Comparing Tyson and Lewis' competition

And Berbick beat Ali

 

sorry but Braddock, Walcott, Conn, Bear, schmeling, Carnera, and Sharkey all acomplished more than your hero who truely feasted on bums his whole career but lost the time he stepped up BTW a fight between Louis and Vitaly would be very similar to Louis vs. Carnera.

 

It didnt happen 88 or even 96 so it dont count. Tyson would of put Lewis to sleep even in 96 when he only had half of what he use to have. Its like Holmes tko over Ali it doesnt matter because he would of never been able to do it if he would of fought ali in his prime.

 

Just like:
Toney beat Holy
Morrison beat Foreman
Berbick beat Ali
Marciano beat Louis.

 

Exactly everyone acts like he beat the best version of Tyson.

 

Based on what exactly? The fact Tysons camp paid money to Lewis to avoid fighting him, or Tysons performances against Holy - remember the guy he lost 2 times to, and Lewis beat not long after?

It's a good fight in 96 - but remember Tysons camp wanted Holy not Lewis, because Holy was considered done then, and they wanted to rebuild Tysons rep.

This whole thing is a bit of a stretch really, you're comparing a guy that peaked early for a short time, and faded over the length of his career, against a guy who improved over time.

 

I understand what your saying but Lewis in his prime had a hard time beating holyfield in there second match in 99 against a guy who was at least 6 years out of his prime, he fought Tyson in 02 about 14 years out of his prime that just seems like good well executed timing to me. You cant give Lewis that much credit for beating either one of them, they were both especially tyson former shells of there old selfs. So your telling me you think Holmes is better than Ali for beating him at the very end of his career?

 

There actually is a huge distinction between these fights and the Lewis - Tyson fight, namely their ages. On the fights you cited the younger fighters who were up and comming all beat the old veterns, in the case of Tyson - Lewis they both were roughly the same age in fact Lewis was older than Tyson.

 

If they were the same age I might very well be saying that and in all honesty, a prime Holmes had a pretty decent change of beating Ali, assuming we're not buying into the Ali myth that he was unbeatable.

 

you need a youtube lesson !

 

Holmes would of had a chance of beating a prime Ali, but the man was amazing his footwork and handspeed were something people have never seen before from a man that size. Holmes was great I take nothing away from him his jab was the best of any Heavywieght, but in my opinion Ali was the greatest he would frustrate Larry like no other by dancing around him, picking his spots at will almost, which I feel would take Larry out of his game plan which in return would give Ali the advantage and the victory at nights end.

 

It's one possible outcome and perhaps even the most likely, but it's not a forgone conclussion. Ali for all his speed had faults, he kept his hands low, he tended to go straight back when pressured, he never had any kind of body attack and no insight fighting skills to speak of and was not a particularly hard puncher, he therefore was not unbeatable. In fact, I'm old enough to remember when he wasn't regarded all that highly. It was basically the Forman fight and the Frazier fights that propelled him into mythical heights.

 

Im sure the Liston fights didnt hurt either towards his mythical status. But if you remember Ali was one of the few fighters who fought very well backing up, while your right he wasnt known for his power he made up for it with his punch selection and his picture perfect timing. Ali will always be one of a kind, just like tyson they were both bigger than the sport itself.

 

You need a history lesson

 

The bottom line is that part of being a great fighter is knowing when to hang it up. The idiom of a fighter only being good as his last fight rings true here. We can only speculate until the two fighters step into the ring; once that happens further speculation only serves to produce excuses for the loser...who would have thought that Douglas would beat Tyson, or that Spinks would beat Holmes, or that Schmleling would beat Louis, or that Rahman would beat Lewis...on any other night those results would have likely been reversed, but the bottom line is that on that when the two boxers got in the ring together there was a winner and a loser. And, on the night they fought, Lewis dominated and KO'd Tyson. If Tyson would have beat him in 1988 or 1996 or any other night, he should have fought Lewis back then, but he didn't and he lost. What's so hard to accept about that?