View Full Version : Rating the fighters [FLAME FREE BOXING thread]


THE REAL NINJA
08-22-2006, 09:42 AM
I made this as a place some of us can come to talk about fighters & boxing in general without the nonsense flame wars and worthless arguing. I have find it hard at times to have a fair discussion about some fighters such as Tyson,Trinidad,Jones, and others without it becoming negitive and assaulting to the fighters or the posters in the thread . I only ask for you to give your true fair opinion and stay open minded of others views. After all boxing is the most unpredictable of all sports so lets not pretend that our words are gospel.If you can not agree to this i ask you not to post in this thread . If you do post and can not be fair and peaceful I will ask that your post be removed . Well then my first question is your fair view opinion of what would become of Tyson if he would have fought in the 1970's Vs Ali,Frazier,Foreman,Norton,Holmes ?

King Koyle
08-22-2006, 03:30 PM
Good question Ninja!I would give prime Tyson a good shot against all of the aforementioned names.But it's hard to analyse(Sp?)Mike.Before he went to prison he seemed to have it all.The mental and physical skills needed to be a true great.But then again he wasn't tested all that often.After prison he was tested against the likes of Holyfield and Lewis.And he didn't exactly pass.But then again his skills had started to decline.His once great head movement was non-existent.My point is that i'll never be sure if Tyson had what it takes to deal with such greats as Ali,Foreman,Frazier,Etc.So I would favor the top dogs of the seventys heavyweights(No one else)over Mike.But I would certainly give Mike more than a punchers chance.

SonnyG8R
08-22-2006, 11:28 PM
I made this as a place some of us can come to talk about fighters & boxing in general without the nonsense flame wars and worthless arguing. I have find it hard at times to have a fair discussion about some fighters such as Tyson,Trinidad,Jones, and others without it becoming negitive and assaulting to the fighters or the posters in the thread . I only ask for you to give your true fair opinion and stay open minded of others views. After all boxing is the most unpredictable of all sports so lets not pretend that our words are gospel.If you can not agree to this i ask you not to post in this thread . If you do post and can not be fair and peaceful I will ask that your post be removed . Well then my first question is your fair view opinion of what would become of Tyson if he would have fought in the 1970's Vs Ali,Frazier,Foreman,Norton,Holmes ?

First of all I commend you for making this thread. I was hoping this could be a place to talk boxing in a civil manor without all the flaming.

Now to your question. tyson was a force of nature in his prime. There is part of me that thinks he could hold his own in any era. On the other hand his competition during that time is somewhat questionable. I would give Tyson the nod over Frazier. Ali I think was to wiley and would probably find a way to get in Tyson's head. Ali had a great chin and if Tyson didn't knock him out I think he would get flustered and probably get ko'd in the later rounds. Forman power and size would be too much for Tyson in my opinion. Tyson knocked the hell out of Holmes but Holmes was not in his prime. I think Tyson would have some trouble getting inside on a prime Larry and would probably end up on his back. I give prime Tyson an edge on Norton, and I think he could have taken Shavers as well but Ernie would have certainly had a punchers chance against Tyson.

THE REAL NINJA
08-23-2006, 09:11 AM
Tyson Vs Norton is the one I am the most sure about. I just can't imagine his chin holding out for more then 5 rounds with Tyson.Tyson Vs Frazier, I give the nod also to Tyson. For as great as Frazier was and as powerful as he may have been he had a major weakness which was facial swelling and poor eyesight. I see it as a hard battle for both men but by mid fight Fraziers face is a mess and Joe will be Tko'd. Ali Vs Tyson I have never seen as a simple easy win for Ali like many do . I see a very hard fight in the same ways that Frazier Vs Ali were . Ali will not be able flurry on Tyson with as much ease as he had others . He will also not be able to hold his hands low and just pull his head away because Tyson's hand speed will catch him. What i've came up with, being as fair on both parts as I can is a 3 fight 2-1 split in favor of Ali . I think Ali had what it takes to beat Tyson on any given day but I also think that Tyson will land at some point in the same way that Frazier did but this time Ali doesn't make it back up.

