Tyson was not in his prime anymore, so your example is not valid. Tyson obliterates everyone in Joe Louis's era
Tyson looked a whole lot better than he was against a number of less than perfect opposition whose own impairing back stories weren’t/aren’t as considerately fleshed out as Mike’s to excuse themselves. At least to date as at that time, Douglas was Tyson’s best opponent and we saw what happened there. Circular reasoning that Mike had to be significantly well below par due to and in direct correlation with the fact of his losing doesn’t cut it. IF Mike was as good as some believed, that should’ve equated to him still rolling Douglas even if Tyson was only 90% of himself. However, he didn’t just fail in that regard - rather, he was rolled himself. Mike was great but he was still overrated all the same. HW RJJ beat Louis? Based on RJJ’s sole success at HW vs one John Ruiz, “Roid”also being aided and abetted by ref “Don’t you daresn’t touch Roy” Nady? That seems rather contrary to suggest that Louis benefited from weak opposition whilst placing Jones on a pedestal above Joe in view of the “outstanding” quality of Ruiz in general and as particularly underwhelming as The Quiet Man was in his performance vs Roy. Joe Louis by chilling, nightmarish KO over Roy, no later than round 6. That’s as much “run”‘time possible as I can give Roy before the Bomber nearly decapitates him.
Douglas was not Tyson's best opponent, at least that's not how he was viewed on paper before the fight. Nobody expected Douglas to be that great that night. And Mike wasn't just 10% off his usual shape, he was more like 50% off.
Roy beats Joe due to him being faster than everyone Joe has ever faced and due to Joe being flat footed. Roy will outpoint him at will.
Big call. I wouldn’t discount Mikey anywhere near that - that’s buy one, get one free territory. Where would you have sh*t scared Spinks v Mike - about 10% of his own good self? I’m glad you said “on paper” because that’s where it seems Mike is afforded most credit, the material world told a different story. As I said, the proof (not proofs) is one fight v Ruiz. Ruiz, of all people, almost spoiled the Roid show by KO’ing Jones in the first round, oops, - then ref Nady said “That’ll do, Johnny”. In terms of HW opp, it didn’t get any weaker than the Quit Man v Roy. Louis had lightning hands, he will catch Jones and catching Jones will mean good night sweet prince. Roy can try and run but The Bomber will hunt him, harass him, hurt him and hand him his hide. Excluding the conjunction break (viz “and”), I just pulled off a delightful 10 X “H” alliterative run, …..H’Awesome!
It's great you have the patience to write well thought replies to him, but I'm afraid it's a waste of time. All he can do is reply with two short sentences like "Louis fought bums. RJJ would mop the floor with him". Anything above that is too much for him I'm afraid.
All good. WB hasn’t been rude and any wayward views on The Bomber only serve to provide the opportunity to reiterate and afford Louis his due credit and reaffirm his rightful standing as an ATG among all HWs - not just in terms of resume but also H2H - Joe was simply that good and the available evidence to argue in his favour is overwhelming. Not a difficult affirmative position to take - as easy as shooting fish in a barrel really , thanks to The Bomber and and his irrefutable qualities.
I rank Muhammad Ali as #1 and Joe Louis as #2 all time, head to head, and resume wise. But I certainly wouldn't argue with anyone having those 2 reversed. After seeing Mike Tyson's career, record, films, etc., I just don't see him in that company.