Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by mark ant, Dec 4, 2018.
I'll say this about Douglas, he suffered his first loss by someone making his pro debut.
Got a draw against a Norwegian, who was European champion.
Lost to Fury sized giant in Mike White.
Lost to Jesse Ferguson, a fighter who lost 18 fights in his career.
Douglas was hardly a better challenger than Ortiz if you're being honest.
And yet, pulled off one of the best wins in Heavyweight history...
...if we're being honest!
Well that tells you Mike Tyson was very beatable, if we are being honest........
If we're really being honest, it tells us more than that - about Douglas and what he was capable of back then, in his prime years.
Unfortunately, Ortiz started his pro career late and hasn't fought anyone of note; not before nor since Wilder. So there's little to compare against. And, at 39, was he anywhere near his prime? I don't think so.
But, Douglas was, when he fought Page, Tucker, Berbick and McCall. And, therein lie the big gaping differences, which make any realistic comparison an exercise in futility.
No. Douglas isn't an all time great but, in his prime, he was better than a 39-year-old Ortiz.
The thing is though, Ortiz didn't beat Wilder......
And Douglas didn't beat Tucker, which is the point at which this entire discussion is rooted.
Joshua- Joshuas jab, height, and thudding combos give Tyson problems early and he rocks him badly. If he can land the uppercut he used on wladmir Tyson might get KOed and would at least go down for sure. But we need to see more of joshua to get a better picture. tyson likely stops him in 6 in a thrilling war but anything could happen.
Fury-Tyson drops Fury early and wins a very narrow decision in a nail biter. Classic slugger vs outfighter chess match.
Wilder-3 possibilities. Either it becomes a brutal shootout where either Tyson or wilder ends up KOed within 3 rounds; or Tyson schools wilder and wins by wide UD or late round stoppage.
Ortiz-hmm, this is a hard one to figure out. I figure Tyson because ortiz is nearly 40 and his stamina isnt that great. However i cant just ignore ortiz enormous reach advantage along with his height, weight, and high ring iq. Tyson wins 7-8 times out of 10 but ortiz can crack and tyson never beat a good southpaw, let alone a huge hard hitting one so eh.
Whyte-probably ends up looking like the berbick fight to be honest. Whyte coming right at tyson with sloppy technique, poor defense and no head movement likely ends with whyte being koed in 4.
Parker-Parker stinks up the joint going down twice in the first couple rounds then goes in a survival mode. Probably ends up looking like a combination of tyson vs Tucker and foreman vs Stewart. Tyson wins an ugly lopsided decision.
Miller-Tyson pounds on the giant heavybag for 10 brutal rounds until the ref has seen enough and waves it off.
Basically a few guys have a chance of pulling it off, but none can be favored over Tyson. None of them have a remote chance of winning a decision except fury and even he would have to dig deep to pull it off.
Maybe but Fury would last a lot longer than the other two I feel.
Where did the ring magazine rank Tucker when Tyson beat him? Tucker v Ortiz would have been a close bout I feel.
There was a hooker or something that slept with Sly in his trailer on one of his movie sets and stated that Stallone uses a pump to help his erection because of damadge done to his testicles via steroid abuse.
povetkin, ortiz,fury and joshua all beat tnt.
Tnt is overrated, the the
The Only one big win that tnt has was buster douglas in a fight that buster lost more than tnt won. Buster was schooling him.
He ducked all the top 10 fighters of his era.
I pick prime Povetkin Joshua Ortiz Fury over him
Povetkin is easier to hit than Buster was and Ortiz is slower.
Prime Tyson could literally pick the rds's he'd ko them in of today's heavyweights. A better comparison in my opnion is could today's heavyweights could've beaten some of Tysons opponents. A Pinklon Thomas would be an ATG by today's standards.