How Would MIKE TYSON Do Against The All-Time Greats?

I think the type of fighter best suited to beat Mike would be the taller rangier skilled boxer ala Ali/Lewis. The smaller fighters like Dempsey/Marciano and Frazier wouldn't be able to cope with Mike's size, speed and power but a bigger fighter with height and reach advantages would simply because he could fight from a distance and keep Mike at arms reach (Include Liston in this category due to his reach and jab). Sure Mike could be discouraged the longer the fight went but I don't think the smaller slower HW's would stick around long enough to see if they could do it. Dempsey would stand the best chance due to his faster footwork but I still don't think he would avoid the hammer for too long...Marciano and Frazier would stand right in front of Mike and that spells doom. The blueprint for beating Mike was laid out by Quick Tillis and would be carried out to perfection by someone like Ali.

 

Lucky for us you're opinion matters little.

 

Tyson beats them all, the only person who would give him trouble is Ali and Lennox Lewis. He wipes the floor with the rest of them. If they tried to brawl with him he will KTTFO. Their only means survival is to run and hold.

 

iron champ, maybe you agree with this bull****? :rofl:rofl:rofl

 

Nobody cares what you think because George Foremans semen is clouding your vision

 

Tyson is an all-time great. I think he's the best ever.

 

Ass backwards analysis. Marciano never faced men of this quality? What about Iron Mike? If he faced and beat all these men than he would have a point. But using this list that somehow proves his superiority, Tyson only faced and beat the limited Ruddock by 1991-1992. His other scalps during this time: Tillman and Stewart. When he faced Holyfield and Lewis later in his career, he was soundly beaten. Poor, poor argument.

So Ruddock, Tillman, and Stewart are better than all time greats Moore, Charles, and Walcott? :rofl

 

you are wrong,i know very well who would have chance against foreman, and believe me, tyson is not one of them :rofl i don´t care for your opinion simply because you said "tyson would beat any hw in the history"
a person who said it know **** about boxing:deal

 

Foremans semen clouding your vision.

H2H Tyson would prove a more difficult opponent than your boyfriend

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHSXyGYcpR8&NR=1&feature=fvwp[/ame]

 

:tired:tired it is all? is it your argument? pfff
you really disappointing. you have no argument .
george foreman has better career than tyson, george foreman did beat better rivals than tyson. foreman in his 40s was competent against a a prime holyfield,and he won de title in his 40s. past prime holyfield destroyed tyson. tyson was destroyed by the bum buster douglas,and humiliated by bums like mcbride and danny williams.
so tyson is the best basing on?
on your ignorance? or you speculation?

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHSXyGYcpR8&NR=1&feature=fvwp[/ame]

 

Settle down guys.

I think we can all agree on one thing... eslubins videos rock.

 

Mcbride and Williams surely don`t count the great joe Louis was poor late in his career,its like saying Ali was poor cos he lost to Birbeck.
Tyson was finished by then and even in the williams fight a peak williams he was injured during the fight.
The fighter out of the list that is greatly overated in my view was Dempsey,Tyson would of KO`d Dempsey early.

 

Ali beats him easily. He psychs him out, uses his inhuman toughness and mobility to evade danger till Tyson fades, badly, as he usually did, then just bounces punches off his face for 9 or 10 rounds to a unanimous decision win.

Foreman and Louis have a darn good shot, because of the tools-Namely, they could take Tyson out just as easily as he could them. Pick em fights. I give Tyson the edge over Louis because he had the harder chin, and they had similar lethality in their offenses, where as Foreman was a bit of the lesser fighter, but was much tougher, larger, and was an expert on pounding on shorter guys. I'd give Foreman a small edge because of styles and identity.

Prime Holmes has the tools. If he doesn't use them, he probably gets knocked out, but if he fights the disciplined, tactical fight he was capable of, it puts him over and he decisions Tyson, outpointing him in the same style Buster battled him.

Tyson beats Frazier. Too many opportunities to hit him and hard, and Frazier usually took some time to wear down fighters of Tyson's toughness. He wouldn't last long enough, or take to much damage. Same reason he beats Dempsey-Too beat Tyson, you can't give him too much opportunity early, and Frazier and Dempsey would give him nothing but a target for as long as Tyson wished to throw. And Tyson had the speed and the combination punching to make the bob and weave mostly useless.

Lewis had everything he needed. I'd bet money on Lewis to beat Tyson prime for prime. He had the size, strength, power, and jab. I don't see Tyson as being able to do what he needs to overcome Lewis-Too weak in the head.

Holyfield, in my eyes, had Tyson's number. I can absolutely understand differing interpretations, but in my mind Holyfield was too tough in every conceivable way.

Sonny Liston batters Mike. That jab and that power is just a nightmare.

Tyson over Marciano. Too easy to hit, too small. Would likely get blown out early before he truly got into his maul and batter groove.

Thats my interpretation. Tyson had great tools, but had a **** poor mind, and never fought a good jabber he had a good time with. He's an ATG for sure, but it doesn't help him that many of the greatest heavyweights of all time happen to have the styles to beat him.

 

Good post :good Mind you,if Tyson does n't get Frazier out of there early,Joe would outlast Tyson.