Joshua's logic doesn't make a lot of sense. "BOXING HAS EVOLVED AND BECOME MORE AND MORE SCIENTIFIC" Ali and Tyson's eras are separated by less than a decade. Ali's last good performance at the elite level was recapturing the title for the 3rd time against Spinks in 1978. If You want to get picky and you don't consider Spinks a truly elite opponent then Ali's last great win was 1975 against Frazier in Manilla. Tyson's best years were no doubt 1986 (when he won the title) to 1990 when he lost it to Douglas. So at best they're separated by 8-10 years as professionals. They even have 2 common opponents in Berbick and Holmes. How much "evolution" do you think happened to athletes in 10 years? Bit of a stretch. The biggest counter to that is: -Tyson's era is often criticized as being average to below average. Some of them were underachievers like Tubbs, dealing with drug problems (Thomas) or didn't turn out to be that great (like Biggs who people had high hopes for after the amateurs). -Tyson himself was an anomaly. He was a genetic freak with tons of talent and surrounded by incredible boxing management/trainers. This has nothing to do with the quality and talent level of his opposition, they do not equate. -Lastly, writing off the skill level of the 70's is a bizarre statement given that mant writers consider this to be one of the best if not the best era. You had 3 gold medalists, plus solid contenders/belt holders like prime Holmes, Norton, Ellis, former 2 x champ Patterson, Bugner, defensive wizard Jimmy Young, etc. Some of the people in this list are still considered on top 10 heavyweight lists. Can't say the same for Tyson's opposition with the exception of Holyfield and Lewis (who he lost to). "ALI WAS A CRUISERWEIGHT AND HEAVIES HAVE GOTTEN MUCH BIGGER" Ali was not only taller and had longer arms than Tyson (6'3 to 5'11), their weights in their primes weren't that far apart. Ali was somewhere between 210-217 in most fights and Tyson anywhere from 215-221. If that sounds like Tyson had a significant size advantage and would simply be too big and too much, I don't know what to tell you. If Ali could have supposedly cut down to cruiserweight today, so could Tyson. Tyson didn't really start weighing more than 220 until after prison where he was noticeably slower and had worse stamina. So if you want to use that version of Tyson be my guest! As for their opposition, once again, the late 80's was notorious for boxers who were flabby and out of shape. Tony Tubbs intentionally showed up overweight despite being offered a bonus out of spite. Buster Douglas was also pretty chunky. Yes the average guy in this era may have been slightly taller or heavier than some of the 70's era boxers, but they were also usually not as well conditioned. "TYSON WAS A SUPER VERSION OF FRAZIER, AND LOOK HOW MUCH ALI STRUGGLED WITH FRAZIER" This seems like a logical comparison at first, but when you break it down it isn't honestly. First of all, Ali had a 3 year layoff before any of the fights with Frazier. And yet, Ali won their trilogy 2:1. He only had 2 fights before the fight of the century and the fight was extremely close (could have been a draw without the knockdown). It wasn't like Frazier battered him from pillar to post, there was a lot of back and forth action. Second, Tyson and Frazier have some similarities but they also have major differences. They both were 5'11 and very stocky with short arms, true. Both went to the body, but the difference was Frazier would consistently rip away at the body for several rounds at a time. Tyson usually did not mount a sustained body attack, it was usually to set up for a combination of a distraction before using his trademark uppercut. Both had great left hooks, the difference being Frazier could reload and smack you over and over like a machine gun. Tyson had more power but couldn't rapidly launch his hooks. A non stop barrage to the body and rapid fire hooks are 2 key ingredients for beating Ali. If You fight looking to just land one big punch or you spend all your energy swinging away in the first 4 rounds and then get tired, you will have serious problems as Ali drags you into deep waters. That's the biggest difference between Tyson and Frazier: Tyson was not a very good inside fighter and was shockingly easy to clinch. Ali would have no trouble at all tying him up and making him reset every time he charged in. Frazier had way better stamina and applied non stop pressure. Even in his prime Tyson did not apply the sort of sustained in your face pressure Tyson did. The last thing I'd like to add is that Ali would get in Tyson's head pretty easily. Tyson was on a very short fuse and Ali would have plenty of ways to take jabs at him (his high pitched voice and lisp, his drug and out of the ring antics, his fouls and brutality, etc).
Perhaps concerning Mike's prime, but Buster stopped Mike before he went to jail. I also notice you're comparing post prime Larry to prime Muhammad.
a PRIME Ali (64-67) beats every fighter in the history of ever, except maybe Tyson Fury.... AJ is on drugs if he really said that
Look at the way Frazier closed the distance on Ali. I am not saying Tyson was a greater fighter than Frazier, but he was WAY more advanced in his ability to close the distance and get inside and unleash hell. Foreman was able to close the distance and cut Ali off into the ropes for large stretches. Forget about Tyson under Don King. Go watch pre King Tyson, the volume-punching, blitzkrieg-fast, defensive monster, with unbelievable precision and technique and with as much skill to get inside on an opponent unscathed as anyone. All of that -- that is THE blueprint to beat Ali and many other fighters. And I didn't even mention his power, which took a backseat to all those listed attributes. Everyone remembers him for his power when in fact it was never his power all along, it was an accumulation of all those attributes that destroyed world champions in 1-2 rounds.
Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson are perhaps the 2 best HW's head 2 head all time, and if not they certainly are two of the greatest. That is not saying they were greater fighters from golden era fighters and pre-golden era fighters. Prime Mike Tyson is an absolute menace and nightmare for any HW in history.
I've said this before and have been met with Tyson never fought anyone as good as Ali my usual reply Ali never fought anyone as athletic and powerful as Tyson
All this talk is ridiculous, Mike Tyson ain't beating Muhammed Ali ever. I would pick the rumble in the jungle Ali to TKO Tyson , he's twice as smart and has more heart and stamina than Tyson ever had. Mike's head would look exactly like it was with Buster, all swelled up ,cut up, and lookin for his mouth piece again around round 13.