THE REAL NINJA
08-26-2006, 06:42 PM
Anyways back to reality ;) What are your true thoughts on Roy Jones .Jr as far as competition level and where he should stand in history ?

PATO 1
08-26-2006, 07:37 PM
tyson wouldnt beat many hw's in the 70's imo

PATO 1
08-26-2006, 07:38 PM
Anyways back to reality ;) What are your true thoughts on Roy Jones .Jr as far as competition level and where he should stand in history ?
rating roy jones is hard because he lacks that career defining fight were no-one thought he would win , or were he is losing and pulls out a tremendous turnaround to win against the odds

that imo seperates him from elite

THE REAL NINJA
08-26-2006, 07:49 PM
rating roy jones is hard because he lacks that career defining fight were no-one thought he would win , or were he is losing and pulls out a tremendous turnaround to win against the odds

that imo seperates him from elite
But at the same time I could say that it was because he was so great. Look at it like this , before Ali was old and past his prime how many times was he the underdog ? Maybe with Liston he was but other then that not many times [you can say the same for Tyson even] . Now that Roy is older he is just starting to get to the point where he may have fights like that but it's up to him if he want's to go thrue it .

PATO 1
08-26-2006, 07:59 PM
but there were deinetly fights people would have picked against him in

also, you can look at his vs in his prime an say he is the biggest waste of talent opponent wise of all time


but still my 5th fave fighter

THE REAL NINJA
08-26-2006, 08:07 PM
but there were deinetly fights people would have picked against him in

also, you can look at his vs in his prime an say he is the biggest waste of talent opponent wise of all time


but still my 5th fave fighter
There were many ppl he should have fought, i'll admit that. But there are very few that I would say would be the favorite over him in his prime . There for I do think that a Tyson or Ali vs Jones analogies do work. Even if he had fought [Winski'???] win or lose he would have still had criticism today for not fighting [xxxxxx] and [xxxxxxx].

PATO 1
08-26-2006, 08:13 PM
oh yeah course i also always say it werent a case of him duckin someone

the only person roy jones ducked imo was Jirov, if ya dont know details il tell ya if ya do good

THE REAL NINJA
08-26-2006, 08:17 PM
oh yeah course i also always say it werent a case of him duckin someone

the only person roy jones ducked imo was Jirov, if ya dont know details il tell ya if ya do good
not really :confused: why because he never fought at cruiserweight ? :confused:

PATO 1
08-26-2006, 08:20 PM
well no heres what supposedly happened

Jones was offered 9.5million to fight Jirov at Cruiser then build a few more pounds an go to heavy ,


instead Jones fought clin woods for 6.9 and went from 175 straight to HW

im not sure why he done that but imo it seems he didnt wanna fight Jirov thats my opinion


he didnt duck no-one else though, he mightnt have even ducked him

THE REAL NINJA
08-26-2006, 08:24 PM
well no heres what supposedly happened

Jones was offered 9.5million to fight Jirov at Cruiser then build a few more pounds an go to heavy ,


instead Jones fought clin woods for 6.9 and went from 175 straight to HW

im not sure why he done that but imo it seems he didnt wanna fight Jirov thats my opinion


he didnt duck no-one else though, he mightnt have even ducked him
It would have been a good fight and Jirov does have a Johnston type style that could be bad for roy, but I think roy is to fast on his feet or was at the time .

PATO 1
08-26-2006, 08:26 PM
me2 jirov was the kinda fighter who was good when it went his way but sometimes got confused on how to turn a fight around

THE REAL NINJA
08-26-2006, 08:33 PM
me2 jirov was the kinda fighter who was good when it went his way but sometimes got confused on how to turn a fight around
yup Toney Vs Jirov is one of my favorite fights all time . I would have loved to see he and Tarver fight as pros.

