Modern Era Appreciation

yeah. And Ali from 70 ies most overvalued fighter ever world had.

However I had compared with Ali from 1960-1966 th when he looked the same age even outside of the ring and he looked and talked if he never had boxed. Unlike in 70 ies.

I had saw a lot of lads trying to implement Ali from 60 ies and their agility and speed, reflexes had failed them to attempt further to copy Ali from 1960-1966.

 

IMHO, in the Heavyweight Division, depending, of course, on your definition of Modern (21st Century?) Evander Holyfield and Lennox Lewis, even aging by 2001, would have been celebrated in any era. Probably, to a slightly lesser degree, so would have Wladimir Klitschko and Tyson Fury, to name a few. There certainly are other modern fighters who would have been celebrated in the older days. Personally, I have Holyfield at #3 all time and Lewis at #4. Extending the word "Modern" (10 more years?), Mike Tyson would have been extremely dangerous in any era, and Old George Foreman would have had a serious puncher's chance against anyone, at any time. A battle ready Riddick Bowe would have been a rough customer, also. As I mentioned before, there are others.

 

Pongsaklek Wonjongkam for the smaller guys. Consistent, possibly more so than any other Flyweight, and was top stuff H2H too.

 

Klitschko era the most boring??

Sadly I have to agree

 

If you mean Wlad, he might had been boring, this yeah.
Don't worry, Eddie is in process to prepare Wlad II era in Octopuse Octopus and this will be not less boring.
Eddie clauses, backyard fights and Octopuse at CW, maybe later a bit at HW.

 

You're comparing Max Baer and Joe Louis beating up a guy with Gigantism
With super heavyweight Andy Ruiz stopping Joshua.
And saying therefore...

All Andy Ruiz proved is that a 260lb+ man with very fast heavy hands has a chance of winning if you trade in the pocket with him and completely overlook him. There was also a rematch...

A better comparison would be look at how David Haye outboxed Valuev (gigantism), then see what happened when he fought Klitschko.

Smaller men could no doubt have success, like Byrd and Haye, but the days of a Tyson or Marciano ruling the top division for any stretch of time are long gone.

 

I used Ruiz because he beat a top 3 guy in the division. Haye never did. His run at heavyweight was terrible. I'm of the opinion that if Ruiz could beat a top guy, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that an old great could do the same. That's it.

 

Fury and Joshua would have done well in the WBA 80s. I don't think either of them would have been champ in the 70s, though Fury quite possibly might have finessed his way over Foreman. Neither would have got past 78 to 82 Holmes, 60s and early 70s Ali, FOTC Frazier, Holy, 1992 Bowe. Just my opinion. I'm not sure Fury would have even made it past Norton.

 

Did you just put Tyson and Marciano in the same sentence?

 

People were arguing about who would win between them on the board yesterday. Personally I think Tyson is far too big and powerful for Marciano. My point was more, that size matters in the Heavyweight division. Both Marciano and Tyson were short men of their respective divisions but dominated for varying lengths of time. But even Mike wouldn't be able to achieve the mass necessary to compete consistently at the top end since the 2000s. The game has changed, and continues to do so.

 

Tyson would compete - and maybe snatch a belt or two.

But overall maybe not...

 

Tyson's combination of speed, skill, and power for a man of his dimensions and weight haven't been seen since.

He was mostly a midrange fighter and that allowed him to be effective against superheavies. Bruno, Tucker, Ruddock, Golota, Savarese, and Tubbs were all big enough to either count as superheavies or could've trained up a little to become superheavies. Tyson most likely would be the top dog if he were fighting today.

Whether another Tyson will come along is a different story.

 

I think Fury would definitely be in contention in any era ... When he's motivated he's extremely difficult to beat ...

Joshua does well in any era as well ...

And Tyson would be undefeated, undisputed champion today. He would tear through Wilder and Joshua to KO wins and and batter Fury.

 

Tucker had room to grow, the others you listed I believe were pretty much maxed out for their frame. 6'5" Tucker was one of Tyson's toughest fights. They both weighed 221lbs in that fight. I believe that was a mistake on Tucker's part. Tyson won comfortably on the cards, but he got rocked a few times along the way, and it was no one sided fight.
Tucker like Douglas should have come in heavier than Tyson. Dropping weight after beating Douglas was Tucker's mistake. I think the 230+lb Tucker potentially upsets Tyson before Douglas could.

Regarding Tyson in this era, he would not be able to over come the size of Fury. I think prime for prime, he likely outpoints Joshua, but there is a chance that Joshua stops him (prime Tyson ate an awful lot of uppercuts from Tucker and a badly faded Holmes). Against Wilder, Tyson has his best chance, I think he could stop Wilder or beat him on points comfortably, but again Wilder would have a punchers chance.

I think Tyson would definitely be a top 5 fighter. But at the end of the day, Tyson would not be able to overcome men like Bowe, Lewis, Vitali, Wlad or Fury. He ruled in the late 80s, but then the super heavy weights came of age.

 

Do you actually watch these fights?

Tyson was out jabbing 6'5" Tucker ... Tyson's athleticism and style usually neutralizes height advantages.

This "super heavyweight" stuff is way overstated ... Tyson would treat Wlad and Vitali like Lou Savarese and absolutely maul them. Lewis gets his jaw shattered and Bowe gets brain damage early. Fury also takes a pounding.

Tyson beat taller guys his entire career and people still think that tall guys give him trouble ... Tall guys with a certain style can give Tyson trouble but you aren't beating Tyson by being tall alone...