Muhammad Ali 1972 v Mike Tyson 1991

Frazier needed pressure and stamina to win, Tyson was much more about overwhelming with brutal assault. He definitely eased as it the fight went on, but Tyson was very much about the early stoppage. Every round he didn't get it, he fought worse and worse, and threw less and less the next round.

To me, arguing any version of Tyson beats all but a faded or shot Ali is saying Tyson takes him out before the 5th. I do not see it. Ali was the most determined champion in heavyweight history, with just about the best chin, and moved his head pretty well, on top. He isn't get put away period, much less early. That someone would argue Tyson remains in control of a fight long enough to win clearly on points over 15 rounds is a mystery to me: Its something he barely if ever demonstrated the ability to do, and in several of those rare fights Tyson was taken the distance, he was given alot of trouble and even hurt late by vastly inferior fighters to Ali.

This just isn't a very good match up for Mike. Doesn't mean he isn't an absolute beast head to head(Top 5, in that category, in my opinion.), but I'd bet Ali wins 8 or 9 out of ten fighters against any version of Mike if he himself was before 1974. If he was after, any pre-prison version of Tyson probably stops him late.

 

Yes, and really as much as Tyson was built up to be some intimidator (which he created by being great), he himself fell for it too. He thought he could just huff and puff and blow Douglas down, but Douglas came to fight, and Tyson wasnt ready for the challenge.
It was different in the post prison scenario, because Tyson could be ready to fight, he was just no longer capable of it.

 

Part of the mental flaw. When an opponent starts having success, Mike starts getting worse. Consistently.

 

Consistently? He lost two fights in his prime.
Ribalta
Tillis
Tucker
Holmes
Ruddock 1
Ruddock 2
All these fighters had early success against Tyson

 

Ribalta, was pretty much a beating. I don't see it.

Tillis got shredded early. Started having more and more success late in the fight.

Holmes had half a good round and was taken out decisively early.

Ruddock 1, imo, was a **** poor fight by Tyson. A sloppy brawl with a terrible stoppage.

Ruddock 2, Tyson looked very good through 6 or 7, and apart from one point of inspiration where he nearly caved Ruddocks ribs in remembering to go to the body, he got hit more and more, landed less, fouled more, and in general, fought worse in the late rounds.

I think you misunderstood me. Tyson was still capable of beating inferior fighters who gave him trouble, but the more trouble given, and the later he got into a fight, he always began to degenerate. Tyson never finished a fight stronger then he started, when he went the distance or was taken late(Ribalta may be the only exception, but I never see Jose offering anything up in that match). Every fighter who had something to offer him back usually gained ground late rather than early. Douglas was an exception in that he had the reins from minute one.

Post-prison, what I am talking about gets magnified.

 

Yeah, Tyson's chance is to catch Ali early. I just don't see him keeping up with Ali in the second half of the fight.

People keep comparing to Frazier, but the resemblance isn't that great. Against Frazier, Ali needed to catch his breath every now and then after the first 5-6 rds but Joe would never let him; against Tyson the opposite would be more true.

After the first 5 rds Tyson would typically fight in spurts, with long periods of rest in the clinches between. But Ali wouldn't let him settle in that rhytm. Here it would be Ali setting the pace in the last two thirds of the fight, befuddling Tyson by mixing jabs with leading with straight rights and even uppercuts and the occasional left hook. I just can't see Tyson dealing with this.

On the other hand, the notion of Tyson getting to Ali early isn't too absurd. I think it's an outside chance, but if anyone would do it, it would be Tyson. Ali did leave openings and Tyson was not only a very sharp and powerful puncher, but also a great finisher.

 

I dont give Tyson quite as good a shot to finish Ali early as you do, but I will sign on that if one person in heavyweight history CAN finish Ali early, it is Tyson.

 

Watch it again, Ribalta had some moments and kept getting up. Tyson finished the fight very strongly.

Watch it again, I would say just the opposite. Tyson started slow in that one, probably trying to go some rounds.

I thought Holmes was competitive in all three before getting caught by that righthand in the 4th.

Thats kind of the opposite of your point. A sloppy fight on Tysons part would really have nothing to do with him being a front runner. You said he started to wilt when a fighter had success against him. Yes Tyson fought a sloppy fight and yes it was stopped prematurely by no fault of Tyson's, but I think Ruddock had more success and hit Tyson harder than just about anyone Tyson faced, yet he was still able to hurt Ruddock and was robbed of an inevitable explosive finish.

Tyson fought hard through the course. Both fighters were fouling and hitting low, but again Ruddock was a live opponent in that fight and had moments throughout.

Inferior to who? Douglas was not superior to the guys he had already beaten, either was Evander Holyfield by much in 1996.

I dont know, you cant knock out everyone. He had some late stoppages, but sure anyones power is going to be less effective as the fight goes on, and a savvy fighter like a Tucker or Smith who had a lot more experience than Tyson are going to adapt to survive the course.

To me a completely different fighter mentally and physically. Theres no way in hell Tyson could make it through successfully the same fights he had with Ribalta, Tucker, Tillis and Ruddock. I would also say he would struggle alot with some of the guys he blew out, Tubbs, Biggs, Williams, etc.

 

Thanks for the talking, friend. :good

 

Yes agree with some of your points, but I would add a lot of the discipline that made Tyson get to where he was, disappeared once he made certain changes in his life. We'll never know how he would have done against the greats, he made the wrong decisions too early in his career, before he even reached his best. He was pretty dam good for a 23 year old though.

 

Tyson didn't have poor discipline in his prime, by any means. My argument is, that he didn't display the discipline needed to beat the greatest heavyweight in history.

I would say that those bad decisions do count as mental weakness. He couldn't sustain a champions mentality. I know where he comes from, and that he lost his father figure, but thems are the facts. If other fighters get shtick for not being able to keep their lives straight enough to stay on top of their form, I don't think Mike should get a pass.

Give me any heavyweight in history at 23 years old not named Cassius Clay or Muhammad Ali, and Mike beats them. Easily, no question at all. Was a thing to watch, Mike was.

 

Yes, I was referring to him joining the King cult, again Tyson was very young. Tyson was very disciplined up until the Spinks fight, at least professionally. I think he needed certain people around him to make him the fighter he was, just as he didnt need the people around him that made him the thug he became.

I always use a comparision with Lennox Lewis, because they basically went the other directions in their respective careers. Lewis had the mental toughness and discipline to be a great fighter, but he didnt have the skillset or the knowledge how to use it. Without Emanuel Steward he would have never became the fighter he did.

I think the same goes for Tyson, without the discipline and influence Cus D'amato had instilled in him, he could never maintain the fighter he once was.

 

Ali in a close decison over 15 rounds, and it wouldn't shock me if Tyson floored him in the middle rounds.