Can a shorter than average height boxer dominate heavyweight boxing like Klitschko?

We also don't need to bring up how he left Rooney 3 fights before and already looked bad in those fights. But he was in his prime so it was fine. It was fine. He was prime. Period. No disputing it.

Lol, Tyson was like 25 when he lost to Douglas and in the middle of his fighting prime. Don't make excuses. He fought just like he always had before, he just got out-boxed and beaten up in the end. Tyson was limited. Period. We also don't need to bring up how he left Rooney 3 fights before and already looked bad in those fights. But he was in his prime so it was fine.

Yeah man he totally fought Douglas when he was in his prime right? Didn't leave Rooney a couple fights before on Don Snake's request? Lol, Tyson was like 25 when he lost to Douglas and in the middle of his fighting prime. Don't make excuses. He fought just like he always had before, he just got out-boxed and beaten up in the end. Tyson was limited. Period.

Ydksab *****

The heavyweight division has evolved after Lennox Lewis. An average height and weight heavy will simply not last long. Even Joshua is a lot bigger than Lewis was at this age.

The main reason why you don't see shorter than average heavyweights doing anything cause they have to adopt styles that take up a lot skill and energy. They also need serious pop in their punches. I didn't realize this was a stealth Mike Tyson hate thread. Even a shot Mike Tyson won the first round against Lennox lewis because that was the only round he had any energy for his style. Prime Mike Tyson beats Lennox Lewis, and the Klitschkos. Just that fighters like him are rare that can combine all the attributes needed to succeed. It doesn't help that Emmanuel Stewart developed a blueprint in how taller fighters can beat smaller ones. There really hasn't been one made the other way around for heavyweights. Can't replicate Mike Tyson cause that takes too much energy to execute. I don't hate Mike Tyson. If anything, he is my favorite heavyweight boxer of all time. However, I think he was too small to be anything more than a minor irritant and nuisance to modern super heavyweights that are 240 pounds + and 6 foot 3 +. It's a near mismatch. Mike Tyson is more likely to itch those guys with even his hardest punches than to actually KO them. He lacked the power in his much smaller fists for a heavyweight and much smaller hands for a heavyweight and his much smaller overall body for a heavyweight and his much more fragile body to KO men of that size. That was proven when his hardest punches were bouncing off Danny William's and Kevin Mcbride's much heavier and bigger bodies ineffectively like they were nothing. For super heavyweights like Klitschkos or Lennox Lewis or Alexander Ustinov, getting hit by Mike Tyson will be like a fully grown adult getting hit by a 10 year old kid. It's a mismatch really! Don't get me wrong, I think Mike Tyson was the best P4P heavyweight in history relative to his size, but in an ABSOLUTE sense, he is vastly outmatched by super heavyweights. Size does matter and when there are two skillful boxers, it's the bigger and larger one who holds the advantage. Mike Tyson's best bet would be to beat smaller heavyweights like Evander Holyfield, Ruslan Chagaev, Calvin Brock and etc. He always stands a chance against them. However, a peak Klitschko or Lennox Lewis scramble his brain and head likely out of his body. It's that big of a mismatch!

The main reason why you don't see shorter than average heavyweights doing anything cause they have to adopt styles that take up a lot skill and energy. They also need serious pop in their punches. I didn't realize this was a stealth Mike Tyson hate thread. Even a shot Mike Tyson won the first round against Lennox lewis because that was the only round he had any energy for his style. Prime Mike Tyson beats Lennox Lewis, and the Klitschkos. Just that fighters like him are rare that can combine all the attributes needed to succeed. It doesn't help that Emmanuel Stewart developed a blueprint in how taller fighters can beat smaller ones. There really hasn't been one made the other way around for heavyweights. Can't replicate Mike Tyson cause that takes too much energy to execute.

