Mike Tyson would suffer more in the 70s because theres like 6 or 7 guys he has a very low chance of beating. And its hard to work around that. Holmes might not be the guy in this era. But hes got a healthy shot of beating anyone who fights today.
6 or 7? Interesting. I'd make Holmes rule the division today in a similar way to Usyk. I have always thought Ali, even seventies Ali beats Tyson, FOC Frazier beats him but a series might see a Tyson win and I swing back and forward with Foreman, for many reasons. Mike goes right through Norton, Shavers, Lyle...maybe Jimmy Young does a Douglas on him, but I don't think so.
Holmes would rule today imo too. He'd beat Usyk, and anyone else around. He'd knock the dodas out of Tyson fury right now.
Tyson would beat everyone in the 70s, maybe except 71-75 Ali, but Tyson has a reasonable chance to win.
This is bizarre to me. Yes, Mike is hugely overrated by many, and he had no longevity as a great fighter. However, he was a great HW with unique attributes. Who are the 6/7 guys who he'd have had a very low chance of beating? To me, Ali is the GOAT at HW. However, he was past his prime in the 70's, and Joe Frazier gave him hell, due to how they matched up stylistically. Frazier was a great fighter. But he wasn't as great as Mike. Mike was a much more dynamic, two handed fighter, with a better offense and defence. I think that Foreman could have beaten Mike. I agree with Cus' assessment. I think he beats everyone else. I'd love to know who the 6/7 fighters are who you have in mind.
Foreman Ali Norton Jimmy Young Lyle Frazier Shavers(number 7) You can throw in prime Larry Holmes and Bugner for good measure. Not that he had a very low chance of beating them thats more reserved for the rest of the group but those are very tough fights for Mike.