Prime Mike Tyson (88) vs Prime Muhammad Ali (66)

He did.

Sylvester Stallone: It's the closest I've ever come to death

In 1982, when his career was already in decline, Shavers tried out for the film Rocky III starring Sylvester Stallone as Rocky Balboa.

In a sparring match with Stallone, the actor asked Shavers to punch him for real. Shavers threw one of his famous punches with his left, which was not his strongest hand.

"That's the closest I've ever come to death," said Stallone, who had to be escorted to the bathroom to vomit, as reported by Jot Down.

After that punch, the role of Clubber Lang went to the popular fighter Mr. T.

 

IMO his most exciting fight was against Ribalta

 

Tyson, Lewis, Holyfield, Bowe, the Klitschko's, Fury, Usyk, Holmes - they all beat him.

 

IMO he was less adaptable. Fighters develop/improve that as they gain experience.
If you look at Ali's first fight with Frazier, why didn't he adapt mid fight ?!
Let me tell you why: cause he had no idea how, he didn't knew what to do to stop Frazier.
By the time they fought a second time, he had added another loss at the hands of Norton, who was also pressuring him like Frazier.
Ali developed a game plan to stop Frazier as he got close, by smothering him, pulling down on his head, basically by fighting dirty and cheating.
Sure, young Ali was not one dimensional by any means, but he also wasn't as adaptable and dirty as 70s Ali.

70s Ali was definitely more faceted compared to Tyson, but young Ali, not so much.

IMO in his prime he wasn't hit that much, especially with big punches, he rarely got hit flush and hard.

But we are pitting prime Ali vs prime Tyson here, what a washed up Tyson did is completely irrelevant.

Liston simply had to make the dive credible.

I see it the other way around, assuming the fight only has 12 rounds.

 

If you say so, dude.

 

Do you mean 90s Mike? I don't think 90s Larry would fare well against '88 Mike. In fact, we have to go back to at least 1983 for Larry to start winning (though I do hold the apparently not popular view that the Holmes as late as the Cobb fight would have beaten him).

I imagine the 90s Mike would have a tougher time with the Mercer/Holyfield Holmes for sure, though I see Mike winning at least a very solid UD.

 

I just have to note it's ironic that a fan of a fighter who ate his opponent's ear and tried to break another opponent's arm would call another fighter dirty because he clinched .

 

Lol, I used to have those mags also, hard to recall which article came from which mag. sometimes. I got rid of all mags yrs ago.

 

I've debated this for years and you mostly see it from critics. He simply never had to in the 70's. This certainly doesn't necessarily equate to him not being able to if needed or chosen. You hear how he wasn't as big, strong or filled out in the 60's. Well he was hitting around 213 while being in, quite likely, even better shape than he was for his best 70's fights. In 73/74 (in his early 30's) and in top shape he hit 212 for Norton and Frazier. He was weighing this in shape as he hit exile.

I'm not saying it's beyond dispute he may have gained a little strength and maybe even a little technique but i certainly don't prescribe to him being as different as some critics try to make out.

 

WB - but prime Ali had less reason to drastically modify or adapt himself, he was doing fine as it was - it didn’t mean he didn’t have the potential to do so as and when necessary.

That’s why I referenced the Chuvalo fight which, at least imo, was a first decent glimpse of a different, heavier Ali showing his durability but also still in possession of all his prime attributes, including mobility.

Not sure what Ali was supposed to adapt to mid fight in the FOTC. Many wax lyrical about Joe “beating up” Ali. I saw Ali beating up Joe for the first 4-5 rounds at the least - but Joe just kept coming - more about Joe’s psychotic resilience than any deficiencies on Ali’s part. And Ali clearly tired after the first 1/3 of FOTC - 3.5 years exile and just his 3rd fight back in.

I deem the Douglas fight to have occurred during Mike’s prime - even if Mike was possibly a bit understated in himself - his state of disrepair before first bell is quite exaggerated imo. And it seems extremely uneven to assess the performance of an inactive, post prime and rusty 29 yo Ali while doing a complete rug pull on the methodical dismantling and brutal KO of a 23 yo Mike Tyson by a heavy underdog.

Conversely, Ali lost a close fight to a reigning Champ at the peak of his powers.

Personally, I saw hints of frustration and discouragement in fights where Mike wasn’t having it all his own way - as he was so often used to.

Prime Ali was clocked enough to suggest there was some iron in his chin. But if you believe he wasn’t - then that can support even more strongly the argument that he had no reason to heavily adapt/modify himself in his first career.

No reason for Ali to fix anything that wasn’t yet broken.


Relative to Mike, without one eye closed, I can’t see how anyone could isolate Ali for the practice of dirty tactics.

Tyson wasn’t at his best but he wasn’t washed up vs Holyfield - in those fights Mike did become clearly frustrated and discouraged.

At any rate, as I said, as far as the truly upper level ATGs go, even when the flesh is/was weak(er), the spirit is/was always willing. A uniform quality unto to itself, despite all context otherwise.

Finally, Liston didn’t dive in Miami. No one cops what Liston did before executing a pre med dive. If by dive you mean Liston unjustly quit because he was getting beaten - some might argue for that but imo Liston retired due to a legit injury.

To some extent Sonny was already staring down the barrel by the close of round 6 in Miami - but with a useless left arm and enveloping fatigue, his viability and chances were even more seriously impaired .

 

Totally agree JT. Well said.

 

I was talking about Liston diving in the second fight, I wasn't paying attention what fight you were refering to.

 

I didn`t think Tyson was that good after he fired Rooney.

 

All good WB.

 

The argument that any athlete is past his or her prime at twenty four years old isn't a sound one.