Tyson Vs Sub-190 Pound Fighters

I wouldn't but I would give some a possible chance. Not a good one, but a shot.

 

Sam Langford.

He has the power, and wouldn't be scared of Tyson.

This content is protected

 

What about Holyfield? If old (not ancient) Holyfield could beat Tyson, you would think that prime Holyfield would have to have some sort of chance, wouldnt you?

 

Older Holyfield had 25 more pounds of muscle than the Cruiser version. This is super important to note in this matchup.

 

And was also fighting a 30 year old, post-prison Tyson. Tyson was the type of fighter that slows down around that age. They have short careers.

 

Holyfield at 190 could beat him, so could Dempsey and Marciano. Charles and Moore would also have a decent shot at it.

As with all Tyson discussions, a lot hinges on whether its Tyson in his wrecking-ball era, or post-jail later career Tyson.

 

I'd be reluctant to rule out Conn. Favor him, no.

 

Whenever there's a Tyson thread, there are always a few people who pull the dumb "he'd beat everyone KO 1" argument. To correct this thoughtless preconception, consider this:

In Tyson's pre-jail prime, more than half his opponents got out of the first round. Most of these guys were nobodies. In this same pre-jail prime, 5 went the distance, including such luminaries as Mitch Green and James Tillis. Douglas beat him.

If over 50% of his early opponents can survive the first round, doesn't it become obvious that a collection of hall of famers, many of whom actually won the heavyweight title and made numerous successful defences, would have *at least one* fighter amongst them who would last more than 1 or 2 rounds?

Why would fighters of the calibre of Marciano (never KOd or beaten), Tunney (never KOd, lost only 1 fight in his career), Charles, Moore, Schmeling, Holyfield be expected to do far worse than Mitch Green, James Tillis, Bonecrusher Smith etc? To say that they have no chance of victory is ridiculous enough in itself, but to say they have *no chance at all* of surviving more than 1 or 2 rounds just displays a total ignorance of boxing.

 

Possibly, but does 25 pounds of muscle off set a reduced work rate, stamina and those extra few years? maybe it does but maybe it doesnt also.

I think that the Holyfield fights show that Holyfield can take Tyson's power and and he will show offence when he is hit. I dont think that Holyfield weighing less changes this too much.

 

I like Conn and think that he would of done tremendous against a few ATG's. But I wouldn't put him in the same ring as Tyson in a million years, there's some very key differences between Tyson and Louis (who I rank above Tyson) that doesn't bode well for Conn.

Basically speed and ability to close the gap. Louis, for all his strengths, was never fast on his feet. Was his footwork and ability to cut off the ring good? Yes, but with Conn's movement and ways of movement, Louis needed to be a step quicker. Tyson was.

 

I think this is actually a very good point, and i think also that Tyson won the first few rounds but tired. If i were picking the winner of Tyson Holyfield (prime for prime) i start Tyson as a favourite. Still, I stand by the comment that Holyfield will start out as the favourite.

 

Tyson, I think beats all these guys.when Cus was alive & tyson actually moved and thru

same straight punches as well as bombs, he was a force of nature.

 

the best h2h below 190 were marciano , langford , holyfield , qawi , johnny nelson (?) , o'neil bell , roy jones jr. , juan carlos gomez , david haye , chris byrd and toney
remind me if i forgot someone.
i do not think anyone of these could take tyson's punches.
monsterous frank bruno could not. langford was stopped at a lower weight and marciaon knocked down by lesser fighters. for holyfield the 20lbs will be critical IMO. and if you think qawi would have lost to marciaon so decisively i must add myself to favor tyson to even stop qawi decisively. and there was already a thread about what could marciano do against tyson.
jones will be KO'd by tyson despite his speed because tyson is fast too.
of all those mentioned that i saw their fights it could have been the most interesting with toney who was both elusive and had a very good chin and would not be anyone's sucker in a brawl (except tua and mccall) and also byrd that who would have believed could have lasted tua and outscore him , so a prime byrd who was quicker at 190 and could definitely make this weight and also 175 maybe had a chance too , but byrd was knocked down by arthur williams so maybe tyson would have finished him too.
back to toney , i think his sticking to the lowest weight classes he could which cost him his fights against jones and thadzi and almost his fights against reggie johnson , david tiberi and mccallum showed that after all he was afraid of facing the bigger men so i consider tyson the favorite against him too. with o'neil bell it could have been interesting too. bell was the winner of many wars against fighters about his own size but what would have happened against tyson ? i favor tyson by stoppage but he did not have the best of chins himself did not he ? about gomez , if frank bruno could not keep tyson away i guess he too was unable.
so the summary is : tyson the favorite against them all and stoppage is the more realistic fashion , but this is not a surprise.

 

///

 

Mike Tyson wouldn't beat them all

That is unless you think James Tillis is the toughest fighter ever live. Not a great fighter and not massive showed Tyson can be beaten.

Tyson is the biggest product of hype there has ever been, as useful as he was.

Roy Jones would have a decent chance of breaking him mentally.