Agree fully with this, Mike wasn't really all that great, he had power that put fear through the HW ranks, until a good boxer that didn't fear him beat him, then Evander a former LH beat him, Lewis is too big, Ali too big too slick and too good of a chin, Klit is too big and tight boxing, Mikes biggest name win was Holmes who was shot to sht and Spinks who was a LH. Mike was a public enigma more than a truly great fighter, he was dynamic and powerful that destroyed average HWs while the elite beat him, just like GGG is blasting through the MWs until he fought a big guy that could really fight, where as G won Mike lost, the same invincible bubble got burst. Agree fully with this, Mike wasn't really all that great , Define 'great'! Also 'great' relative to whom? Mike Tyson was easily the greatest heavyweight boxer compared to any other boxer that competed at heavyweight his own size (height, weight and reach). Was he great compared to other super heavyweights like Lennox Lewis or Wladimir Klitschko? No, but neither are any other boxer that are the same size as Mike Tyson. If a guy who is 5 foot 5 and only 150 pounds can lift more weights than any other person on Earth his own size, is it fair to claim that guy doesn't have 'great' strength only because there are guys MUCH bigger than him who can lift heavier weights? Of course not! The same applies to Mike Tyson. It's an unfair comparison to compare Mike Tyson's accomplishments and capabilities at heavyweight to much larger heavyweights who are more natural at the division. If you want to make a fair comparison, instead of making an absolute comparison, make a relative comparison in terms of size. How often did any of the other super heavyweights like Lennox Lewis and Wladimir Klitschko beat guys that were regularly over 3 inches taller than themselves and over 10 pounds heavier? Not as often as Mike Tyson. So relative to his size, Mike Tyson is better than Lennox Lewis or Wladimir Klitschko relative to their own size. he had power that put fear through the HW ranks, His power was grossly overrated. I doubt he hit much harder, if at all than guys like Evander Holyfield. It's his offensive skills that allowed him to get as many knockouts as he got. His power was discovered to be near useless and ineffective against certain opponents after they got to a specific weight. Mike Tyson had a dreadful KO% against opponents over 250 pounds, including bums. Mike Tyson had sufficient power to KO specific opponents without totally brutalizing them when they were of a specific weight. His offensive skills are what allowed him to consistently score knockouts. However, his offensive skills were irrelevant against opponents much heavier than himself as he lacked the sufficient power on his fists to KO such opponents, including bummy ones like Danny Williams. until a good boxer that didn't fear him beat him, Mike Tyson is a guy who is barely 5 foot 10 (in person), weighs just above 200 pounds (barely a natural heavyweight), has a 71 inch reach and people are going to tell me this undersized midget competing at heavyweight is going to strike fear upon guys who significantly outsize him by multiple inches in height and reach and multiple pounds in weight? If that's the case, what does that tell us about Mike Tyson (striking fear on MUCH larger men) and tell us about his opponents (being scared by a midget)? It's like a year 9 high school kid who is only 5 foot 5 and 150 pounds, putting fear upon other students at year 11 who are 6 feet tall and weigh over 30 pounds more. It's totally irrational! If anything, Mike Tyson should naturally feel more fear competing against guys much heavier than himself on a regular basis. Even if Mike Tyson did inflict fear upon his opponents, he shouldn't be discredited for it, instead be credited when taking into consideration that it's