Could Anyone Stand And Trade With a Peak Tyson from 1986-88

Frazier probably has the best chance, actually, i completely disagree. He's the best actual crowding fighter that the division has ever seen. His game is more like Armstrong's. I also think he'd be able to slip a lot of louis' jabs- judging by how he did so to a faster Ali.

Tyson and Dempsey both make a lot more space for their punches than people say ,working a lot from the middle range, and Louis would be able to take advantage of that with his stellar compact punching, IMO. Louis got knocked down a lot of times in a long long career.... But he also got up, and when he did he got pissed and let his cannons go more often then not. He's a very dangerous fighter when hurt or embarassed by a mistake. I don't know how Tyson would respond when the fireworks start. Not physically, but he might be intimidated by Joe. Tyson matches up very well in size, power, and speed and skill though, so on that level i'd definitely say Tyson is a live dog here.

Dempsey on the other hand would hurt and get hurt. Both guys would get knocked down, and come back roaring. This is my dream fantasy match btw. I think Louis wins via better inside game and countering.

 

It would be interesting to see him against an unexceptional but uber durable fighter who could work inside his comfort zone. Sombody like Arturo Godoy perhaps.

Don't know how well it would work, but it might make the fight interesting.

 

Not blasphemy at all. In terms of being a puncher, Tyson is leagues above Walcott, Galento, Braddock, Buddy Baer, and some of the others who dropped Louis. Unlike those men, Tyson is a dynamite finisher as well. Joe Louis would not know what hit him, and would wake up stuttering and stammering in a hospital room hours later.

In my opinion, Mike Tyson at his peak was probably the best head to head Heavyweight ever. What sucks is that at his peak, he was rolling over tomato cans, and the few quality heavyweights he did fight were old (Holmes) or intimidated (Spinks). I wish that you could put a peak Tyson in the ring with a prime Liston or Foreman. Those are the only two that I could imagine who might have success.

 

It's ******ed to say that someone is #1 H2H and simultaneously admit that they have mediocre competition. Does that make sense?

 

Azzer85 summed up what I meant. Tyson was sensational, but we'll never know if he really was the best head to head because he never fought the guys who might have survived the trade-off with him.

 

I agree that Louis would hit the canvas first. He was a slow starter and that could hurt him here for sure. Tyson was bloodthirsty, but i think everyone's portrayal of him as a 99% MURDER KILL INCREDIBLE finisher is just as overstated in some ways as Dempsey's is. Look at what happened when he was taken longer distances and couldn't get the early knockout. Look at what happened when he matched up with greater fighters that refused to be intimidated by him(Louis and Dempsey both fit this category). My point is that Louis and Dempsey both got off the canvas to win in a lot of their best fights. Sometimes Tyson didn't.

I agree that Dempsey is lesser skilled than Tyson on the outside and middle range. On the inside i would give the edge to Dempsey. And this wouldn't be a boxing match between the two of them. It'd be a war. Dempsey did pretty well in those.

See what I mean by all the allowances Tyson gets in these matchups? Every truly heavyweight champion has a period where they're raping the division. Dempsey ran through his in a single year. Louis dominated his for twelve years. my point is that it doesn't make too much sense to rate someone so highly just because he was looking so great against less than the best. It's why my own rating of Dempsey has fallen.

 

I wouldn't call quality guys such as Berbick, Thomas, Tucker, Tubbs, Biggs, Bruno..."mediocre", that member clearly underrates or is just ignorant of '80s Heavys.

Also, Futch strongly believed that Spinks was not scared, he just failed so quickly because he didn't manage to implement his "stick & move" gameplan. Besides, Rooney telling Tyson before the fight that he bet his entire $23million purse on a first round KO* probably helped the performance...

*He didn't place the bet, but Mike believed it when told.

 

Holyfield could.

 

Tyson never got off the canvas to win a fight. Every time he was dropped, he went on to lose the fight.

Joe Louis looked wonderful against his "bum of the month" club. There isn't a single opponent that Joe Louis fought that Mike Tyson couldn't beat. Every era has some weak contenders, and the ATG who rules these eras looks fantastic by comparison. Many people point to Joe Louis as being the best ever, just because of 25 title defenses and a 12 year reign against inferior opponents. Sure, he fought a few decent opponents--Baer, Walcott, Braddock, etc--but none of them were ATG. So if we're giving Tyson "allowances" then people also give Joe Louis "allowances" as well.

 

This is a division of guys that either didn't live up to their potential or lost to guys they shouldn't have... And by the time Tyson got to them some of them were past their best. Very few spectacular performances by any of this crowd really, in fact the only one i even remotely enjoy watching is Tucker once in a while as far as just watching material goes.

Oh man, where to start? "bum of the month club", maybe. Do you know anything about the fighters you're referring to? Have you checked the rankings during this period? 5/12 of this "club" were top 10 ranked HWs when he fought them. 4 others were top 10 in a different year. And a world LHW champ in John Henry Louis, a top 15 atg LHW at that. Everyone calls these guys bums because Louis was tearing through them so fast and in such dominant fashion. They clearly were not bums. Dont throw stats around without any context.

Tyson could beat all of Joe's opponents? Really? Tyson lost to Buster Douglas in his prime. Louis lost to a lineal HW champion at the start of his. And unlike Tyson he came back to be a much more dominant fighter. Lost years of his prime willingly to the war and then came back and was still good enough to beat a top 15 heavy in JJW. Louis won every single rematch he ever took, by even quicker knockout. Can't say the same about Tyson. You're speculating about mythical ability. I don't need to in regard to Louis.

 

we need to leave some time for the dust to settle on tyson's career. louis wasn't appreciated for years and years after he retired. neither was holmes. tyson's ranking will go up in years to come.

 

baer and walcott are both MUCH better than decent. walcott and baer could easily be top 20 heavies, as could schmeling