Who ranks higher as a heavyweight, Joe Frazier or Mike Tyson?

Tyson had way better head movement and overall defense than Frazier and threw vast, FAST combinations. Mike equaled Ali's speed (at least '71 Ali) so he'd be landing just as many as Muhammad does, if not more. I love Smokin' Joe, but Tyson is way more skilled and physically gifted than him.

And what is with this reoccurring sentiment that Mike lacked heart? The guy took tremendous punishment against Douglas, Holyfield and Lewis before folding, and took bombs from Ruddock without even hinting of quitting. I'll never understand why people think this.

 

It's fine to believe that, if you want, but you haven't made a case.

Frazier, on average, had a significantly higher work-rate than Tyson. He threw more and landed more accurately. Moreover, Frazier was harder to land on than it was on Tyson.

If Tyson couldn't knock Ali out (and, in all likelihood, he wouldn't be able to) then he has to outpoint him. I don't see how he does that without replicating Frazier's effort and, to pull off something like Frazier did against Ali, Tyson would need to deliver a performance that we never saw him do.

Speculate all you want. Frazier beat Ali and Tyson has nothing close to matching that feat on his ledger.

 

Fighting with Ali would more or less go the distance seeing as he never got in trouble in the early rounds aside from the Cooper fight. As history proves Joe builds more momentum from the later rounds while Tyson does well early then starts to gas out. Not to mention that Joe is tougher mentally than Tyson whose biggest losses were to opponents who weren't intimidated by him. Ali with his typical clowning fashion towards his opponents would also likely have an adverse effect on a Tyson that didn't have the camp in his prime.

 

Frazier never lost to the level of fighters Tyson did. It took a great fighter to beat him. Also Jerry Quarry, Jimmy Ellis, Buster Mathis, Joe Bugner and Oscar Bonavena would hold their own in the 80s.

 

Tyson was definitely the more spectacular performer. He electrified the sportsworld. Frazier was no slouch, he loved combat. Both champions cleaned out their division.
I could see it going either way. I'm a bit biased toward Joe Frazier so I will rank him slightly higher than Mike based on The 1964 Olympic Gold Medal he brought home. He was the only guy in 64 to bring it home.

 

Mathis goes nowhere in the 80s and Ellis was a cruiser. I don't see Binavena doing well either.

Using Buster Douglas to construct your argument is just weak.

 

Douglas didn't go anywhere in the '80s, either.

 

Tyson was far better both in terms of offense and in terms of defense, so he wouldn't need to take so much punishment in order to land his punches

Ali wasn't a big puncher, so he ain't got much adversity. Tyson survived brawls with bigger punchers.
Plus, he has a stylistic advantage over Ali

 

These points are not relevant since this will only be a 12 round fight.

Completely FALSE. It's the other way around. Tyson was both far more accurate and also harder to land on.
He was barely hit in his prime.

 

He still won both those fights tho.

Yes there is. Don't you know the basic principles of boxing ?!?
A boxer beats a slugger, a slugger beats a swarmer, a swarmer beats a boxer.
Ali was a boxer. Tyson was a swarmer and a counter-puncher.
He'd dip under Ali's jab and counter hard.

 

And the 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc. rounds with Pinklon Thomas.

Except, as I'm sure you're fully aware, even early 70s Ali was so much better than either of those guys as to be a relative Superman.

Pinklon himself will tell you he was never the level of an FOTC Ali. He'd actually giggle at the idea. In fact, he'd probably guffaw to hear he was Zaire-level Ali.

 

ali was never the greatest .there were many with better records.he got credit for 5 fights i know he lost.

 

Ah.