How many of these fighters would you favour Fury to beat ?

Ngannou is a plodding bum and that’s being generous. He seemed to do ok.

 

So when was Prime Mike exactly? The 4 year stretch he was beating past their prime fighters and tomato cans? We keep hearing about this mythical creature that could chin anyone, but Tony Tucker didn't get chinned. Razor Ruddock didn't get chinned (first fight was a Richard Steele special). Even Bonecrusher Smith went the distance. And that's not considering the thumping Tokyo Douglas put on him. Do people not think Fury is a better fighter than them?

I re-watched the Tyson-Lewis fight last night and Jim Lampley had a couple of quotes on the broadcast that kind of surprised me, but sums up Tyson pretty good:

"You can't spend 5 years in Class C ball and expect to pitch in the World Series"

"He was in against a guy who was way too good"

Sums up Tyson's career succinctly. He looked like Tarzan against has beens and never will bes, but he looked like Jane when he got in the ring with the best of his era. He was barely competitive against Holyfield and Lewis (possibly won 1 round). "Oh but he was old then." He was YOUNGER than Lewis and Holyfield when they fought AND he hadn't been taking 4 years of beatings like they had because he was in jail. Remember he fought Holyfield AFTER the Bowe trilogy took years off his life, and was the NEXT TO LAST fight in Lennox's career.

Remember, Tyson is YOUNGER than Holyfield and Lewis, but instead of fighting Bowe, Morrison, Foreman, Briggs, Moorer, and the like, he was fighting Orlin Norris, Bruce Seldon, Lou Savarese, Brian Neilsen, etc.

"Prime Mike" benefitted from the fact that he fought in the 80s instead of the 90s. He peaked at 20 years old and never got better.

 

No, I’m not having that.

If you think I am going to just stand by whilst you say mean things about Orlin Norris then you have another thing coming.

 

About half of them imo. Some of them like Rocky and Dempsey are too small and free of PEDs, others like Hrgovic and Parker just arent all that great.

 

91 tyson was prime. but that would be overkill. any tyson up til the one that lost to lewis would beat the crap out of fury. fury just was never that good. even the tyson who lost to douglas would rip futy a new one, fury has never looked half as good as douglas looked that night. tyson is just not as good as these guys. he just isn't. you can see it if you know what you're looking at.

 

And yet all those fighters you call "bums" are pretty much better than any fighter Fury has beaten outside of an old Wladimir.

Tucker
Thomas
Berbick
Holmes
Spinks

Are not bums......and certainly better than the likes of Chisora, Whyte, Wilder.

You can also add in big punchers like.....

Bruno
Ruddock

I also like how you simplify Tyson's prime being "4 years" when he won 10 title fights in that period with 8 stoppages over 8 ranked opponents. Remind me again when was Fury's prime did he even have one ? and remind me again how many ranked fighters Fury has beaten ?

 

I'd make him favourite at his best to beat all of the later ones
I think
Vitali
Lewis
Foreman
Ali
Holmes
Bowe
Would all be favourites to beat him.

I think he beats marciano and dempsey

Liston, Norton, frazier,and louis are all 50/50

 

When I say he beats the later ones I mean hrgovic and Joshua and anyone still fighting

 

I'd favor him over most of them way too big and long as well as fast for a person of his size. It would be pretty hard for any small heavyweight to deal with. Those more his size would have more a chance. Prime Fury was a H2H nightmare big, long, knew how to use his size etc it wouldn't be easy for any fighter to beat him. I think I would favor Lennox, Foreman over him rest would be 50/50 or I'd favor Fury.

 

I would give you the names I'm 100% certain will beat Fury prime for prime from that list, as i think this will be more accurate and easy to do:
Joshua
Vitali
Wlad
Lewis

Some of the others have puncher chance surely, but i won't bet on any of them.
Mike Tyson is very overrated and i don't rate him that high. And he is one of this guys with ever changing prime that suits our bias.
Be real and stop overrating or underrating fighters based on 1 win or lose.

 

The problem for Mike Tyson is he doesn't have Wilder height and reach. And he is super easily clinchable and tire quite fast.
Old Holmes with his jab being gone done pretty well for few rounds and also frustrate Mike.
And Fury is miles better than that version of Holmes. Tyson Fury is just way too big.
Also when you punch upwards your shots loses some power, and have less reach, makes it extra hard.

 

He ain't going to beat Lewis for sure. Lewis is miles stronger and loves to jump on big guys, and Fury can't do anything to stop him. He doesn't have the power or chin, neither the strength.

 

This 100%.

 

Tyson brutally KO'ed Holmes in 4 rounds Holmes was never stopped in his entire and went on to have a respectable showing in the 90s.

I do see Fury's size and clinching being a problem for Tyson yes but again Fury has been hurt and floored by unremarkable opposition. We've seen Fury recover vs Wilder but again Wilder isn't close to Tyson in regards to overall skillset and finishing capabilities.

 

I haven't even mention skills. It's obvious who the more skillful fighter between Wilder and Tyson is. All mention is there is big difference in height and reach, which is a fact. Fury dwarfs most big HW, and he will have a 40+ weight advantage, 28cm. in height, and most importantly 36cm reach advantage.
Larry Holmes was 39 years old, and was 191cm tall, not 206cm, and was weighting less than 220 pounds. Huge difference.
And he had great success with just clinching Tyson and Mike was getting frustrated. And Holmes didn't even throw much, as he was 39.

Sorry but people just loves to overrate the 90s and before that boxers and so.
Most of them going to get schooled. It's completely different game and i usually hate talking about this fantasy fights, as its stupid. Different Peds, different food, different trainings, different world really.