Tyson Vs The 60's And 70's

o wow talk about being biased. Floyd gets credit for beating a 40 year old that never was heavyweight champ. But tyson doesnt get credit for beating a 38 year old holmes that would go on to beat ray mercer. Not to to mention that tyson was shot to **** by the time he fought lennox.

Michael spinks in reality is just as good of a win as patterson is. Both were natural light heavies and it would have been a 50/50 fight if they fought each other. Hell, most on this forum think that spinks probably could have beaten holyfield, i mean moorer did and hes a lesser LH.

By the way, if tyson would have beaten holyfield and lennox, i doubt you would call them ATGS and top 10 heavyweights.

By the way, ranking floyd and tyson at the same level is ridiculous. Tyson had a much better title run and beat better opponents overall. Not to mention that floyd dodged half his challengers during his title run.

Michael spinks was 32 when he lost to tyson, archie was either 40 or 43 when he lost to patterson, jesus!

 

I agree. But Ali was a little bit faster than Tyson, it's nothing huge but he's a shade faster.

 

Frazier has better head movement, but some of Tyson's body shots were lightning quick. Frazier's style is perfect for Ali with his pressure style, against Tyson it wouldn't work.

 

true Ali is a shade faster but just a shade therefore he cannot employ his dancing strategy since Tyson is fast enough and has good enough footwork to keep up with him.

Ali's pulling straight away from a punch would land him in alot of trouble against Tyson since unlike most guys Ali fought Tyson is fast enough to make him pay for it.

I se Ali winning a tough close decisionbut i would'nt be suprised tosee Tyson winning.

 

The 'best' of Tyson vs:-


Sonny Liston: Liston, TKO11. In a intensely fought and closely contested war, Listons jab and superior infighting abilty would be the key. In terms of adaptibility Liston was one of the finest boxer-punchers the best in HW history and could fight very well off the backfoot too.Tyson would have his fair share of moments but would ultimately be outgunned approaching the champoionship rounds.

Muhammad Ali: Ali, UD. Immovable object prevails against irrisistible force. The only real choice from those listed I'd take with near total conviction to prevail against Tyson.

Joe Frazier: Tyson, TKO4. Bad style matchup for Joe: obviously if he lasts past the mid-rounds his chances increase, but I don't think he would.

Ron Lyle: Tyson KO4. Similar to the Foreman fight: he goes toe-to-toe with Tyson and there's only one winner. Lyle lasts for a while but is ultimately outgunned.

Jimmy Young: Tyson TKO6. Young is game in the early rounds, and his tricky and slippery style would ask Tyson questions for a while, but once Tyson connects with heavy leather it's only a matter of time before it all unravells for Jimmy. He wouldn't withstand the barrage and the ref steps in the call a halt to proceedings in the mid-rounds.

Ken Norton: Tyson, TKO2. Norton fares poorly against fighters with top level power and few come with as complete an offensive arsenal than what Tyson brings to the table. Norton is in trouble from the get go and is decked towards the end of the opening round: he makes it to his feet just before the bell rings and staggers back to his corner. Tyson comes roaring out for the second, goes straight for the body and then upstairs ripping uppercuts and hooks to the midrift and head. Norton can't take much more and the ref ends the contest soon after.

Earnie Shavers: Tyson KO2. Both have immense power, Tyson has the better chin, stamina and variety. He also is faster and would land first, only one outcome: Shavers is getting overwhelmed early.

George Foreman: Tyson, TKO9. The sole exception to the general train of thought that 'Foreman eats up all swarmers'. Tyson is a much faster starter than Fraizer, he is less predictible in his movement and has more variety in terms of weaponary, Frazier was more of an exclusive infighter (like Marciano), Tyson is more suited to fighting at mid-range. He is a bigger version of Dempsey who happens to do most things better than the Manassa mauler. For me Tysons handspeed, movement and more compact punching stlye gives him the edge. Foreman would have some moments, but I can see Tyson staying on the outside for spells of the fight and moving in to counter Formans wide swings with crisp, powerful combinations, hooks and uppercuts down the middle. As the fight progresses he eventually would pick appart Foremans leaky defence more and more often: resulting in a stoppage via accumulation late on.

Larry Holmes: Holmes UD. This one would be closely contested and Tyson could drop Holmes at some stage. Larry was always at his most formidable when hurt, though and I think he'd know that he couldn't afford to trade with Tyson, who's a much better finisher than Shavers. He'd stay almost exclusively on the outside, use plenty of lateral movement and look to catch Tyson with heavy jabs and uppercuts, whislt tying him up on the inside. Holmes' ring gernalship, chin and skillset allows him to brave through some rough early moments and in the end would be enough to take a very competitive decision.