extremely rare for a smaller sized being to inflict that much fear upon much bigger entities. then Evander a former LH beat him, Evander Holyfield was an excellent boxer. However, Mike Tyson always had a chance at beating him. Things just didn't go to plan against him on the night. Lewis is too big, Ali too big too slick and too good of a chin, Klit is too big and tight boxing , Agree with everything except Muhammad Ali's qualities. Mike Tyson probably has 0% chance of beating either Lennox Lewis or the Klitschko's, not even a punchers chance. They could literally stand there in front of Mike Tyson blind folded, with both arms tied behind their back with Mike Tyson landing his hardest punches flush on their chin multiple times and Tyson would likely still fail to KO men that are that much bigger than himself. He simply could not generate the power required with his relatively much more fragile, smaller and weaker body and hands / fists. That was proven when he fought Danny Williams and Kevin Mcbride, 2 guys who outsized and outweighed him by a HUGE margin. His hardest flush punches were barely even fazing the two. They appeared to be bouncing off their chins with minimal effect, almost to the point where both were nearly walking through Tyson's hardest punches. Taking into consideration those two opponents were heavy but bums and journeymen respectively, heavy + skilled guys like Lennox Lewis and the Klitschkos are boxers Mike Tyson has 0 chance against and probably doesn't even survive 30 seconds if they're serious. Muhammad Ali on the other, gets steam rolled by Mike Tyson just as Larry Holmes did. Muhammad Ali was by no means a modern super sized heavyweight. He was much smaller than the current breed of heavyweights and also isn't much better, if at all than modern cruiserweights like Oleksandr Usyk. Mikes biggest name win was Holmes who was shot to sht and Spinks who was a LH. Maybe, but beating Larry Holmes (especially in the manner he did) is probably greater / better than anything any other heavyweight boxer of Mike Tyson's size ever did. Mike was a public enigma more than a truly great fighter, Again, he 'TRULY' was a 'great fighter' relatively speaking for his size. In fact, he was the greatest boxer at heavyweight P4P and inch for inch relative to his size. However, his accomplishments (understandably) pales in comparison to much heavier + skillful guys like Wladimir Klitschko. he was dynamic and powerful that destroyed average HWs while the elite beat him, Which was still better than any other heavyweight boxer his own size. just like GGG is blasting through the MWs until he fought a big guy that could really fight, where as G won Mike lost, the same invincible bubble got burst. Shouldn't a boxer knockout every journeyman and bum and win decisively instead of going 12 rounds in a close fight? I really don't understand why you'd even mention that. It's not like only GGG and Mike Tyson were fighting average opponents and looking invincible. Most of the other top boxers have also been fighting poor to average quality of opposition. Difference is, only guys like GGG, Sergey Kovalev, Artur Beterbiev and the likes have looked invincible whereas boxers like Andre Ward haven't. When you have two top boxers who fight low to average quality of opposition and one looks invincible against such opposition by knocking them all out and the other doesn't by having to win every fight by close decision, the one who looked invincible is the better of the two 'top' boxers. This is why GGG is better than Andre Ward. This is why Sergey Kovalev is also better than Andre Ward. GGG may have been in a closer fight against a top quality opponent like Daniel Jacobs compared to his lower quality opponents in the past, but he still beat Daniel Jacobs more convincingly than most other boxers have beaten their best opponent.

