Prime for Prime: Dempsey & Tyson

Probably Tyson...

 

Tyson early, maybe in the first, certainly within 3. Dempsey doesn't do anything better, he's much more open to being hit, he punches slower, punches much wider, isn't as durable, he doesn't have a jab, he's far weaker, and his power in big gloves wouldn't see him as a puncher, Tyson would be an even more devastating puncher in smaller gloves

 

Frankly, I can't see this fight as being anything other than a mismatch. Mike Tyson was in an entirely different league than Miske, Willard, Firpo, Carpenter, Tunney or even Dempsey himself. Its easy for someone to ask the age old question " well how do you know?" Okay, the fact is, I don't really know.. These were two men who fought several decades apart from one another and had no common opponents. But, I think that after looking at some comparisons on film, the circumstances of the fights, and the abilities and records of Dempsey's opponents, things just don't ad up in Jack's favor. Of course, the first thing that somebody might shout out is the infamous Douglas defeat, but this was not the best version of Tyson, and anyone with an ounce of honesty knows this. I will also ad to that the fact that Douglas was an african American heavyweight who stood 6'4", 230 lbs, had good mobility and could box pretty soundly from the outside. He was also 29 years old, healthy and fighting acitively.. How many guys like that did dempsey even face?

 

tyson no question for me.tyson ko2

 

I think it was the word

 

Tyson was more active and fought more live opponents.

 

Competition in their era under the spotlight:

Current Champ:

Willard/Spinks

Prior Champ and Great of the Decade:

Johnson/Holmes

Alphabet Champions

Dempsey: Wills
Tyson: Berbick/Smith/Tucker

Top Contenders/Titlists of the Era (bolded the ones they faced)

Dempsey: Willard/Johnson/Wills/Tunney/Greb/Brennan/Miske/Langford/Godfrey
Firpo/Norfolk/Fulton/McVey/Jeanette/Carpentier/Gibbons/Sharkey

Tunney/Greb proved themselves emphatically superior to Brennan/Miske/Carpentier/Gibbons

Wills, was number contender throughout Dempsey's reign

Tyson: Holmes/Spinks/Thomas/Holmes/Bruno/Douglas/Holyfield/Witherspoon/Foreman
/Rudduck/Tucker/Tubbs/Williams/Biggs/Williams/Smith/Tucker/Berbick

Fighters they missed:

Tyson: Witherspoon/Foreman
Dempsey: Johnson/Wills/Greb/Langford/Godfrey/Norfolk/McVey/Jeanette

 

This is the big one right here. Dempsey missed out on fighting some big names. Tyson pretty much cleaned out his era and fought all the big and best names out there. Dempsey didn't even fight the two clear best contenders of his era.

 

Janitor's anus is gunna violently prolapse when reading through this thread.

 

I'm going for Tyson by mid round KO or TKO after a brutal war, I think his advantages in chin, combination punching and strength are important here. I always find it funny when people say Tyson of 1986-1989 is the best, his skills already looked diminished in terms of head movement, combination punching and footwork against Bruno. He was a more skilled fighter when very green in 1985 than in 1989 and I believe by 1991 Giachetti (hired after Buster) had made the best non-Rooney Tyson, he definitely was better then, than under incompetent fanny Snowell in 1989-1990. Regarding Dempsey, as McGrain's superb article explains, he was a different animal in 1919 when he massacred Willard and I award that absolute peak version a 45% chance against Tyson of 1986-1988.

 

if dempsey can make it an inside fight - he'll kill tyson. midrange? tyson easy. i'm going for the former.