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

Come in spinner.

You harp on about Tyson not being prepared yet Ali receives no such concessions as you hold up Frazier gave him hell card. Ali who'd had years out of boxing and fought bugger all rounds leading into the first Frazier bout. You think Ali was the same fighter?

Shockingly transparent double standards.

 

In his own time Tyson could only be expected to beat virtually every boxer he (Tyson) faced - even if it took a rematch - but he didn’t, did he? Does Mike somehow get a magical upgrade in fantasy matches?

 

Tyson clearly beat Tillis but it was still close - and Mike’s superior margin was not reflective of the pre fight odds of 10-1 in Tyson’s favour.

Douglas beat a more than sufficiently prepared version of Mike. Watch the fight again. 42 -1 Buster immediately took away the play and lead from opening bell.

Foreign territory (and I don’t just mean Tokyo, Japan) for Mike from the get go.

Ali was past prime for Frazier and still had not reached the full potential of his second career self - even at his second career best (vs Norton/Frazier rematches and vs Foreman in Zaire) Ali was still a notably diminished version of the prime Ali,

 

Very possible.

 

Ali didn`t have enough power to hurt Tyson, Mike took Ruddock`s best shots and was harder to hit than Foreman was.

 

Douglas had more reach than Ali 83 inches to Ali`s 78 inches, Tyson when trained by Rooney had a better offence than Ali, he was a better combo puncher and body puncher.

 

The version of Ali that fought Frazier in 71 was still way closer to his prime than the version of Tyson that fought Douglas.
Tyson's main issue was cause he underestimated his opponent badly, and that his personal life was a mess, which had him distracted from training properly. He also didn't have Rooney, which held him on course. Tyson's defense began to downgrade as a result.
Also, I don't agree Ali was closer to his prime in 73/74 than in 71. He simply fought more dirty against Frazier in their rematch, and kept fouling and cheating. He also knew what to expect from Frazier.

 

I did not say Ali was prime, my point was the stylistic matchup was bad for Ali vs Frazier, so it will also be bad for Ali vs Tyson.

 

So your point is Ali is the greater heavyweight? I would agree and I don't know too many folks who would argue that. He had longevity, more success and would rank higher on a list of greatest heavyweights of all time. Overall stronger character as a person.

Mike was a unique talent in his own right. He did accomplish alot, in unifying the belts Tyson took the sports world by storm. He beat good fighters on his rise and during his initial title reign. The greater fighters he faced later were not in the picture yet. Late 80s.
Mike Tyson did suffer from Mental Illnes. We all know that as we watched his life unravel in front of the cameras. Obviously his career was effected negatively.

Prime vs Prime its a different question. Both guys prepared and sharp certainly an intriguing matchup.

I don't see Ali having much fun in there against Tyson. The idea that he would toy with Tyson or dominate from the bell as some have presented isn't realistic. He would have a dangerous opponent with a unique style of fighting.

Ali could figure out Tyson during the course of the fight and pull out a win but he would have paid to learn in the first half of the bout. It would be intriguing to see it unfold.

At their respective peaks as the thread indicates
Ali 1964- 67

Tyson 1986-88

They were both dominant. Who faced the better competition?

 

Ali had to clinch too much v Cooper in their rematch and Tyson was far quicker than Cooper plus Tyson had a better corner than Ali, "work that 7!" Rooney shouted in rd2 v Tucker and Tyson immediately started ripping left hooks to Tucker`s body, "work that jab!" Tyson fired off the jab immediately, Rooney would have worked Ali out the same way and told Tyson how to land on him, Tyson`s punches were sharper than Ali`s who used to slap with his shots. The Ali that beat Cooper in their rematch wa too slim to fight Tyson.

 

Better combo puncher? Ali was a great combo puncher, and he could sustain it over a full 15 rounds - Mike didn’t/couldn’t. James Tillis’ reach is listed as 80” - near enough to Ali’s 78”-79” and Ali was a far better boxer than Douglas. Over the long haul, Ali’s offence was better maintained and more potent in accumulative terms.

 

I agree to some extent, however on average Ali had an incredible chin, I don`t think Tyson could have knocked out but I think he would have stopped him by TKO.

 

No, my points were as stated.

The concept and finer details of a better resume in some cases can also be incorporated into the calculation of who might emerge victorious H2H.

Ali imo, did face and prevail over the better competition - defeating a broader range of styles and strengths. Ali also dealt with his own private issues - as have many other HW contenders and Champs.

Ali was the far greater boxer and far more adaptable than Mike - as Ali’s resume clearly reflects. Mike beat some good guys - sensationally, as fighters of his ilk tend to do - but he didn’t beat anyone great., did he?

Not saying Mike wasn’t great in his own measure- of course he was but he was still overrated and therefore fell below expectations in several matches.

And even now, the emphatic conviction many hold when claiming that Mike himself easily dominates ATGs X,Y and Z seems rather misplaced and devoid of fair analysis of his actual career results and complexion of several of his fights.

What some perceive Mike to be able to do against Ali - Mike didn’t actually do against comp. anywhere near as good as Ali. They’re transposing Mike’s performances and successes against notably inferior comp.

I personally never said Ali would have it easy from the get go. I think I said Ali would not fool with Mike, playing it very careful for the first 3-4 rounds while maintaining a respectable offence from the outside - just as he did vs Liston.

Where I see Mike falling exponentially behind is when the rounds start rolling on, Mike becomes that much less offensively dangerous and Ali conversely ramps up his attacks - punching Mike to a near standstill and looking a good chance to stop Mike before final bell.

 

I agree with some of what your saying but I don't believe a better resume necessarily the deciding factor. As we know most of Ali's greatest wins against his best competition was when he was past his best.
The untouchable version of Ali we saw in the 60s didn't face better opponents than Tyson. As Ali himself said his first title reign opposition was "lightwork".

Chuvalo, an old Folley, a shot Williams, Mildenberger and Terrell were decent fighters. The best around at the time but not necessarily as good as Tyson's opponents. Ali does have Liston from that but opens a whole can of worms.

 

Yes, Ruddock was very very powerful.

But Mike was inconsistent. Ruddock certainly hit harder than Buster Douglas and Holyfield....