So you really believe that 56 years old Tyson is a better fighter than 39 years old Tyson? I have to ask it - have you ever attended to any sort of organized sport? You sound like someone who never tried any serious activity outside of watching sport. Do you understand how hard it is for 50+ years old people to compete against young guys? Looking nice in sparring and against another 50+ years old retired guy is a different thing than beating someone 30 years younger than you who actually trains and fights consistently. Tyson would have his brain damaged after few rounds.
I`m telling you Tyson was the most skilled heavyweight of all-time and to beat a brawler like Galento all he has to do is sharpen his tools, he didn`t train properly at 39.
It is not so much Galento that you are underestimating, as the effects of age and inactivity. Look at what Vitor Belfot did to Evander Holyfield, and then consider how you think he might have done against a prime Holyfield. It doesn't matter how much you sharpen your tools, if father time has blunted them.
Well we don't know how much Mike has left. He held back against a smaller Roy Jones Jr.. So this thread is pretty silly. We are asking could a washed up boxing who hasn't had a legit bout almost 20 years could beat a prime version of even a bad fighter like Galento.
Lol and Joe Louis fought this guy in a title fight. None of Mike Tyson's opponents during his title reign were this unskilled. Well none of the opponents Mike fought period were this bad.
Well pretty much every fighter Joe Louis fought was a tomato can. Like I said Butterbean was far more skilled than Galento.
