Who wins my fantasy heavyweight super series?

yes sure he would , 215lb fighter would just wreck them all

 

You think Ali is too small to beat some of them on the list, don't you?

 

That is all hypothetical , but if we talking about 215lb Ali he would get wrecked by most on the list.
I have no problem people calling Ali the greatest , but hard to compare him to fighters who are much taller, bigger , stronger and punch much harder,he was talented and gifted , but a bit small and too featherfisted to do anything against much bigger opponents. Amazing fighter , but it’s like comparing pele with ronaldo.

 

In tournament format anything is possible.

Good question, let me know your findings.

I completely agree. I was annoyed for Wallin.

Let's say that I agree with you that the degree Fury's eye was a mess is a better reflection of who won that fight. What relevance does it have to Mike Tyson?

Wallin is 6'6", 235lb, southpaw who is well schooled . Tyson to my knowledge never beat a man of Wallin's size let alone Fury. So what data are you trying to glean from this fight?

Again what is your case for Tyson. I understand you think Fury is a little overated. That is fine. But ours is not an argument about whether he wins the full tournament. We are discussing why I think Tyson was too small.

As I recall King steered Tyson away from Bowe, Lewis and Foreman. So what is the commonality?

 

I would say the best chin ever in boxing because not only did he face a murderers row of opponents he survived them. I agree with everything else you wrote Sir. It’s clear you know boxing

 

I didn't follow along actually, as I tried repeatedly to get you to actually say why you thought Mike could win.

With every post you focussed more and more on hyperbolic statements about how bad Fury's resume was. "Worse than wilder's" / "going life and death" with Wallin. Etc. Etc.

So no, I'm not that I'm trying to play games or trick you, but I would have liked you to make the case for Mike that addresses the obvious size gap.

i.e. whether or not a 6'6" southpaw can bloody a 6'8' Fury doesn't automatically mean a 5'10 Mike is going to achieve parity or better. My point is Mike has not achieved much of anything against the talented large men of his generation to make that leap of faith.

Your point is, far worse fighters than Mike have given Fury trouble. Therefore size doesn't matter. Is that a fair reflection or I am missing the nuance?

And you don't have to guess. You can see from the graph in my first post that Mike had little to no success with decent opposition who were both heavy and tall.
Bruno wasn't even 6'3" btw. So he wouldn't be tall by today's standards.
The Lewis (6'5") fight was pretty one sided. But no shame in that.
So it seems you are left riding with his win over a Golota (6'4") that resulted in a NC.

Hence we arrive back at the beginning.

Fury 6'8 with his combination of size, weight and agility would dominate the 5'10 Mike on his best day.

But sure we can agree to disagree if you like.

 

Strategy can overcome size which is why we shouldn't rule Ali completely out alongside the modern-day tall fighters. Remember in his prime he was running 4miles backwards during road work as part of his gameplan. He beat Liston twice who wasn't tall but had an insane 84" reach. (Fury is 85" for example)

I picked Lewis because he had both strategy and size, on top of good power.

 

Lewis is the archetype for the modern super heavy. I can't look past him.

And the sport has only moved in one direction. Ali's achievements (alongwith J. Louis) are peerless. But in a head to head, the smart money is on the 6'5" Jamaican.

 

There was no contradiction in what I wrote, but as we are using strawmen now...

My point is you are effectively ignoring there is a 10 inch height gap and a potential 40+lb weight gap. It's arguing something which would be the equivalent of asking Canelo to fight Wilder.

Sound ridiculous on the face of it. But, the height and weight difference is about the same as between Mike and Fury.
Canelo has also a far better resume than WIlder, just like Mike has over Fury.
Canelo is also far more skilled than Wilder. The skill gap is less pronounced between Mike and Fury.
Canelo has also beaten much taller guys like Kovalev and Smith.
Just like Mike.

So can Canelo beat Wilder? Would you pick Canelo?


And again you are welcome to your opinion, but mine is that Mike is too small (height+weight) for Fury, and rather telling (for me at least) it's an opinion that Mike Tyson, himself, has come out with.

 

Some would say Mike had gotten wise with age. Most young champions think they could take on the world. With age comes perspective I guess.

Or we can just ignore his insights into himself as meanigless and call him an old stoner.