Harder to defeat: Tyson, or all 3 of these other guys?

At their respective primes on their respective best nights? If so, Tyson. I'd likely make a few fighters underdogs vs the best version of Tyson, yet favour them to go 3 out of 3 vs the others. E.g. the Klitschko brothers, Ray Mercer, Tony Tucker, etc.

 

If we're talking prime Tua I'd choose him, as far as Morrison and Cooper are concerned they never matched Tyson's level, except at the very end when Tyson lost to McBride and Williams.

 

You might be getting tired by the time you get to Cooper if you'd already fought both Tua and Morrison.

Fighting all three on different nights though, prime Tyson is far harder to beat. Levels above. He was considered s shoe-in to be one of the best ever for three and a half years - the length of Marciano's reign, twice that of 70s Foreman. He gets marked down for not becoming what we thought he'd be, not for what he actually was.

Tyson doesn't go life and death with Carl Williams, as we know. Morrison did. Cooper didn't do that well.

Nor does prime Mike have the struggles with the likes of Rahman, Izon or Maskaev that Tua did.

 

Its got to be Tyson. Not saying the other three (especially Tua) won't be a challenge or be tough, but Chris Byrd beat Cooper and Tua and I think he could beat Morrsion. I don't think Byrd beats the best prime version of Tyson

 

Let’s look at it this way …Felip Hrgovic is an undefeated heavyweight prospect…15 -0 …if he beat David Tua ..Tommy Morrison…and Bert Cooper …would you be convinced that he could beat Mike Tyson ?

 

It is a good question, but it may well be that Tyson is easier to beat.
I agree that Prime Tyson was significantly better than al of them.

However the question is how much harder is it to beat him than 3 other legitimately World Class fighters?
And even resting months between fights, fatigue may be a factor.
The thing that makes it mo' closerer (sic) is that you have sluggers & swarmers-but no True Boxer.

If you had an equally proficient fighter but in another style, then it would be harder for one man to beat them all.

However as it stands it comes down to how much of a gap is between them & Tyson-& how hard is repeating the performances 3X?
I can see the argument for either option!

 

Fair comment and I think myself that going 3/3 vs those guys as opposed to beating Tyson once is a lot harder.

Prime Cooper would be the Mercer fight and frankly I think prime Tyson would have his hands full with that dude. Y'all musta forgot.

This content is protected

Morrison was a good boxer with comparable power to Tyson and Tua we all know about. On their best night they were all scary dudes. Tyson always had specific weaknesses to big guys with a good jab, who would tie him up and who weren't scared of him. It's easier to gameplan for one hard high level fight like that than three seperate ones with different styles at a high level.