, and while I feel like a fresh Tyson's handspeed and power would be a nightmare for Johnson's usual style, I think he could be the one to finish him after Iron Mike went through two tough foes.
4.) Bob Fitzsimmons - I got Ruby Robert as the cleanup man, the closer. If Mike Tyson's still around, he'll be the one to try to finish him. Fitz wouldn't be scared of him and could finish as well as anyone of the time. Langford would be my alternate for this spot, but I figure if Tyson went through four opponents in one run, he deserves to call it a night after that.

I acknowledge that this is a rather absurd endeavor, but a strangely intriguing one in any case.

 

Best pick would be Johnson, who would defend, frustrate, and sneak in shots here and there until Tyson wore down.

 

As much as I think Johnson would be a stylistic disadvantage, under his era's rules, I'd give him the best chance of any, provided he's putting forth his best serious effort and doesn't get put down within a round or two. The longer the fight goes on, I think it starts favoring Johnson more, relatively speaking. I don't think that'd be easy for him, but I also don't think Tyson would like the back end of a twenty rounder, either.

 

Johnson under 1900s rules would do that. Tyson did nothing about wrestling and clinching and his high guard wouldn't be effective with smaller gloves.

 

I think Jeffries was clearly tougher than Sharkey, and by a significant margin.

Sharkey had incredible recovery, but could be hurt and was many times. Jeffries dropped him multiple times.

 

Johnson would frustrate Tyson and once frustrated hurt and losing Mike becomes a much more sedate fighter. Johnson stops Tyson late.

 

Frankly I don't think anybody from that period beats Tyson under modern rules, even Johnson.
Not because boxingsevolvedmodernutrtionscientifictrainingblablabla, but because beating Tyson requires staying constantly on a knife edge of defensive responsibility at mid range, and I don't think any of them would be sharp enough if thrown into a modern ring with modern rules and equipment and no adjustment period.

However under ~1900 rules I think Jeffries and Johnson would be reasonably competitive, tying him up and frustrating him, and could at the least make him look bad in winning.

 

That's a fair point, I was thinking mostly about Sharkey's recovery more than anything when I typed that.