PATO 1
08-27-2006, 11:27 AM
yupp

jirov was just a lil short of bein a great fighter

he would not beat roy jones though

King Koyle
08-28-2006, 11:24 AM
Anyways back to reality ;) What are your true thoughts on Roy Jones .Jr as far as competition level and where he should stand in history ?

Roy probadly could have faced some better comp.But im not one to **** on him over it.He beat some good fighters like Woods,Griffin,Ruiz,ETC.And also beat some great fighters like Toney and Hopkins.Two wins he seems to get little credit for.Especially the Toney one!Simply because James showed up in bad shape.When it's all said and done,I'll rank roy in my top fifty GOAT.But I strongly disagree with people who have him in the top ten.Or at #1 :eek:

THE REAL NINJA
08-28-2006, 11:29 AM
Roy probadly could have faced some better comp.But im not one to **** on him over it.He beat some good fighters like Woods,Griffin,Ruiz,ETC.And also beat some great fighters like Toney and Hopkins.Two wins he seems to get little credit for.Especially the Toney one!Simply because James showed up in bad shape.When it's all said and done,I'll rank roy in my top fifty GOAT.But I strongly disagree with people who have him in the top ten.Or at #1 :eek:
I put him high P4P not # 1 but up there maybe in the top 20. But Out of his prime era 90-2000 I do put him as the # 1 best P4P .

King Koyle
08-28-2006, 11:40 AM
I put him high P4P not # 1 but up there maybe in the top 20. But Out of his prime era 90-2000 I do put him as the # 1 best P4P .

I agree about the prime thing.He was the greatest of that era.And if all time lists were based on natural ablity,I would have him in the top five!

K-DOGG
08-28-2006, 12:35 PM
I made this as a place some of us can come to talk about fighters & boxing in general without the nonsense flame wars and worthless arguing. I have find it hard at times to have a fair discussion about some fighters such as Tyson,Trinidad,Jones, and others without it becoming negitive and assaulting to the fighters or the posters in the thread . I only ask for you to give your true fair opinion and stay open minded of others views. After all boxing is the most unpredictable of all sports so lets not pretend that our words are gospel.If you can not agree to this i ask you not to post in this thread . If you do post and can not be fair and peaceful I will ask that your post be removed . Well then my first question is your fair view opinion of what would become of Tyson if he would have fought in the 1970's Vs Ali,Frazier,Foreman,Norton,Holmes ?

Well, if we're putting Tyson in that decade, it's only fair to keep Rooney in his corner for the duration because that was Tyson at his best. He had a fragile mentality and needed support from those he trusted so that boxing was "fun" for him and not just about the money....so let's keep Jim Jaccobs alive as well. I know this sounds silly probably; but it's only fair, in my mind because the post Jaccobs/Rooney Tyson was not the same because he had lost his love of the sport and his attention to detail in the ring; and that Tyson would have been beaten by Ali, Foreman, Frazier, and probably Norton and Quarry as well.

With all things being ideal, Tyson still loses to Ali (pre 1977) and Foreman at anytime. The third Frazier fight pushed Ali over the edge and he was never the same. Ali after Manilla would have lost a decision to Tyson; but no way does Mike stop him...Ali had too much pride and too good of a chin. Pre-Manila Ali was still a formidible challenge for Tyson. I think Mike would win many of the ealry rounds; but Mike had a tendency to settle down after about 5 or 6, which is when Ali would find his target better. Also, there's the psychological warfare Ali would have waged before the fight....Mike's confidence was never the greatest; and I can definetly see Ali getting too him, which would cause Mike to make some mistakes in the ring. However, as he showed in the Tucker fight, Rooney was good at reeling Mike in and making him focus. Still, I think about the Tillis fight; and James showed that Mike was vulnerable to the style he emmulated from Ali. A pre-Manilla Ali wins a decision over Mike with a later round stoppage not out of the question.

