1988 Mike Tyson who KO'd Spinks vs these opponents

Tyson and Louis are different punchers, but IMO Louis was the better puncher out of the two.

I think Tyson beats Louis P4P, but can't be arsed to actually answer the thread. In fact, I've only read this page

 

1. I thought that would wind you up I exagerate the case but I certainly see Tyson as a better version of Louis, mainly due to footwork/defense, which are so important

2. So Tyson and Louis are 'incredibly close' but Tyson cant replicate what Louis didagainst Baer and Braddock, despite being the faster starter, yet Im the 1 with the agenda

3. No I dont but if Louis can beat a man Tyson can beat him faster 9 times out of 10 and I dont think Lamotta is as unstoppable as some think

4. Everyone who dont rate the win that highly it seems to get discarded

5. This is true but we have to make predictions based on what we know and I'd rate Tyson as the best for stopping world class opponents quick and I wouldnt put it past Cocoa KId to take a dive in that 1

6. Like I say I'm not saying Baer can't punch, he can, I just dont think hes brutal aspeople make out and I dont think he'll land much

7. Not by much and shorter than Spinks

8. No I see how Charles fights, what plan would you have for him? I think he needs to get in and out but it doesnt help that hes the slower fighter whos giving up 30lbs. I see Tyson catching up to him early and Charles not taking the power

9. Williams outjabbed Holmes and allot of people thought he deserved to take the title. Plus he had faster thans than the smaller Schmelling

10/11 Tysons overcome every reach advantage from great rangy jabbers, these men in this pool cant jab nearly aswell from range, thats the fact your happily ignoring

12. The skilled men are weak by HW standards though, the big men dont have skill or a defense

13. Way to pick up on my lazy grammar and then instantly spell "weakling" wrong? And yes a 167lb Conn isnt lasting a round with Tyson, but I think Louis wasnt at his best for this fight. And Tyson throws great counters

14. Yawns, he outlanded the jab

15. You pick him to beat bigger men with better rangier jabs that hes ever encountered, men who were faster, with 100% certainty? Men with similar styles to 2 men who beat him or gave him nightmares in Schmelling, Conn and Walcott? I wouldnt be suprised if he beat the lot but I think the odds are 1 beats him and I wouldnt put money it

16. You claimed Tyson was a poor infighter, I said he had a great uppercut, you said that doesnt make him a great infighter, I said Louis could have done with such an uppercut in his loss against Goddoy where he got beat on the inside

17. I put the 3rd round of that fight on. Tyson wasnt at his best but he was landing decent none devastating bodyshots

18. I remember 1uppercut hardly an inside owning and Tyson was seriously removed from his prime

19. in close quarters Mike did well, he even had Holy reeling at 1 stage, those first 5rounds were close, but 7rounds of fighting and 4years inside meant it wasnt the same Mike

20. Technically he was prime http://www.thefreedictionary.com/prime
3. The age of ideal physical perfection and intellectual vigor.
4. The period or phase of ideal or peak condition.

 

Eh? :huh

 

The Tillis fight Tyson wasnt at his best, he went on to beat better versions of Tillis more emphatically. Moore had allot of problems with faster fighters

 

Mixed up Gadoy and Galento atsch

 

Though not Tyson's fault, his big wins against Berbick and Spinks are way
overrated. Neither was that good and Spinks shouldn't have entered the ring. It's so unfortunate how Holmes was finished by the time Tyson came around. It's also unfortunate that Holmes came after the big 70's fighters. Back to Tyson, much of his competition was not that good.
It's hard to judge how he would have done with the fighters on the list
based on his competition.

 

As opposed to the above quote

 

Come on man, Ortura Gadoy

 

I honestly think he KO's every one of them early.

 

1. I said within 5, I assume uve been following the thread
2. Baer was only 26 and 1-2 years off his best wins
3. Its not only being a better offensive fighter, its about closing the gap quicker, getting his shots off quicker, athleticism, landing his best shots clean early
4. I havent seen anything to suggest hes a brutal 1 punch ko artist, hes heavy handed, lacked explosiveness from what ive seen
5. You can do better that that surely
6. Schmelling has a wonderful right, it doesnt change the fact Williams had a great jab, better than Max
7. He outjabbed practically everyone in his prime, the way he stepped in explosively it landed very clean while his opponent couldnt get the jab off. Watch some Tyson, it wasnt his main punch by any means, but it was an effective tool, he was outjabbing lewis is the first despite being past it
8/ Im referring to Baer brothers, they just dont have the defense/jab to bother Tyson
9. Tyson always slips and counters the jab, its his whole mo. Do you need a vid with writing to explain it to u The Spinks KO is a counter from what I remember
10. I prefer the way Tyson bends at the legs for his uppercut
11. The point is despite him being a supposed great in fighter as you claim he didnt have the sense to use his uppercut on the inside againt a smaller man and clearly didnt like being crowded
12. No because Id say they were effective
13. He never got on the inside really though and was past it, over weight and drugged up, bad example
14. Not because of his inside game
15. :bart