Gemini says prime Tyson annihilates Ali's 1964-67 challengers

That’s a good point, but remember that if Tyson had been in Ali’s shoes, he would have fought better boxers. In reality, many of his first twenty opponents were useless. Tillis was a step up into deep water; even Ali’s debut opponent would have given Mike more experience than the actual fights he had in 1984.

I have no idea why the "intimidation factor" keeps getting repeated on a serious forum; it motivated Tyson just as much as getting inside his head did. Did Buster and Holy intimidate Mike? Did they get inside his head? Pinkie Thomas, Razor, Tubbs, Holmes, and many others weren't afraid of Tyson, whereas Tyrell Biggs got inside his head as early as 1984.

I can agree with Gemini, but let’s look at a hypothetical scenario based on facts: Tyson beats everyone but underestimates a German boxer—he gets humiliated by Mildenberg, and today we’d be arguing about how he could possibly stand a chance against Frazier when he couldn't even beat Carl. Sainpat would say Mildenberg shattered the Mike myth, and the Germans would have had a second Schmeling.

P.S. Japanese women are prettier than German women.

 

Sounds like Floyd Patterson

Patterson sure got inside, just not for long.

 

I don't know who or what Gemini is, but I agree.
After winning the title with Berbick, Tyson would clean out Ali's challengers, as he cleaned out half of the lost generation of the 80s, plus Spinks and Holnes.
Mike Tyson 80s Vs. the whole "lost generation of the 80s" (alternative history) | Boxing News 24 Fan Forum

 

I'm not seeing him get through Liston so easily. Prime Tyson went the full distance with a 31-8 James Tillis who was KO'd 4x prior and lost 4 of his last 5 fights before getting into the ring with Mike. With a record of 16-2-1 Mitch Green also takes Tyson the distance. Are we to believe that Liston is a lesser fighter than Tillis and Green?

 

Nuclear, heck he might get out of the first round then.

I tell you what, why don't you point out the multiple fighters sharing the following Gemini-labelled traits that Liston struggled immensely against - "Liston historically struggled immensely against fast, aggressive, low-crouching swarming fighters who could slip inside his long leverage."

 

They say Geminis are two faced or do they simply hold dual opinions that aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive and therefore acceptably compatible?

Ask Gemini the same question next week and we may get an opposite answer - but that’s okay because it is obviously a Gemini’s due prerogative to switch horses anytime they so please.

Excuse the digression. Please return to normal “programming”.

 

Had Gemini been asked who wins and how between Tyson and Tillis (with all known data to date as at the time plugged in) there’s a good chance that it would’ve aligned itself with the implications of the 10-1 odds set for that fight.

Those odds suggested an easy and quick night for Mike but obviously it didn’t play out anywhere near that way.

Despite being in the midst of his own career doldrums, post fight, some credited Tillis with having fought the fight of his life.

Interestingly, some years later, when Mike was made a far greater prohibitive favourite. his conqueror Buster Douglas was also credited as having fought the fight of his life.

Hmmm.

 

One of the oddest arguments I've seen for Tyson. It's strange not only because Liston thrived against that style, but also because Tyson's inside game was surprisingly limited. Liston was actually far more effective on the inside.

 

I know you probably don't care, but Gemini is an AI model.

 

If that was "prime" Tyson, then it looks like he should have lost to Pinklon Thomas, Frank Bruno, and Carl Williams. Damn, even Marvis Frazier beat Tillis more convincingly than the best version of Tyson did. If the Tyson-Frazier fight hadn't happened, we might have wondered which of the two was better.

 

Over a much different time frame though.

Tyson had 20 professional fights in just over 1 year.

Ali had 20 professional fights in 3 and a half years.

So whilst it's the same amount of fights at similar ages it's not close to the same time frame.

So logically we should pit the Tyson of when he beat Berbick for the title and had his title reign up until the loss to Douglas.

Tyson's reign of 1986-1989 would also perfectly mirror Ali's reign of 1964-1967 in which they both had 10 world title fights.

 

double like