Foreman, on the other hand just had the style to beat Tyson, IMHO. He wouldn't have blown him out like Frazier, though. Mike had a better chin and was more elusive than the Frazier who Foreman beat the first time, to say nothing of the second; but I'll get to that in a minute. Foreman-Tyson would be a merry war with Mike getting his licks in as well as Foreman; but George's monstrous shots would take there toll and put Mike down by the 4th, however, Mike would get up and continue to war back; but the ref would have to stop it....yes, this Mike doesn't quit. And, I actually can see a scenario where Mike could survive the early round assault until George had shot his load, so to speak, and Mike coming back and getting Foreman in trouble and possibly stopping him in a similar fashion around the 9th....yes, that Mike was that tough and it is possible.

Frazier loses, more than likely. Remember, we're talking 1970's here and Joe really was never the same after the first Ali fight....the third one was the nail in the coffin. Joe was the type of fighter that he kept coming and kept coming and wore you out, broke you down until your body submitted to his will; but after Ali in MSG, he wasn't the same as he was, for example, against Quarry in 1969 or Ellis in 70. If Joe, who was a slow-starter, could survive Tyson's early round assault like he didnt' against Foreman, then there's a possibility of him wearing Mike out and maybe even stopping him late; but I don't see it. Tyson stops Frazier within 3 or 4 IMHO.

Norton, forget about it. Norton was always like a deer in headlights against the big punchers. He couldn't fight going backwards; he was an "aggressive" counterpuncher, for the most part and was out of his element when pushed onto his back-foot as he was by Foreman, Shavers, and Cooney, even though he was far past his best by the time he fought Earnie and Gerry. Mike stops Norton, quite possibly, in the very first round.

Quarry actually stood a pretty good chance against Mike because he was tough as nails and a good counterpuncher; but I don't think he was fast enough to deal with Mike. It would be a humdinger of a fight for as long as it lasted; but I feel it would probably end around the 5th or 6th with Mike getting his hands raised by the ref.

Shavers was a monster puncher; but had a so-so chin. Remember, he was rocked by Jimmy Ellis just seconds before he lowered the boom. Mike, on the other hand, didn't hit quite as hard as Earnie; but he was much faster, a much better technician, much better defensively, and had a much better set of whiskers. Think Hagler-Hearns or Dempsey-Firpo for this one; but, in the end, it will be Earnie who is uncounscious on the canvas...and quite possibly, it could be a Spinks-like blow-out without Earnie landing a significant punch.

Lyle would have given Mike trouble, like Foreman would; but maybe even worse from a style perspective. I actually can see Lyle winning a decision over Mike because Ron would be throwing punches and never give up...and he wasn't a bad boxer when he had to be, as he showed against Ali. True, Mike could catch him and put him away; but Ron was made of some pretty stern stuff as he showed againt Shavers in a win and Foreman in a loss. This one, because of styles, is a toss-up.

jason100x
08-28-2006, 12:37 PM
Year after year for a long time, Roy was the best guy out there so I rate him very highly. When he was at his peak I never felt he was overrated and I respected his moves up in weight classes. He probably should have stayed at heavyweight rather than losing all that muscle and coming back down to LHW. He should have had Tarver face him at HW.

THE REAL NINJA
08-28-2006, 01:18 PM
K-Dogg... My thoughts are the same on a lot of what you said .Myself I like to give room for the unexpected so most of the time I think of these things in a 3 fight match up with a chance of the not so likley outcome. The Norton that fought Holmes was so driven that night i'd give him a slim chance at Tyson and maybe also the Norton who beat Ali. other then that Tyson would crush him. But with the skills Tyson had and the unstable mental state he had there is always the chance of anything.

