I think Tyson of 2000 would hammer the entire division.

He was very one dimensional in 2000..Head movement gone.still had great speed but he loaded up on one shot too often..If he landed on wk though goodnight..and it could definately happen that way.But he definately couldnt RULE the division..86-90 would clean it out again though

 

Tyson of 2000 would be a pretty highly rated contender. While his head movement, stamina, and skills had eroded greatly, he still had pretty fast hands and had greater power than ever. Tyson looked good in making Golota quit and destroying Savarese and Francis. He'd beat Sam Peter in my view, his shorter crisper punchers would be Peters undoing. Tyson would be able to beat anyone in todays division but lose to many of the top guys as well.. He could get a belt but lose it pretty quickly.

 

The Tyson that beat Spinks , many people say was the finest Mike Tyson there ever was, but i think that night he was too anxious, i honestly reckon the man who got the rawest deal ever was the man who faced the best Tyson since him winning the WBC from Berbick, That was Alex Stewart. The Tyson that beat Alex was a brooding ball of rage just brimming with hate .. He was making his first statement since Jimmy Douglas exposed his aura, and wanted to make everyone sit up and recognise that Mike was back to beating very good heavyweights outa sight.. Tyson of 2000 had lost a lot by way of the onion effect, too many layers were dragged away from his beat skills, Prison, divorce, miscarried child (alledged) loss of D'amato, loss of Jimmy Jacobs, loss to both Douglas and Evander (a man he despised...) and lost years out of the gym, lost BEST years perhaps.. 1991 was a good year.. he showed that he was more than we saw in Tokyo..

 

1987 Tyson would have beaten all of them.

 

Your posts are always the best! :thumbsup

 

tyson beat henry tilman after douglas. stewart was second opponent. you are right it was a great performance. stewart went the distance with foreman and Holyfield

 

I didn't read thoroughly enough, sorry. :good

I am not sure that 2000 Tyson (which was about as good as any version of Tyson, if you ask me) would have ruled, no.

He may, or may not, have been able to win the titles, but I am sure even if he did, he'd have had one hell of a hard fougth battle taking any titles away that Wlad happened to have had.

Tyson never faced, and beat, a big athletic heavyweight on Wlad's level. He did face Lewis (very big and Wlad-like, some would say), but Tyson obviously lost due to Lewis's combination of skill, power, AND size.

Wlad also has all three of those elements. So I am not sure Tyson would RULE today. He may have to fight Wlad two or three times before their score was settled.

 

Tyson would not even get in the ring with an ancient George Foreman and only fought Lewis at the very end. He couldve easily had a fight with Vitali or Vlad but he simply wasnt interested. He and his people had no interest in fighting the best of the really big guys.

 

2000 version as good as any version..wow,,pass that **** this way

 

That is the most idiotic statement I've ever read about Tyson :good

Congrats.

 

Late 80's Tyson would wipe the floor with everybody, Tyson of '96 would also be be top man in todays division (minus Holy and Lewis, obviously). The '00 (Golota fight) version would probably still win some.

 

nope

 

:thumbsup

Very good. I agree to this.

But I hope you´ll choose a Minto Avatar by time again .

:hi: