Prime Mike Tyson (88) vs Prime Muhammad Ali (66)

Ali in 8.

Though he'd land some ugly grazing shots in the first four or five rounds, Mike would have a hard time pinning down Ali and landing flush. As effective as Mike's style was against the majority of fighters, Ali even in the mid-60s was already really good at figuring fighters out. He'd have him timed and tied up again and again, all the while keeping the jab in his face.

Mike would go cautious by the fifth round, which he often did when frustrated, and that's when Ali's jab would really start doing its magic. Mike starts going for the one punch, always a big mistake for him in deeper waters. Ali starts landing wicked counter shots.

Mike would get floored by a flurry (highlighted by a nasty left uppercut/right cross) get up shakily and eat an even bigger flurry. Ref stops the fight.

 

Ali could win it, but man, if Tyson catches him, he's going to finish it.

I mean, a prime Tyson is such a nightmare. Quicker than anyone not named Ali or Patterson, power like Foreman, chin like McCall, accuracy and combos like Louis, elusive as hell on his own right. ****.

 

With all due respect to this poster who started this less than original thread, this thread has been done over and over. This thread reminds me of the dictionary's definition of insanity, please look up the definition, you will know what I mean. Again no disrespect is intended, please try another original fantasy fight, all these type of threads cause arguments, they appear to be instigative.

 

Foreman had more power than Tyson, as did many fighters, although Tyson's blows had more impact for their force due to speed/not being seen as well, & in combinations.
I doubt he would deny that guys he fought (Bonecrusher & Ruddock + Bruno twice) hit harder blow for blow.
Tyson also had an excellent chin, but not like a McCall.

Both guys were modest about how they would so against the other.
Prime Tyson was superb, & Ali was not a behemoth in terms of overall size & power, which would give guys Foreman & above in these regards an advantage.

 

You need to look no further than the Tillis bout to see what would happen if Mike was in there with the 1966 version of Ali.

TILLIS: 208 lbs, 6'2" with a 79" reach
66' ALI: 209 lbs,6'3" with a 78" reach

Amazing how similar their stats are. However, that's where the similarities all but end. Had 2 of the judges scored 1 more round in favor of Tillis, he would have held Tyson to a "draw". And some observers felt Tillis merited the verdict. That shows you how close that fight was. Now imagine what a 66' version of Ali would do to Mike. Ali was way quicker than "Quick" Tillis, not to mention better in every other department. I rest my case.

 

Hey I definitely favor Ali & that analyses is sound.
Except it is selective in picking the weakest near-prime Tyson performance.
You could do a mirror-image assessment & highlight a similarly immediately pre-prime Ali squeaking by Doug Jones-& add that he did not have nearly the muscular size, power or talent as Tyson.

Thus claiming that Tyson would murder Ali.
Using their most lackluster fights when young but not a novice, we can justify anything.

 

I see what you are saying. I agree, the Tyson who faced Tillis was not quite prime yet. However, Ali beats Mike regardless if it's 1986 or 1988. Ali from 1966 was infinitely better than ancient Holmes, bloated Tubbs, and frightened Spinks.

 

You could make arguments for either.

I've never been sold on Tyson vs stick and move boxers or guys that tied him up and Ali excels there.

On the other hand Ali did tend to slow down and if Frazier was able to land a lot on Ali and bother him, well, Tyson hits much harder than Frazier in my opinion.

I suspect there's a chance that the actual fight might be a blowout in either direction. It's possible that Tyson's explosiveness and power prove so problematic to Ali that he takes a terrible battering after getting stunned early that its a KO. Or its possible that Tyson simply doesnt have the footwork or speed to catch up to Ali properly and gets outpointed wide.

The only scenarios I dont envision are Ali on a KO or Tyson on points.

 

This question has been asked a million times already.
And the answer is Tyson, he has the stylistic advantage.

 

Ali ain't KO'ing Tyson in a million years.

 

No version of Ali beats Tyson, Tyson is a stylistic nightmare for Ali.

 

That's funny, cause the most likely scenario I envision is a Tyson win on points.

 

Ali goes down and loses on points. Doesn't open enough after a torrid first half

 

The Ali who fought Frazier should not even enter into the equation here. Sure, Ali slowed down by then, but for the purpose of this thread, we're talking about the 1966 version who was next to impossible to hit.