Who could beat Mike Tyson in his prime?

He did not beat the best of Tyson. Fantasy matches feature the best of both.

Your boy Holyfield was prime for Moorer. Do you put that version of Holyfield forward as the best version ever for fantasy fights?

I can't believe i am in here promoting Tyson after so many biased posts the last day or two from his disciples.

You've got a lot to answer for

 

My view is that Tyson probably wasn't quite as motivated after Spinks and didn't train as hard. And Rooney was a better cornerman for him than anyone after. But similar things can be said about several champions. I just don't see the game change many like to point to.

As for his shape for Douglas. I think it's reasonable to think that he had a walking around weight of at least 240 lbs after the Williams fight. It's hard to see a HW that likes to party not put on at least 20 lbs between camps. So he shed at least 20 lbs. That takes a decent amount of training and conditioning. And if he just stopped to eat rather than train in order to get to a decent weight, as some say, there's no way he takes punishment like that for 10 rds, I just don't see it. So all things considered, I think his shape probably was more or les alright. Not great, but not terrible.

Personally, I would also favour Tyson in a rematch, but that's because I think Douglas would train poorly and gain flab, like he did against Holy.

Maybe Mike just had an off night, where his timing was off. Timing was after all key to his style. Maybe he'd just slipped those jabs and crosses on another night. That is possible. And also impossible for us to know.

Seeing how comprehensive Douglas win was, it takes more for me not to make that version of him a favourite to beat even the sharpest version of Tyson.

 

Tyson wasn't at his best against Douglas but not nearly as much as his fans like to think he was.

 

I do get where you are coming from. We both agree on Tyson not being at his best we just minorly disagree on how much this affected his fight with Douglas. I sit somewhere between your view and that of his disciples. I'm not saying your view is extreme, i just sit back from it somewhat.

As i said i accept the opinion of others that believe Douglas may still have been kryptonite for him, i just oppose thinking that is a given and everyone should accept it. Best for best it is not a forgone conclusion either way imo.

 

This is fair. His disciples label it the be all and end all, his detractors like to thrust it completely aside.

 

Yeah, you should always be careful to say something is a given. Douglas did after all never perform to that standard again, and Tyson wasn't as thoroughly beaten again for another 12 years. So humility has its place in predictions like this.

As concerns Holy, I feel pretty certain though. Because he showed he was an extremely difficult man to KO when he was in any sort of decent shape, and he would never give up or be discouraged. He was also strong in the latter stages of a fight. And he showed against Mike that he could take his punches if they came one at a time. So a Tyson blitz or a one punch KO seems unlikely, as does Mike getting the better over 12.

 

I like Holy over Tyson. As a matter of fact call me stupid but i don't think any version of Tyson beats the version of Holyfield that whupped him. Holyfields tactics and spoiling were PERFECTEMUNDO and would have bothered Tyson at any point of his career. Holyfield took his punches with ridiculous ease. That's why he quit in the rematch. He shot his best most determined wad and got precisely no-where.

 

Well the thread is seriously flawed and jumbled.

He asks for prime Tyson in the header yet -

Tyson was actually 23 when he was beaten by Douglas. I simply defaulted to what was peak Tyson as i am sure many others did.

Tyson was basically in jail at the ages the OP states.

 

There was a thread on this a short while back. Some did indeed pick a younger Liston from memory. Of course if you fixate on "could" a can of worms is opened and the thread devalued.

 

I always look at prime and peak.

Holyfield beating Bowe the fight before Moorer may have been the best win of his career, and if it isn't it's right there. Lets not pretend struggling to get by a top flight heavy like Bowe is a negative.

The simple fact of the matter is Holyfield, for whatever reason (steroid abuse is a chance) was struggling in that fight. Routine logic and fairness dictate that we don't fixate on that version of Holyfield when looking at how he'd go against X or Z at his best.

 

Holyfield had that wear and tear but Tyson had that slipping dedication, loss of corner and various other things going on. He was sliding out of control and that was well publicized even among the cover ups. A lot of things were kept reasonably hidden until he got beaten and then the floodgates eased open somewhat.

If you see the Tyson of Tokyo as the absolute best of Tyson there's probably not much to say.

I accept that you still favor the Douglas from Tokyo over any Tyson. It is one of two quite legitimate opinions. I don't accept the Tyson of Tokyo being put forward as the best of Tyson no matter how the thread reads.

 

Holy is a pretty interesting example. On him I hold a position that I normally would dismiss as fan boy talk: that his rematch against Bowe was both his best performance and his last prime performance.

But I think it's pretty clear that he started suffering from health problems soon after the second Bowe fight. Probably caused by steroid abuse at leat in part, but health problems nonetheless. When they seemed to ease up, he was in his mid 30's and naturally past prime through age and wear and tear.

 

Joe Louis lost to Schmeling due to a technical weakness and way too much rumpy pumpy and golf in camp. He decimated him later. Duran was underprepared against De Jesus and paid the price then defeated him two times thereafter. Lewis took Rahman for granted then left him prone. Boxing is littered with upsets primarily caused by poor preparation and overconfidence. Tyson - Douglas is a strong candidate as well but Tyson didn't get the chance to avenge.

It happens, and has happened. At this level even the great ones can be beaten by overconfidence and outside distractions. Lets not pretend a poor camp is negligible.

 

Foreman
Holmes
Ali
Louis

I think these are the guys who could beat Mike, and out of the 4 I’d want to see Tyson/Foreman the most.

 

To be fair, the so called "lesser fighters" who went the distance with mike did so by fighting an intelligent fight with caution. Ruddock is the only guy who fought aggressively and he got dropped 2x i believe.

Rocky's style does not mix well with tysons. Its like oil and fire. If he makes it past the 6th somehow, sure, he might be able to pull something off with his superior stamina and workrate but i have serious doubts that he'd last long enough to make that happen.

Holyfield was 4 inches taller, 20 lbs heavier and stronger than marciano. And yes he stepped forward and opened up but he also out clinched and out bullied Tyson picking his shots carefully. Holyfield was a much better counter puncher and faster than marciano.