Some say the blueprint to beating Tyson was fighting like Tillis did. Would Ali have beaten Tyson?

You can`t see it because you don't want to. It`s OK your a Tyson fan I get it.

 

To be honest that has nothing to do with it whether you are facing a big hitter in your first fight, 10th fight, 50th fight. Chin in Chin.

 

He rarely did. Tyson doesn't pressure like a Joe Frazier in the later rounds. Usually once a guy got past x rounds he could go all the way. Larry Holmes ground Bonecrusher down.

 

Norton and Frazier were certainly well equipped as they gave a still good Ali hell. Parts of their game eclipse Tyson's and there's no guarantee he does better than them.

 

I've watched the fight many times and disagree. I've also watched all Holmes pak fights and tho he dances a lot less than many thing he certainly danced more and a lot better than he did against Tyson. He was old and way past his best - he was never going to replicate his earlier self.

 

Great fighters think they can beat anyone. Of course Holmes had visions of beating Tyson. He would have thought he could beat Holyfield too. These beliefs are often delusions.

 

LOL just LOL!!!! We are talking PEAK Ali bud.

I'll ask you again, what fights did Ali get hit often in between Liston and exile?

Spare us the past peak Ali thanks.

Tyson got pumped loads against Holyfield and Lewis too yeah.

 

The problem was that he wasn't moving like Larry Holmes and that his once legendary jab was reduced to feeble pawing. I am thinking that this thread has turned into a troll fest.

 

How long before someone brings up Ali vs Inoki?

 

So Joe's chin got better over time?

 

Thinking, or KNOWING that Mike Tyson is a better finisher than Frazier and Norton makes one a Tyson fan? Tyson would be an absolute nightmare for Ali. Speed along with power, stuff that won't bode well for anyone, are a couple things Tyson has going for him.

 

So because Tyson went the distance (mostly due to his opponents' hugging tactics) and only recorded 3 KO's past the 7th round means Tyson can't record a KO...in the 9th round?

I agree Tyson slows down over time. Anyone would. But it's a more measured pace so he doesn't tire and fold. If Ali were to open up more in the later rounds I'm sure Tyson would too. He did it against Ribalta and Ruddock.

 

And Tyson has a helluva lot more in his game that eclipses both Frazier and Norton. One of them being a better finisher, another being a better defensive fighter, and another one being his speed. I can continue?

 

Holmes emulated Boencrusher's holding tactics and game plan, which was to survive until the 4th and then start unloading in hopes that Tyson would tire out. It backfired. Sure Holmes was stationary at times, you have to be in order to land an overhand right. But let's not forget Larry was using stalling tactics and moving around the ring to gain distance.

I never said he was prime but he prepared just fine. A bout with Tyson had been on hold since 1986. He knew what he was getting himself into. A prime Holmes lasts longer, does better, but ultimately falls short against a fighter whose whole purpose in boxing was to dethrone the Larry Holmes's and Muhammad Ali's of the division.

 

A lot of that is due to Tyson's speed and agility.

And why is this a troll fest? I'm getting a bit tired of all the "Holmes was past his best and reduced to a feeble old man" tripe. Tyson was just a young dynamo who would always pose problems for Larry Holmes.