THE REAL NINJA
08-28-2006, 01:23 PM
Year after year for a long time, Roy was the best guy out there so I rate him very highly. When he was at his peak I never felt he was overrated and I respected his moves up in weight classes. He probably should have stayed at heavyweight rather than losing all that muscle and coming back down to LHW. He should have had Tarver face him at HW.
It may have been best if he just stopped at cruiserweight and won a title in his 5th weight class which would put him in a very small class of fighters who have done such. It also would have gave him a reason to not have fought Tarver at LHV and made Tarver move up to cruiser for the fight, which would have gave Jones a bigger advantage in speed and stamina.

PATO 1
08-28-2006, 01:48 PM
jones could and should have took better fights than teleco,frazier,kelly,harmon, he really pissed me off with that, but i guess he didnt want harder fights

THE REAL NINJA
08-28-2006, 01:57 PM
jones could and should have took better fights than teleco,frazier,kelly,harmon, he really pissed me off with that, but i guess he didnt want harder fights
There is always to sides of the story . From what i've heard he wanted those fights but money was never agreed upon. Then again they say the same about Roy, who knows :confused:. I don't think Roy was afraid to fight any of them because even Banks and others admit that Roy would be hard to beat even at there best but I guess we will never know .

K-DOGG
08-28-2006, 01:57 PM
The only thing about Jones to me, as with so many, was the competition he faced compared to what was available. I understand why Benn and McClellan (obviously) were never made; but I can't understand why Eubank or Hill (when he was champ) never happened....or the unification with DM, who had beaten Hill for the Unified championship. Technically speaking, Michalicantspellhisname was more the lineal champ than Jones. For someone who wanted to be regared in a historical sense, he should have known how important this fight was. Robinson fought abroud when he lost to Turpin, other greats have fought abroad...yet Jones didn't.

I just think it was a bad move. How he ranks, well, I've honestly got him in my All-Time P4P list based on his talent alone; but he could have ranked higher, I think, if he'd just taken on more of the premier fighters around him.

PATO 1
08-28-2006, 02:00 PM
if you watch the mayweather-gatti fight he encourages floyd not to go to england to fight hatton

i dont think he ever got over the olympics he refused to go overseas for fear of losing a hometown decision

K-DOGG
08-28-2006, 02:05 PM
if you watch the mayweather-gatti fight he encourages floyd not to go to england to fight hatton

i dont think he ever got over the olympics he refused to go overseas for fear of losing a hometown decision

:lol1: I WILL BE DAMNED!!

I am ashamed to admit that I never even thought of that....not once. Geez, I'm thick sometimes. :rolleyes:

Great point, terrible.

:( ...must spread karma around before giving some to El Terrible again.

Rats...sorry, man.

THE REAL NINJA
09-02-2006, 12:54 PM
Ok so what boxer or boxers got you hooked ?

PATO 1
09-02-2006, 01:54 PM
well ive only been watching boxing seriously for about 5years so

shane mosley
floyd mayweather
roy jones
larry merchant (LOL)
oscar de la hoya
marco antonio barrera

OptimusWolf
09-07-2006, 08:52 AM
Naseem Hamed got me properly interested. Can't stand him now, but he was extremely entertaining in his pomp. Hopefully Khan will get boxing mainstream again in the UK, like it was in the early 90s

The Noose
09-07-2006, 11:01 AM
Naseem Hamed got me properly interested. Can't stand him now, but he was extremely entertaining in his pomp. Hopefully Khan will get boxing mainstream again in the UK, like it was in the early 90s

I got into boxing around the same time.

They were showing an Ali fight every sunday night on some crappy cable channel called Wire TV.
It was all his mid to late 70's fights. And i just had to tape them all for my dad, but i knew they were keepers.

Then Benn fought McCllenan, Hamed beat Robinson, and i saw Roy Jones fight for the first time. Plus Tyson made his comeback. All in 1995. That got me really hooked.

I watched Tyson and Hagler and Leonard wen i was a kid with my dad, so i always liked boxing.

jason100x
09-07-2006, 12:17 PM
Ok so what boxer or boxers got you hooked ?

I guess Ali got me hooked first but I was very young when he was at the tail end of his career. I guess it was the fighters like Hagler and Leonard who made me follow boxing, but the first boxer I followed from the beginning of their career was Mike Tyson.

