You seem to be forgetting the Millions Tyson payed Lewis not to fight him in the 90's. Tyson was always afraud of Lewis, a fully motivated Lewis beats Tyson 9 times out of 10
Tyson even in the Williams fight wasn't even 10% of what he once was. Don't even try to discuss this with with me. I don't care how bad Tyson was whooping Williams before he blew his knee out. Tyson was totally gone after Holyfield II. His skills had completely eroded, he started looking like an amateur.. it's not even worth arguing over honestly. Lewis fought a perfect fight against Tyson, but he fought against a shadow of Mike. I've seen that fight many times, I've seen all of Mike fight's too many times to count. Lewis was bullshitting himself by believing he was proving something by winning that fight.
You talk like Lewis only wanted to fight Tyson when Tyson becomes a shot fighter. Again i proved to you that Lewis wanted to fight a 96 Tyson that wasn't a shot fighter by any means but again Tyson instesd fought a bum Seldon then a real fight with Lewis. But i guess you think Seldon was more of a better fighter then Lewis huh?
Maybe Tyson did avoid Lewis. That's not the point. Tyson's career in the 90's was a joke, he even admits that. The point is Lewis fought a shell of Mike Tyson, and he walks around acting like he beat him in 1988.
Fighting WBA champion Seldon instead mandatory challenger Lewis is much better choice. Than fighting no one instead of mandatory challenger Byrd, like Lewis did.
Woah, hold the phone! You mean a fighter is given to hyperbole? So you think Tyson really meant it when he called himself the best ever?
:huh Fighting a paper bum champion Seldon then a real fight with Lewis is a better choice? Give me your reason's why. Lewis choose Tyson instead of Bryd but even though Tyson was shot, Tyson if i recalled was the wbc mandatory challenger to Lewis title belt. Lewis choose Tyson is not cause he knows Tyson was shot, cause it was a big money fight in which i believe it was Lewis biggest pay day in his career. Nobody and i mean nobody wanted to see Lewis facing a real smaller fighter feather fisted Chris Bryd.
WBA belt + lineage to WBC belt. Better than having only one belt. It was better choice than Lewis own solution in same situation. He vacated his belt and stayed inactive.
:huh So by your logic, Tyson choose 1 title belt and thats the wba in which it was easier for him to get by beating a bum Seldon then not keeping the wbc to fight a real fight vs Lewis? Am i getting this right?
Why even discuss this anyway. The point of the thread is Tyson v Lewis prime for prime basically. We all know Tyson 96' -onwards wasn't the same Tyson. We all know he was just fighting for money. It's not even worth arguing 'who was better' in 96 or 2002. We know prime for prime who was better. Every guy who strapped on boxing gloves knows who was better. Tyson would have eaten up Lewis and the entire division had he come around during that time. Lewis is just lucky he didn't come over to the USA while Tyson was at his best. His career would have been over.
If Lewis wanted hes turn so fast, he shouldnt have taken the step aside cash. Judging how much Tyson made money in Holyfield fights and eventual Lewis fight. Fighting Seldon for WBA belt indeed was a right move.
Imo even a prime Tyson, i'll still pick Lewis. Lewis will be well prepare in which he would have train very hard for that fight. And the reason i pick Lewis over a Prime Tyson cause a prime Lewis is more skilled with a better jab and unlike a taller fighter Holmes, Lewis wouldn't be over the hill. Lets be real in Tyson era in the 80's it was a weak heavyweight division in which it was really no big time challengers. I mean damn Tyson best win in his career as a prime fighter was beating a former light heavyweight Micheal Spinks.
Tyson would have made way more money fighting Holyfield with 2 title belts but again Tyson didn't have faith in beating Lewis so he went the easy way out.