Tysons Legacy Defining Fight

It cracks me up how people dare claim they are unbiased after saying that Tyson could beat Ali too. The reality of the matter is that there are press conferences, and Ali would be giving him ear fulls of abuse, and that is affecting Tyson. And Ali has a bigger will to win than Tyson, and that is simply that.

 

Holyfield got hit more in 91. Bowe was bigger and stronger and never showed a bad chin until later in his career when his fitness went completely down the tubes.

 

that's a good post. Sorry if I came across a bit wrong there by the way, not intentional.

Actually, your last point is very interesting and has me thinking, good point.

 

What if you just happen to think Tyson has the style to beat Ali? Yes Ali would be trying to get in Tyson's head, he'd have more heart but he'd also lean back in straight lines with his right hand down :yep

 

I think on paper the style is somewhat, not totally in favour of Tyson, but some aspects of it are, yes. For me, standing off and boxing Tyson without a real intent to damage him is not the way forward, his head movement and countering abilities with the heavy artilery would probably see you done in. But let me ask you a straight question- even if you concur with what I have just said, and you see anything else in favour of Tyson on paper, do you think he wins it? Give me a straight yes or no please.

 

I won't do that It's a match up I'm not sure about and for a record I'm a big fan of both, you can tell that because I rarely have a bad word to say about either.

I see Ali's footwork as controlling the distance, and he'd use it to pick and choose his battles, using lateral movement to take him to Tyson's left, darting in and out to gete off his punches when it suited him. The combination of footwork may see him get off first however Tyson would be a more ellusive target than he ever faced, he could take away Ali's jab somewhat and land his own jab/flush while pressuring Ali.

Tyson's speed would see Ali's reaction based defense exposed much more than normal and Tyson would get his jab and left off pretty effectively as Ali was open to both those punches and Tyson lands them more effectively than anyone. Tyson would look to pressure with his jab, use movement to force mistakes and set up combinations to the head and body. In terms of accuracy, speed, power and timing Tyson is the best puncher Ali has been in with by a distance. The fascinating thing is both are very fast starters that fade. Ali's footwork/movement would slow, as would Tyson's own energy draining attacks and pressure.

As for the pyschological side, I think Ali getting in Tyson's head would actually backfire, because 1 of Tyson's biggest problems was coming in under prepared. Getting him angry and scaring him would actually bring the best out of him because he'd actually get some hunger and determination. We saw Ali's mind games backfiring on him against Frazier, same thing here imo As for Tyson not having heart, I think he certainly did in the early days, but having the world at his feet so early made him complacent

 

Going back to the OPs question, the interesting thing is there are arguably many legacy defining fights because at the time there were many fighters who had a claim to be the best HW in the world.

Spinks was the lineal champion

Holmes many thought deserved to be the lineal champion after the close controversal rematch

Tucker had been ducked by Spinks who gave up his IBF title in order not to face him

Berbick - had the WBC lineage that Holmes discarded in order not to face his no1 contender

Thomas had lost his WBC in a close loss to Berbick that he perhaps may have edged, Thomas had been avoided by Holmes when he was the best contender and took Holmes ex-WBC belt that Holmes discarded to not face his number 1 contender

I can't think of another time when so many fighters have a good argument to be number 1 in the world and have a fight come out and beat the lot of them an so dramatically. Then clean out the rest of the division of every meaningful contender bar Holyfield/Witherspoon. That's Tyson's legacy and it's a fine 1

 

If you're looking for a defining fight it was the Spinks fight.

But the Tyson legend didn't need a defining fight, or even a quality opponent. People would watch the montage of him knocking out tomato cans like Sam Scaff, Don Long and Reggie Gross and that was enough. The legend was born.

I guess the Berbick fight was the most important, because it showed Tyson could do it against a decent ranked belt-holding fighter.

Spinks was built up as something more than he was though. That was the defining fight because it was built into a "Super Fight".

 

I never said he didn;t have any heart mate. I just said Ali has more will to win than him. You know that I am usually all for these analytical break downs, and you make a very good post in that sense, as usual. But my opinion is very simple, I just think that if they get in the ring, Ali will be too much for him. Tyson doesn't bring the heat constantly in the sense of a Frazier or an Amrstrong or an in full flow Pryor. He's a combination man who is amazing technically and has a good defense, I just don't see it happening for him at all. I don't see Ali slowing because he sees some of his own work falling short, in fact, I see him turning it on more if anything. Ali's multi directional movement coupled with his constant throwing of shots is ridiculous and for me it's not foiled by a non-swarmer. Just my opinion, I don't see this one for Tyson at all, a larger version of Rocky Marciano would be a different story though, that would have me on the fence.

 

Although a prime Tyson would take Marciano imo, its all about styles as you know, it's not simply fighter a beats b, b beats c so that means a beats c too.

 

Holyfield was the only one that knew. The general feeling among everyone was that Tyson felt that Holyfield wasn't what he once was. Holyfield had been stopped for the first time in his career against Bowe a year earlier and hardly looked great against Bobby Czyz. Everyone felt that Holyfield never had a chance against Tyson in 1996, unlike 5 years earlier in 1991 when they were first due to meet. Prior to the bell ringing, Tyson, rightly so was the overwhelming favorite. He was just simply bullied and outfought.

 

Spinks

 

Spinks. But Tyson's legacy is concrete because of the way he went about business, the guy was a f*****g phenomenon.
The only time he never showed heart in his career was when he bit Holyfield's ear. In all his defeats he took his lumps like a man and went down trying to fight. Mike had heart from the start of his career to the end. McBride and Williams don't come into it, just incase anyone points them out. The man openly admitted his heart wasn't in it anymore.

 

Spinks was at the end of his career,

But it is interesting to see your double standards AGAIN.

The way Lewis obliterated Ruddock was impressive, but you try to spin it round into being worthless because of the manner in which he won.

If that doesnt underline your transparant agenda I dont know what will.

I would say that Ruddock would of KO'd that version of Spimks within a round as well...