FOTC Ali vs 1986 Mike Tyson

Really? On one side Ferguson, M Frazier, Ribata, Ratliff, Tillis, Green, on the other side Peralta and Chuvallo, then both give one of the best performances of their careers. I can agree that Foreman had a better resume and more experience before the title fight, but it's close and Peralta didn't fight like Frazier.
What do you have better with Whitearspoon before Holmes than Tyson before Berbick? these 13 fights? and Leon Spinks before Ali? Let's be honest, each of them was green and each of them had a great performance.
Of course, you can argue that lack of experience would be crucial in the Ali-Tyson fight, I think not, although Tyson was certainly more complete a year later, but at the same time he was slowly starting to lose that momentum.

 

The upper end is close, absolutely. Foreman has more fights and at least one guy in the rankings.

If you agree Foreman had a better resume and experience then you agree with me full stop, which is the point. Prior to their title fights Foreman had a bit more behind him.

It's "Witherspoon" just to clarify. They all put on fine showings, absolutely. That's irrelevant tho when looking at what they did prior to stepping into the ring those nights. Spinks at 9 fights and Foreman at 37 fights aren't remotely comparable when talking "green" etc. How could they be? If Jim is a virgin but gives an elite level porn star performance first go it doesn't mean he wasn't a virgin prior. It doesn't matter how good he lays the pipe he was still a virgin.

Realistically Tyson and Foreman were well and truly ready and were close to the top of their game the night they won the title.

Meta has already explained to you at length the Tyson questions. I'll rehash his post below. It's an absolute ripper -

This content is protected

- Yes, but the reason why people raise CV is by 86, who really has Mike fought. Which fighters has he been in the ring with that leave us with a good idea of how he would fare against genuine ATGs.

Mike of 86 - 88 will always be big problems for FOTC Ali, but we hadn't yet seen Mike truly mentally tested in the ring and despite Ali not being ready for what Frazier brought on that night, Frazier's stylistic tendencies and Mike's are not identical.

I propose that the same Mike that reportedly was always liable to out of control behaviour outside of the ring and therefore vulnerable to mental warfare inside the ring isn't seasoned enough in 86 to deal with an Ali who's already dealt with Liston, exile and continued to be defiant in the face of death threats and peers and acquaintances dying horrible deaths saying the same things that Ali was often saying about the plight of America's Black citizen. That kind of living makes for a mental resolve that Mike hadn't faced anything remotely close to and history does show through his career, when faced with true iron resolve and skill, many of Mike's flaws often shone brightly.

 

These are already far-reaching and unconfirmed speculations - did Tyson show mental weakness until 1997? I remind you that in the same year or a year later he began treatment for depression. In 1986, a series of victories made him enter the ring very confident and even if he had problems, he overcame them.
I don't really know what we're arguing about... Foreman's CV before Frazier was generally better than Tyson's before Berbick. but not much... if you say it's a big difference, then you say so... for me, to be honest, it's not better at all, but I'm going to argue about it because it's not important.. L Spinks' CV before Ali was weaker and that's a big difference, same as Whitearspoon's CV before. Holmes. So experience is not as crucial as we think... And what about Ngannou's CV before Fury?

 

The doubt is there and it's an open question. There's ZERO mental doubts over Ali, he was the king of the mental game.

Tyson wasn't pushed to the brink, or even close - so again, the question is there. If one thinks he's going to walk thru Ali without having his mental and intestinal fortitude tested immensely they should be following a different sport. So again, the question is there and up for interpretation. These sorts of questions aren't answered for free. He may or may not pass.

You've argued Foreman was as green as Tyson coming in but then admitted Foreman had a better resume and more experience. The argument is dead and buried.

Yes, much weaker.

You've honed in on a few guys with little to middling experience and extrapolated this to be factual. What about the 100 000 with similar experience who got the tar beaten out of them? Foreman, Tyson, Spinks and White ears spoon are just four boxers who surprised most of us as to how well they went. Tyson not so much as he was hyped to the eyeballs, correctly so.