Feel free to offer a response to anything you disagree with. You just repeat the same thing over and over, the more you say it doesn't make it anymore true... You could look of some of your points objectively until you used the last few of tysons fights to come to the conclusion that he didn't have enough power...

Mr Tarabistio...Do you enjoy repeating your self over and over ? Feel free to offer a response to anything you disagree with.

Mr Tarabistio...Do you enjoy repeating your self over and over ?

First, a skilled short fighter can beat a non skilled tall fighter Valuev-Haye is a prime example and many of the tall guys that Tyson faced.. So, I'm not claiming a short guy can't beat a tall guy, all I am saying is if the tall guy stays out of range and knows how to negate the short guys offense then it's hard to get through.. And the modern day HWs are Goliath size compared to early 90s.. Second, you are reaching there with having Mike no power to KO top tall HWs.. We all know that except Vitali who hadn't gone down the other tall HWs like Lennox and Wladimir have hit the canvas and against good punchers.. Mike's power was real and so was most HWs but he was effective with those early in in the fight, the later the fight went his stamina and power decreased.. Mike was washed up and dried twice before he faced Williams and Other average guys.. So say you have a short boxer who is a master at boxing short and is a master at closing the distance, vs a tall boxer who is a master at boxing tall and is a master at maintaining and creating distance, who do you think would be more likely to win? It's takes just as much skill and effort to box short as it takes to box tall. It takes just as much skill to close the distance against a taller opponent as it does to create and maintain long distance against a shorter opponent. Would you agree with this? Mike Tyson himself proved that he lacks the sufficient punching power in his fists to KO opponents of a specific size (especially weight combined with height). That was proven against Danny Williams and Kevin Mcbride. His most powerful, flush landed punches were practically bouncing off Danny William's face. He could barely even faze Danny Williams. Danny Williams was nearly walking through Mike Tyson's hardest punches with minimal effect. Take into consideration that Danny Williams and Kevin Mcbride were relatively unskilled heavyweights that were much heavier than Mike Tyson. Both of them were respectively a journey man and a bum. Boxers like the Klitschkos and Lennox Lewis are not just MUUUUCH heavier than Mike Tyson, they are also very skilled. This makes it impossible for Mike Tyson to even stand a chance. In other words, Mike Tyson has the same chance of beating a Klitschko as Roman Gonzalez has of beating GGG, which is none! Klitschkos or Lennox Lewis could literally stand right in front of Mike Tyson letting him land his hardest punches whilst blind folded and having their hands tied up, yet Tyson will still likely be unable to KO any of them. The best he could do is probably cause a bit of facial damage like causing some bleeding. Other than that, there is more chance of Mike Tyson injuring himself trying to knockout a Klitschko than actually knocking out a Klitschko. That's exactly what happened against Danny Williams. Mike Tyson ended up injuring his own, small, weak and fragile body trying to KO Danny William's much stronger and heavier body. Mike Tyson really wasn't much of a true heavyweight compared to either Lennox Lewis or the Klitschkos. Mike Tyson will likely get destroyed in mere seconds if the Klitschkos were really serious on intending harm. It's a gross mismatch as there is no humanly possible way for Mike Tyson to even come close to beating the Klitschkos if they're fully prepared.

What would average height before hw? 6,2 6,3? Plus I would not want a new set of heavyweight fighters fighting like wlad or Lewis lol

