Joe Louis vs Mike Tyson

Bull****.
Tyson is way ahead in the poll, and several people here are saying Louis will be "overwhelmed" and that he'll get "crushed" in a "mismatch".
How can that be bias in favour of Louis ?

When Louis was young, his hand speed is certainly comparable.
The film evidence shows that clearly.

"Chin" ? I think Tyson had a better "chin" for taking single shots.
But the record shows he got knocked out more times than Louis did.
He suffered as many bad defeats, and more.

Stylistically - in your opinion !

But for years I remember arguing with people who said that Holyfield was made-to-order for Tyson too, because he took too many shots and liked to brawl or whatever other idea that had about it. That was their opinion, and most of them think differently now, but a few still insist a "prime" Tyson would destroy Holyfield.

But it's all opinion. Nothing can be proved.

I think Louis is getting unfair treatment here rather than favouritism. For a man of his record and sheer destructiveness to be seen as an easy mark against anyone is absurd.

 

I'm actually surprised Tyson is winning this poll.

Usually I avoid threads like this one.

 

I should clarify,tremendous bias by some posters on here for louis,my bad.
Look,holyfield and louis are really two different types of fighters,so the tyson holyfield example is pointless.
I think the fighters tyson likes the most are those who dont tie him up,are relatively slow,and have a go at him. Now louis fits all three,its only louis' awesome punch arsenal that gives him a sniff here. But it is only a sniff...

 

Fair enough. Notice I didnt comment on Louis, I have a whole different feeling about these mythical matchups and thats why I rarely comment on them. I do feel the physical size aspect starts to play a big factor as it does often times in the lower weights, but thats a whole different discussion. Personally I dont think Louis has ever experienced someone who punches as hard and fast as a prime 220 pound Mike Tyson therefore its very hard to say how he would hold up. Its almost like Spinks going in with Tyson.
Im just pointing out some disagreements of your asessment of Tysons skillset, but its all good, were all entitled to our own opinion, and we cant agree on everything.:good

 

My point about Holyfield is that no one really knew how his style would mesh with Tyson's and there were loads of different opinions. And some of the ones who claimed to know with almost certainty that Holyfield would be knocked out have changed that opinion.

See, I disgree with your analysis of Louis's capabilities and of what's needed to beat Tyson. I certainly dont think Louis was slow, his hands were ridiculously fast.
I see Louis busting Tyson up with jabs on the oustside and picking off with hooks on the inside, and catching him with uppercuts as he comes in. Tyson can get through with some bombs and maybe floor Louis, maybe knock him across the ring, bounce him off the ropes, but I doubt he could finish him. Louis was every bit as badass as Tyson, and cooler under pressure.
That's how I see it, based on filmed evidence and the record books.
I see Louis adapting to Tyson's style better than Tyson adapts to his.

 

Ok,thats fair enough.
But you also have to state the reverse,that we dont really know how louis' style would match up to a guy who is quicker,punches as hard as any other opponent,has a great chin,elusiveness And physically is unusually built for a heavy.
I think it goes without saying theirs no dogma or 100% certainty on any of the mythical matchups.
But i think we have to be careful not to weigh the evidence in FAVOUR of the boxers we like better.

 

There seems to be a myth that Mike Tyson was completely useless after the 5th round..

 

Yes,in the tucker fight he took over AFTER the fifth or sixth. He won plenty of fights after the fifth as well.
In the losses to douglas and holy,i dont think it was stamina,but the fact that they consistently punched the **** out of him...

 

He was already losing both the Douglas and Holyfield fights, long before those matches ever extended into the latter rounds, so the observation is moot.. At only 19 years of age, he was absolutely pounding Jose Ribalta to submission in the 10th round... At 21, he outgunned a 6'5", 225 lbs Tucker to a decision.... He took loads of shots for 12 rounds against Ruddock, but was still standing at the final bell, and won a comfortable decision..

 

Exactly.
I know its become fashionable now to downplay tyson,and to contend he was a complete front running puncher,who would lose to most of the greats.
Well,last week i reviewed the tucker and tubbs fights,plus a few of his post douglas/post jail fights.
Frankly,the guy is superb. Great punching prowess,speed,elusiveness,body punching,jabbing,awesome early attack. Super chin,heart and a great intensity. I think he also learned a little more about how to fight on the inside as he got older.
I keep reminding myself that the guy was only 21 in the tucker fight!!!!!
It might be sacriledge,but he'd beat 95% of the atgs heavies inside.

 

Agreed,

I seriously doubt that there are many people around here who saw the Douglas fight live and who fully understood the circumstances that surrounded that match... Anyone who saw that fight from round 1 to the point where Tyson was counted out, listened to all the commentary, paid attention to what was going on in the corner between rounds, and who heard the news in the months and years leading up to that match, knows that he was not himself that evening.... Its easy to see the defeat listed on boxrec, then follow up by watching a few brief youtube clips, and arrive at the conclusion that he just wasn't that good, or that Douglas was better than everyone had originally thought, but these things don't tell the whole story...

 

Exactly my point. People too often forget about just how elusive and explosive Tyson was in his very brief prime. He was, as I've said before, the perfect combination of Patterson and Dempsey or Frazier...without the stamina.

 

Yes,i watched nearly all of tyson fights live from alfonso ratcliff to peter mcneeley. You forget how awesome he was.
I think everyone in the know accepts that douglas would be stopped in a rematch by tyson,and without too much trouble...
Its a damn shame we never saw holy and tyson pre-prison.
ps; son of gaul,i dont think his prime was that short either,he was superb right up until jail,after that he became a bit too power happy,and too bulky.
I dont agree with the stamina thing though,he always had enough to win fights,he didnt really lose through exhaustion.

 

Didn't help him against Douglas did it?

Louis KO. End of thread.
atsch

 

His stamina was not that bad, and it certainly wasn't the deciding factor in most of his losses.. In the vast majority of his defeats, he was already losing those fights long before stamina should have even come into play, and was broken down over a long period by sustained beatings before ever succumbing to defeat...