They were the exceptions rather than the rule, excepting Tyson. Berbick was the 6-1 underdog before shortening to 3-1!!!!!

The others were significant underdogs.

 

Tyson's speed and power would shock Ali early. Mike builds a lead with a knockdown or two. Ali digs deep, survives those moments but is well behind rallies back to make it a good fight.

Tyson wins close but clear UD

 

Tyson wouldn't be hitting Ali with his resume. Some lefthooks probably.

 

No, no my friend, there are many more examples, but I gave the most extreme ones, writing from memory and focusing only on heavyweight. In fact, we have quite a lot of fights where boxers fighting against the best have a dozen or even several fights. In a word, experience matters but is overrated. If someone like Leon Spinks with a few fights could beat Ali in 1978, then a bigger, stronger, more talented Mike Tyson with 27 fights could do the same to Ali in 1971. Discrediting his experience isn't a very strong argument. Ali himself probably didn't have many fights before Sonny Liston. True? Tyson got bored with boxing extremely quickly, I agree that in 1987 he would have been more ready, but it's not a big difference.
Mentall.. Tyson's problem was not fear but lack of motivation. It's all based on his rematch with Holyfield in 1997 and actually no fight before he went to prison. In fact, Tyson took heavy punishment from Frank Bruno and Tony Tucker while out of shape and making a terrible Lennox Lewis-style mistake against opponents who could knock him out with one punch.
He accepted it and won. With Douglas, being completely out of shape and being beaten like never before, for almost 8 rounds he was able to knock down his opponent for 14 seconds while being extremely exhausted, he was completely useless against Lennox Lewis and yet he attacked him in the 8th round despite having a complete lack of strength, even receiving a whole series of heavy blows directly to the head from Danny Williams, being again extremely exhausted and without strength struck a desperate blow when Danny was gathering strength for another attack for a split second, he also showed a lot of heart against Holyfield 1 and Ruddock 2. If you think that Tyson in 1986, based on the form he had with M Frazier or Bernick, would have been as outclassed from the very beginning as in the fights with Lewis or Douglas, then a much better argument would be - Tyson was too slow, too not very talented, too static and had too little cardio to threaten Ali.

 

I'm not one to argue victories weren't victories and losses weren't losses but Ali was so busy immediately after his exile and fighting Joe so soon was there was a real possibility he would lose his appeal in the Supreme Court and go to prison. When you look at all the circumstances around the FOTC he did pretty darn well.

 

Remember kids...if Tyson didn't get you out of there by the 6th round...he became a completely different fighter.... Never mind March 8, 1971 Ali...match Tyson with the Ali of 1963-1967...Ali in his prime! If Ali gets into Tyson's head...(and he will)...the fight is over. Mike was not mentally tough. If things don't go Tyson's way...he folds up!

 

"The moral to the physical is as three is to one."

 

I think otherwise that Ali would motivate Tyson much more, he would irritate him and
got into his head like Tyrell Biggs did and it would be a mistake.
Until round 6? why not until 3 or 9? Have you calculated it somehow? Tyson did not finish at least 8 opponents before the 6th round in the first period of his career. In the 8th round of the fight with Douglas, he was really in the ass and was about to be put on the mat.

 

What would Mike have done with Rocky's heart?

 

Eaten it with some fava beans and a nice Chianti.

 

Your post is from the extreme end of the pro Tyson spectrum. Everything in question is slanted completely his way.

I don't know where the highlighted last sentence springs from as I've made absolutely no mention of such predictions and leanings.

 

There is no point in confusing the thread. You wrote that Tyson in 1986 had too little experience to win against Ali in 1971, I wrote that it was not that important, giving the example of Spinks who fought Ali having had 4 times fewer fights than Tyson in 1986, being less talented and generally worse than Mike. That's it, do with it what you want