King Koyle
09-07-2006, 12:22 PM
Ok so what boxer or boxers got you hooked ?

I watched Ray Leonard as a kid.But it wasn't until many years later that I got full blown into boxing,when I saw Ward versus Augustus(Burton)live at the Hampton beach casino.What a fight!

THE REAL NINJA
09-08-2006, 08:27 PM
That's cool.. For me it was just always around. My dad would watch the old Tuesday night fights on USA and all the big fights on HBO. I remember watching Leonard Vs Duran as a kid and how much I wanted SRL to win. I'd say over all Tyson was the first active fighter that I was a fan of and later on Holyfield,Bowe,Da La Hoya,Roy Jones . Most of all that got me hooked was just reading about the fighters of the past like Marciano Sam Langford and so on.

THE REAL NINJA
09-08-2006, 08:32 PM
Ok well with all this controversy that has followed Floyd Mayweather as of late do you agree with the thought that he has "ducked" or is "ducking" some fighters ?

MANGLER
04-08-2010, 01:59 AM
I made this as a place some of us can come to talk about fighters & boxing in general without the nonsense flame wars and worthless arguing. I have find it hard at times to have a fair discussion about some fighters such as Tyson,Trinidad,Jones, and others without it becoming negitive and assaulting to the fighters or the posters in the thread . I only ask for you to give your true fair opinion and stay open minded of others views. After all boxing is the most unpredictable of all sports so lets not pretend that our words are gospel.If you can not agree to this i ask you not to post in this thread . If you do post and can not be fair and peaceful I will ask that your post be removed . Well then my first question is your fair view opinion of what would become of Tyson if he would have fought in the 1970's Vs Ali,Frazier,Foreman,Norton,Holmes ?

Ali beats Tyson, maybe not by KO but he beats him. Quick and had a good jab to keep Tyson off him. He knew how to clinch. Tyson would get frustrated and outboxed by Ali.

Tyson KO's Frazier. He was kinda a quicker version of Frazier by style. Also had better defense and power in both hands. War, but abbreviated war. Mike gets him out within 7.

Tyson vs prime Foreman is a juicy fight. Winnable for either guy. I'd favor Foreman to stop him in anotha all out war.

I'd pick Tyson over Norton. Handspeed would be key for Mike in this one. Gettin off more punches in a firefight would win it for him.

Holmes beats Mike. Again, he might not KO him, but he's got the goods to give Mike a boxing lesson. I give Mike credit for the 88 win, but it clearly wasn't Larry as he was at his peak. He'd do a # on Mike wit the left jab. Not outta the question for Mike to blast him out, but not likely either.

UND
05-04-2010, 11:23 AM
Ali beats Tyson, maybe not by KO but he beats him. Quick and had a good jab to keep Tyson off him. He knew how to clinch. Tyson would get frustrated and outboxed by Ali.

Tyson KO's Frazier. He was kinda a quicker version of Frazier by style. Also had better defense and power in both hands. War, but abbreviated war. Mike gets him out within 7.

Tyson vs prime Foreman is a juicy fight. Winnable for either guy. I'd favor Foreman to stop him in anotha all out war.

I'd pick Tyson over Norton. Handspeed would be key for Mike in this one. Gettin off more punches in a firefight would win it for him.

Holmes beats Mike. Again, he might not KO him, but he's got the goods to give Mike a boxing lesson. I give Mike credit for the 88 win, but it clearly wasn't Larry as he was at his peak. He'd do a # on Mike wit the left jab. Not outta the question for Mike to blast him out, but not likely either.

Thats the way i would see it also, Ali would very widly UD or KO tyson, jabbing him into submission, i also think that a prime foreman would be too much for tyson and would KO tyson in the later stages of the fight.

UND
05-04-2010, 11:26 AM
A new Question:

Who is the most deadly fighter in terms of Punching power ever?