Andre ward

Agree fully with this, Mike wasn't really all that great, Define 'great'! Also 'great' relative to whom? Mike Tyson was easily the greatest heavyweight boxer compared to any other boxer that competed at heavyweight his own size (height, weight and reach). Was he great compared to other super heavyweights like Lennox Lewis or Wladimir Klitschko? No, but neither are any other boxer that are the same size as Mike Tyson. If a guy who is 5 foot 5 and only 150 pounds can lift more weights than any other person on Earth his own size, is it fair to claim that guy doesn't have 'great' strength only because there are guys MUCH bigger than him who can lift heavier weights? Of course not! The same applies to Mike Tyson. It's an unfair comparison to compare Mike Tyson's accomplishments and capabilities at heavyweight to much larger heavyweights who are more natural at the division. If you want to make a fair comparison, instead of making an absolute comparison, make a relative comparison in terms of size. How often did any of the other super heavyweights like Lennox Lewis and Wladimir Klitschko beat guys that were regularly over 3 inches taller than themselves and over 10 pounds heavier? Not as often as Mike Tyson. So relative to his size, Mike Tyson is better than Lennox Lewis or Wladimir Klitschko relative to their own size. he had power that put fear through the HW ranks, His power was grossly overrated. I doubt he hit much harder, if at all than guys like Evander Holyfield. It's his offensive skills that allowed him to get as many knockouts as he got. His power was discovered to be near useless and ineffective against certain opponents after they got to a specific weight. Mike Tyson had a dreadful KO% against opponents over 250 pounds, including bums. Mike Tyson had sufficient power to KO specific opponents without totally brutalizing them when they were of a specific weight. His offensive skills are what allowed him to consistently score knockouts. However, his offensive skills were irrelevant against opponents much heavier than himself as he lacked the sufficient power on his fists to KO such opponents, including bummy ones like Danny Williams. until a good boxer that didn't fear him beat him, Mike Tyson is a guy who is barely 5 foot 10 (in person), weighs just above 200 pounds (barely a natural heavyweight), has a 71 inch reach and people are going to tell me this undersized midget competing at heavyweight is going to strike fear upon guys who significantly outsize him by multiple inches in height and reach and multiple pounds in weight? If that's the case, what does that tell us about Mike Tyson (striking fear on MUCH larger men) and tell us about his opponents (being scared by a midget)? It's like a year 9 high school kid who is only 5 foot 5 and 150 pounds, putting fear upon other students at year 11 who are 6 feet tall and weigh over 30 pounds more. It's totally irrational! If anything, Mike Tyson should naturally feel more fear competing against guys much heavier than himself on a regular basis. Even if Mike Tyson did inflict fear upon his opponents, he shouldn't be discredited for it, instead be credited when taking into consideration that it's extremely rare for a smaller sized being to inflict that much fear upon much bigger entities. then Evander a former LH beat him, Evander Holyfield was an excellent boxer. However, Mike Tyson always had a chance at beating him. Things just didn't go to plan against him on the night. Lewis is too big, Ali too big too slick and too good of a chin, Klit is too big and tight boxing, Agree with everything except Muhammad Ali's qualities. Mike Tyson probably has 0% chance of beating either Lennox Lewis or the Klitschko's, not even a punchers chance. They could literally stand there in front of Mike Tyson blind folded, with both arms tied behind their back with Mike Tyson landing his hardest punches flush on their chin multiple times and Tyson would likely still fail to KO men that are that much bigger than himself. He simply could not generate the power required with his relatively much more fragile, smaller and weaker body and hands / fists. That was proven when he fought Danny Williams and Kevin Mcbride, 2 guys who outsized and outweighed him by a HUGE margin. His hardest flush punches were barely even fazing the two. They appeared to be bouncing off their chins with minimal effect, almost to the point where both were nearly walking through Tyson's hardest punches. Taking into consideration those two opponents were heavy but bums and journeymen respectively, heavy + skilled guys like Lennox Lewis and the Klitschkos are boxers Mike Tyson has 0 chance against and probably doesn't even survive 30 seconds if they're serious. Muhammad Ali on the other, gets steam rolled by Mike Tyson just as Larry Holmes did. Muhammad Ali was by no means a modern super sized heavyweight. He was much smaller than the current breed of heavyweights and also isn't much better, if at all than modern cruiserweights like Oleksandr Usyk. Mikes biggest name win was Holmes who was shot to sht and Spinks who was a LH. Maybe, but beating Larry Holmes (especially in the manner he did) is probably greater / better than anything any other heavyweight boxer of Mike Tyson's size ever did. Mike was a public enigma more than a truly great fighter, Again, he 'TRULY' was a 'great fighter' relatively speaking for his size. In fact, he was the greatest boxer at heavyweight P4P and inch for inch relative to his size. However, his accomplishments (understandably) pales in comparison to much heavier + skillful guys like Wladimir Klitschko. he was dynamic and powerful that destroyed average HWs while the elite beat him, Which was still better than any other heavyweight boxer his own size. just like GGG is blasting through the MWs until he fought a big guy that could really fight, where as G won Mike lost, the same invincible bubble got burst. Shouldn't a boxer knockout every journeyman and bum and win decisively instead of going 12 rounds in a close fight? I really don't understand why you'd even mention that. It's not like only GGG and Mike Tyson were fighting average opponents and looking invincible. Most of the other top boxers have also been fighting poor to average quality of opposition. Difference is, only guys like GGG, Sergey Kovalev, Artur Beterbiev and the likes have looked invincible whereas boxers like Andre Ward haven't. When you have two top boxers who fight low to average quality of opposition and one looks invincible against such opposition by knocking them all out and the other doesn't by having to win every fight by close decision, the one who looked invincible is the better of the two 'top' boxers. This is why GGG is better than Andre Ward. This is why Sergey Kovalev is also better than Andre Ward. GGG may have been in a closer fight against a top quality opponent like Daniel Jacobs compared to his lower quality opponents in the past, but he still beat Daniel Jacobs more convincingly than most other boxers have beaten their best opponent.