 

So as an overview: the only fighters in history I make slight favourite against a peak Tyson would be Ali, Liston, Holmes and maybe Lewis as well. Holyfield pre '90 is a close call, but after that Evander handles him well. Johnson and Tunney are interesting ones and I suppose it depends how both adapt to the changes. I think both could take Tyson into the late rounds but would untimately be stopped.

Tyson knocks out Dempsey and Patterson early on and stops Marciano near the mid-rounds. He'd beat Jefferies, and Walcott (who I think could stylistically give him trouble) but would lose a close one against Louis.

 

Holmes Jab: The 'best' of Tyson vs:-

Disagree. Liston was a fine boxer puncher but has never faced a fighter with the type of power and skill that Tyson brings to the table. Tyson was technically proficient- he had a competant jab, terrifiic arsenal of punches and was a better composite puncher than Sonny Liston. His chin was also better. Liston would make a fight out of it but that's as much as he'd be able to do. His lack of handspeed would cost him against Tyson as he'd invariably find himself on the wrong end of an exchange each time they battle toe to toe. Another thing I believe is that Tyson had better late round stamina than Liston. It would be fireworks but I believe that Tyson would control the pace from the outset until Liston is counted out.

I'd favor Ali as well but for him to win he'd literrally have to dance all night and steer clear from any exchange. Ironically I believe that it is Tyson that would start to close the gap towards the championship rounds as Ali tires late clearly tired from executing a near perfect fight plan. Tyson's inablity to land early against a very elusive target would actually help conserve his stamina as his output would be relatively low against Ali. As the rounds wear on Tyson would occasionally land a big punch but not enough to slow Ali down. As the championship rounds wear on it become clear that Ali is unable to keep the tremendous pace that he's had all night and slows down just enough to make it competitive for Mike. Though Tyson would be tired himself I believe that by expending less energy he'd be the fresher of the two and would use every moment to capitalize the situation but would fall short as the final bell rings.

Agreed, although I don't believe that his chances increase past the mid rounds simply because he's not going to bring anything for Tyson to solve that he hasnt solved already.

Agreed.

Agreed, though I would have Tyson winning in 7.

Though I feel Norton gets short changed all too often, I agree with the above scenario.

Agreed.

Agreed

Plausible. I think both Tyson and Holmes are made for each other styliscitally. Holmes has enough savvy and guile to weather the storm and fight a competitive fight.

Whereas Tyson has the right hand, the speed and techinical competence to score a KO following up from a big right hand or win a decision by being the effective aggressor in landing the bigger punches while pressing the fight.

 

When it comes to hand speed they were quite close. Ali's movement and reflexes were quite significantly quicker than Tyson's IMO, even if Tyson did well in those departments as well. But Ali was THE absoulte freak when it came to over all speed.

I see Tyson beating Norton, Quarry, Lyle et al. quite easy. Against Liston and Frazier it's a toss up. The only reason I would pick Foreman quite clearly against Tyson is because D'Amato and seemingly Tyson himself did so.

For me, Tyson's first three rounds against Tucker showed how he would fare against someone with superior skill and speed than Tucker, and who wouldn't suddenly stop fighting for whatever reason - namely Ali. Likewise, I think Ali showed in the early rounds against Patterson (before Patterson hurt his back) how hard it was for someone with Tyson's style but slightly superior speed to catch a prime Ali. I can't really see how Tyson would pull this off, but you can't never know for sure...

 

An interesting thought I've always had is that I reckon Tyson would fare better against a 60's Ali than the early-mid 70's version. Not enough to win the fight, but still.

 

Playing Devil's Advocate here but Tyson could pull it off because Ali would not be able to fight that way for the full 15 rounds. As a result Tyson provided he fought patiently (and he could) would pick his spots pressure Ali just enough that he stays on his toes unwilling to commit to his punches with the hope that he'd catch him as Ali becomes more and more stationary.

 

I think whatever era you put Tyson in his career pans out prety much the same as it did in his own era.

He tears through the ranks to the top, has a short prime, and then starts to decline.

 

Yeah, that's about right. The 70's aside what other era do you think he'd be tested the most in during his peak?

 

Good question.

I think that if he had come along a few years later when the likes of Holyfield, Bowe and Lewis had been facing off he would have landed in hot water.

I would also be interested to se how he would have fared with the black dynamite crew, not just at his peak but also coming up through the ranks. That would have been the least forgiving environment for any heavyweight to fight his wat to the top in more wats than one.

Without speculating how he would have fared in these eras he would have been more than tested.

 

Yeah the early 90's would be the obvious other so to speak, it would be intrugUing to see how he'd fare if emerging around the same time as Liston did, or sometime during the late 30's - early 40's.

 

My thoughts exactly.

Say he dosnt get guided to the top.

Say he has a Don King style promotor from day one before his potential is recognised.

Perhaps he dosnt even have a promotor and is sleeping rough when he starts fighting profesionaly.

Say he is fed to the wolves from day one.