1934 Baer vs 1988 Tyson

The biggest irony is that Mike Tyson plenty of threw wide looping punches while leaping in from the outside too.
It worked for him too. He was so fast too.
Tyson loaded up and threw 'em from way back because he was trying to kill his opponents. Same reason Dempsey, Baer and Foreman sometimes did the same thing. Bad intentions.
They all generated great power that way and it's easy to sit on the safe side of the ropes and say someone "telegraphs" his punches but when world class boxers are in the ring with them they are getting clobbered, so it can't be as simple as it seems.

 

They don't realize a wide punch can escape your frame of vision if you are actually in the ring standing in front of it. And someone like Baer had very long arms, and his loops were really hard to gauge...Schmeling got totally confused by that big Right Hand that finished him, it looked he was anticipating it to go to the body like the last one but it hit him right in the chin instead.

Watching from television, the cameras are like what...sometimes 15 feet or more out, and showing the action horizontal, of course you can see everything.

 

I think Tyson decimates him

 

Tyson batters Baer, quite easily I might add. Repeat of the Louis dismantling but sooner.

 

And how!

 

I don't see how this isn't obvious

 

Baer was not better than Tucker if you mean overall ring iq/skill/h2h ability. The only thing he had over Tucker was an edge in raw power.

If they fought, as long as Tucker avoided getting nailed by too many wild right hands, hed win a clear decision over Baer. Constantly on the move, 6'5 lanky, good jab, nasty uppercut, solid chin, tons of experience in title fights and against punchers. Bad matchup for Baer who wouldnt in a million years outpoint Tucker at his best and would have a very slim chance of dropping him, let alone stopping him.

A prime Ruddock would be competitive with Baer, in fact id favor him to win 6/10 if not more. Longer reach, heavier, hits just as hard if not more, an absolute monster of a finisher, excellent jab. It would be a hell of a shootout, Baers not having an easy time against Ruddock by any stretch of the imagination.

I could even see the past his prime coming off a layoff 38 year old holmes drawing on his experiemce, excellent chin, and sharp jab to outhustle baer and win a decison.

The idea Baer is better than anyone Tyson beat is pretty hilarious honestly and i have no idea how this thread got 5 pages. Hed have a punchers chance and thats it.

 

Just imagine what a Bear Baer would have been given the same juicing programme Tyson was administered as a rising star, Mike would do well to last 3 rounds.

 

Tucker really wasn't a very smart or skillful boxer, quite average in H2H ability as reflected by his actual marginalized success in a tightly managed drug riddled career that saw him take few risks and still not get anywhere.

At the end of the day his best wins was a come from behind against a gassed Douglas, an outright robbery over Norris, and a close win over McCall in what could be argued as one of the worst undercard bouts of all time. And wins over Norris, Douglas, and McCall should not have to come with negative baggage.

In his two step ups against Tyson and Lewis, he was non-competitive and battered mercilessly with only his durability, size, and extreme caution keeping him in the fights. Oddly enough the Douglas and Norris fights aren't far removed from that.


He was tall, fought cautiously, and could take a punch, and had solid HW power. That's about it. He wasn't a bad boxer by any means, he was contender level guy, but any attempts at beefing him up beyond that is laughable and you know it.

Sounds like a great fighter...


[url]https://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/scale_medium/14/145476/2243837-lennox_lewis.jpg[/url]

If you think Tony Tucker is a H2H monster, I can see that.

 

Tyson realizes Baer isn't a cruiserweight turned heavyweight at the end of his career with bad knees and bltches out like he always did when the going got tough.

 

I can see Tucker outpointing Max Baer. Between the two, I can't in my wildest dreams see Max Baer out boxing Tucker to a decision and Tucker likely had the chin to take the odd shot he'd get from Max. I mean, the man did take punches from power hitters and overall better punchers than Max Baer in the persons of Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson.

Outside of a KO, which would be unlikely against a prime/near prime Tony Tucker, I don't see how Max Baer wins that one. I have Tucker winning a decision. Max Baer would do best against against fighters who slugged it out with him and didn't have the chin to take it in return or the speed to beat him to the punch.

 

Since when do you have to "out box" someone to win a decision?

Baer beat several good fighters via decision, Tucker lost several decisions, so I don't understand the "Bear needs a KO" narrative you are trying to sell.

Another weird narrative. Baer has multiple signature wins over fighters that most certainly were not slugging with him.

You would have to match Tucker against Baer during his post Campbell slump or a version near the end of his carer to give him any kind of shot, and I still wouldn't be confident in picking Tucker given his track record of lackluster efforts in important fights.

 

The Baer "legend" continues to grow and befuddle us all.