So you're claiming no matter how good a short boxer is, they can never defeat modern day taller heavyweight boxers? In other words, being short is unsuitable for shorter boxers irrespective of how much skill they have? As for Mike Tyson, he was barely even a natural heavyweight. The guy was below 5 feet 10 (in real life when I saw him in person). In truth, Mike Tyson shouldn't survive even 30 seconds against giants and natural heavyweights like Lennox Lewis or the Klitschko brothers. Mike Tyson probably doesn't even have a 1% chance of beating Lennox Lewis or the Klitschko brothers, not even a punchers chance. Even if they had both their hands tied behind their back and let Mike Tyson hit them with his hardest punches flush on their chin multiple times, Mike Tyson may have still lacked the power and strength to KO such heavier + skilled boxers. Mike Tyson's power was exposed to be near useless against much heavier super heavyweights like Danny Williams, Kevin Mcbride and Brian Nielsen. Three of those guys were nearly walking through Mike Tyson's hardest flush punches. It's as if they weren't even bothered by those punches whilst making it seem like Mike Tyson was in a lower weight class throwing punches on heavier men from a higher weight class that were near ineffective. Not to mention, Mike Tyson injured himself from landing flush punches on Danny Willains where Danny Williams was barely effected but Mike Tyson injured his knees, just to add to the fragility and how weak Mike Tyson was against such heavier men. Truth is, Mike Tyson lacked the strength and power to KO opponents after they reached a specific weight. Mike Tyson was far too small over all, his body was far too fragile and weak, his hands were far too small to KO opponents that were of the weight and size of Lennox Lewis and the Klitschko brothers, possibly even if they stood there letting him land his hardest punches. First, a skilled short fighter can beat a non skilled tall fighter Valuev-Haye is a prime example and many of the tall guys that Tyson faced.. So, I'm not claiming a short guy can't beat a tall guy, all I am saying is if the tall guy stays out of range and knows how to negate the short guys offense then it's hard to get through.. And the modern day HWs are Goliath size compared to early 90s.. Second, you are reaching there with having Mike no power to KO top tall HWs.. We all know that except Vitali who hadn't gone down the other tall HWs like Lennox and Wladimir have hit the canvas and against good punchers.. Mike's power was real and so was most HWs but he was effective with those early in in the fight, the later the fight went his stamina and power decreased.. Mike was washed up and dried twice before he faced Williams and Other average guys..

Don king wasn't mikes true downfall mike caused his own downfall read his autobiography he was just a reckless person outside of the ring

You also have to bear in mind that in today's clinch happy environment shorter boxers face even more disadvantages. Povetkin might have had a chance against Wlad if he'd been allowed to fight on the inside every time he got close instead of being frontal dry humped. That was never a problem for shorter fighters in the past since refs were much stricter on that kind of thing.

As has been mentioned earlier in this thread a small heavyweight has to be exceptional to overcome the physical and stylistic disadvantages he'd face against naturally bigger men. That generally translated to being faster, more explosive, at least as physically resilient to punishment as the bigger men if not more so, and more vicious in going about getting the knockout, since it's hard to maintain a high energy style for more than a few rounds. This type of fighting is not really suited to longevity since it burns your body out and relies on physical capabilities that tend to erode when you get into your thirties. A taller fighter in comparison can afford to fight in a more cerebral and laid back manner since he has a lot more tools at his disposal that can allow him to fight in a less risky manner. This allows them to take less punishment over the course of a career (if they're smart) and to capitalise on their physicality long after they've peaked. A smaller fighter can still reach the pinnacle of the sport and become the undisputed best in the world, but I have a hard time envisioning them staying there for long. Too much physicality needed, too much wear and tear.

There is an old saying " All things being equal a good big man will always beat a good little man" What that is saying is its not just the size its the ability that goes with it, a great little guy will beat a not so great big guy, but when all things are equal the big man will win.