I have just rewatched a Tyson fight. How many true & good (champion) heavyweights did tyson fight in his pime. I think the answer is one (have to check that stat, coming from the top of my head) I personally don't think alot of tyson's opposition could even compete in todays era. So why does everyone say todays heavyweight division is so bad and Tyson's was so good. I beleive the oppisite is true? Just want to get your info and honest thoughts on this. :huh
FFS styles make fights! Tyson was a pressure fighter. Wlad is a technical one. Why do noobs associate aggression with skill?
There is no comparison. Tyson came from an era of technically well rounded fighters. Some of the fighters were under achievers and some used drugs, but there is no comparison in regards to skills. Tyson's era was far better.
Come on lefthook31... they were better mostly I agree, but no comparison at all?:huh None of Iron Mike victims would stand there with Klitschkos today as equal. They didnt have qualities dominate like Klitschkos in a long run but they sure would make hell of a fight with klitschkos! holmes of course but he was old, damn old even he became to dominate great Boxer like Mercer after getting destroyed by Iron Mike.
Big difference, Tyson didn't **** around & bore us. He did what HW's do, Knock people the **** out!. In his prime Tyson walking down the street was more entertaining than both Klit bros career combined.
The Klitschkos cant fight, period! Thats why bums like Sanders, Purrity, Peter, Williams and Brewster, could make them look bad. Thats the one intangible that can allow the most limited of opposition take advantage of them and alot if not most of the contenders of the 80's could fight a bit.
Are we comparing the competition of the eras or the Klitschkos vs the competition? Sure Wlad is a skilled fighter, but he cant fight, so he would have a lot of trouble with guys who could bring it, and the contenders of the 80's could fight way more than the bums of today that have zero plan B and only have one dimension to their game.
Well to compare perfectly random title retentions between Tyson and Wlad, who would win between Frank Bruno and Sultan Ibragimov?
I dont know what you mean by this but it marks my point even more. Mercer pretty much beat Lennox Lewis because he couldnt fight at the time. Mercer took him out of a boxing match and took him to school in fighting. Mercer LOST to old Holmes, because Holmes even in an advanced age could take advantage of the guys that had little dimension to their game. The Klitschkos are dominate boxers but mediocre fighters. They are not complete fighters, and thats why they have historically struggled with fighters who can get close, bust them up, and create some adversity. The reason they are dominate is because the level of opposition is not only **** poor skillwise, but they are also flawed one dimensional fighters.
Because that's what the casual fan thinks a boxer should be (aggressive) and that will never change. To this day, Jack Dempsey is regarded as one of the greats due in large part to the fact that he was the most aggressive pressure fighter that anyone had ever seen, at the time. Tyson was the baddest man on the planet. And as good as Lennox Lewis and Wlad were/are, they have never and will never scare their opponents...with the possible exception of Alexander Povetkin.