If a Prime Ali & Prime Tyson were in the same era, who would win the popularity/global fame contest?

With all due respect my friend this thread Tyson vs Ali, has been done to death, what is so intriguing of a fight between those two that has been posted over a million times before? Personally it reminds me of the definition of insanity in the dictionary. My experiences with this type of thread, it benefits the younger crowds, reading Tyson's name, opinions, but does end up causing dissention and arguments. Henry Cooper and James Buster Douglas will end up being resurrected to belittle the other. Excuses will contaminate this thread. Again with all due respect, good luck with your thread.. I will stay out of this thread. But I am looking forward to new and original threads. Originality.

 

Ali is an interviewers dream. Tyson a nightmare. Ali always had a quote. Tyson was intimidating like Liston and a young Foreman. The public could approach Ali but were usually too scared to ask Tyson even for an autograph never mind a photo. Ali was at one time THE most famous person in the world. Ali wins this one easy.

 

I get the question, but how does one answer it? Both had magnetic personalities, exciting styles and larger-than-life personas.
How do we know exactly how popular they would be today?
Ali's competition, which is one of the reasons he was so great, isn't around.
The things he said and did back then wouldn't raise an eyebrow now.
So it's really hard to say how popular he'd be today.
Certainly not as popular as in his own time, for sure. There aren't the right conditions for it.

Tyson may be less affected because his competition wasn't outstanding anyway and it was more his dark menace that got tongues wagging.
But even so, he had very powerful backing to get the biggest fights signed without much problem.
Today, he'd be signed to one network, maybe his competition another. The big fights wouldn't be signed quite so easily anymore.
Part of the Tyson mystique is that he fought often, ripping through the division in double quick time to become the youngest HW champion ever. He also became undisputed very young.
I'm not sure the conditions are there now for him to replicate that.
So all in all, they'd both probably be less meteoric and controversial than they were in their own times.

As for who would be the bigger draw, the bigger PPV star, who would have more Twitter followers... well it's hard to say. Probably Tyson in all honesty. Just because Ali as a persona wouldn't be as electrifying as he was in his own era.
But Ali was pretty unique, and who knows? Maybe he'd come up with new ways to shock and amaze audiences.

 

Begging your pardon, I was thinking that it was a typical Tyson vs Ali that is like a broken record, but I now understand. In answering this question that you have asked. When I first saw Muhammad Ali fight in 1965, it was on Closed Circuit Television at the local high school with my Dad and uncle, the first Floyd Patterson fight against champion Ali. At that time Ali's bigger fights were on Closed Circuit Television, the rest of his title defenses were on the airwaves, usually on ABC's Wide World Of Sports live, I saw them .I saw some of his fights in the 1970's on Closed Circuit Television. The Fight Of The Century was also on Closed Circuit Television. PPV is way too expensive, I see the results on You Tube. I am on Social Security. Ali would be the more popular today, in the same era. His only crime was his battle against the selective service board, he objected to any kind of war, religious beliefs. Mike Tyson spent time incarcerated for what he did to Miss Washington. Both were popular in their eras. Ali stood up for what he believed, he won the title 3 times, had longevity on his side. Ali even had a prime time special on ABC, was invited to the White House. Ali was known for his skill and was very articulate before his neurological issues. He travelled all over the world meeting with world leaders as an ambassador. He was the first to use his gift of gab, along with his unique style, he used psychological warfare on his adversaries as well as the use of poetry on his opponents. Tyson to his credit is also known for his victories in the past. Ali was also a 1960 Olympic Gold Medalist. I think that PPV is for the wealthy or well to do, many of us are not, we do not have a wealthy mommy or daddy. We believed in earning our way with hard work.

 

Sadly, some cannot read nor understand the question being asked.

 

I agree that PPV it could be Tyson. Because of his exiting finishes. But even though times are different Ali still had more to say than Tyson. If we pick say mi 80’s as a neutral time. No real PPV and no Vietnam for example I still say Ali.

 

I do know how to read, do you?

 

I know how to break great slabs of text into paragraphs.

 

I see where this is going, I have suspected this for some time, time for the ignore button.

 

Ali by a hair.

 

In the western world, it's probably a tie. But in the non-English speaking countries, it's Ali by a mile. People who have only lived in North America and Western Europe don't understand how big a deal Muhammad Ali is worldwide.

 

Mmm... it may be Ali, but Tyson is plenty well-known worldwide.

This content is protected

 

Tyson would have had the same popularity as Foreman and the same reputation imo and perhaps there would have been a great defeat in Kinshasa or somewhere else as for Foreman. Besides Ali had the aura of a good man who wins against the bad fighters and the corrupt and discriminatory political system of his days. Tyson fought exclusively for himself and had the aura of baddest man on the planet...in any case after he retired Tyson was taken as an example by many people as a person with a difficult life who worked hard and managed to achieve great results.