old tyson vs old ali

A 5'9" guy needs a lot of luck 2 KO a 6'4.5" guy .
D chances leap if u replace d 6'4.5" with a 6'2.5" guy .
It's somewhere where d

This content is protected

difference is .
Tyson's shots could not reach McBride even close 2 full force unless he fought an extremely stupid fight , and yes , McBride was a prime very big bum and Ali was a shot overrated big ( but not so big for d 90s and on ) fraud .
And Ali was not 2 far from being ko'ed by a much weaker henry cooper much closer 2 his prime than he was come 1981 .

 

quite so , especially his parkinson version .

Berbick was better than McBride and would have probably outpointed him if they fought prime vs prime .
Shitload better ? IDK , Berbick was quite unimpressive himself , 2 say d least .

 

I think that Berbick would have slaughtered McBride.

McBride was never anything at world level.

 

Berbick and slaughter don't go together .
And Berbick being at "world level" was only due 2 Ali&Holmes' cherrypicking , a Don King made titlist for his **** "champions" will b able 2 look competitive against .

 

So are you trying to make the case that McBride being any better then Witherspoon, Thomas, Page, Mitch Green, or Tate? there is no way. those 5 guys blow mcbride away. as would Berbick

 

no but berbick was not d 1 2 blow any1 away , especially not some1 who could hit him back . Tate , Page & Berbick were d lousier , even if not by much from d list u typed here , Green was probably d best of those .

 

u all r looking 4 n argument ? i stated explicitly that IMO berbick would have outpointed mcbride . but berbick was still not good .

 

My take exactly.

 

the old Ali seemed to have a little more than the old Tyson, so I think Ali by decision in a very bad fight. This is a very difficult thing to answer.