Prime Tyson could have been the best ever??

[The Iron Man]

Well couldb be a case of chinese whispers with the knocking out the ring thing!

[tmoqsudz]

Well couldb be a case of chinese whispers with the knocking out the ring thing!

Naa that aint a case of chinese whispers, ive seen it on youtube and a documentary, he knocked him out of the ring in the first round.

[Poet682006]

You need to remember Tyson peaked much earlier than Lennox did. While Tyson was wearing a title belt Lennox was still in the amatuers.

Poet

[them_apples]

Ali would beat him the way Douglas did but would also get into his head at the same time.
Cus told Tyson many times never to fight someone like Foreman, because he couldn't win.
Louis stop Tyson with a powerful barrage unless he gets caught more than a few times.

Ali would get into his head for sure, but beating him the same way Douglas beat him sounds pretty far fetched, I don't think Ali could touch Tyson during his power years (years that he trained hard, and partied less w/o don king and prison)

Holmes had one of the best jabs boxing has ever seen, and him although 38 years of age was still game enough seeing he almost became undisputed champion again, but Tyson stopped him.

Tyson did extremely well against "jabbers" during his reign, he started getting hit way more the less he trained. However if you watch his fights that he has whilst making his way up to the belt (85-88) he has excellent defense and avoids the jab quite well.

Foreman is tough, so this fight could go both ways, but Tyson has speed and endurance, Foreman has neither. Foreman destroyed Frazier, but Frazier was slow as hell and packed less power than mike. However, This fight still could go 50/50.

Joe Louis was no doubt one of the many ATG's of his era, however, I can't see Louis standing a chance against Tyson, even an old one. Louis is to slow, has no footwork and his style is very old fashioned. All IMO of course. I really highly doubt Louis could even go one round with a technically and physically superior fighter. Louis fought guys like Marciano, and what did everyone in Louis's era have in common? lack of speed thats what.

Once again, no disrespect for for the ATG's

[Jim Jeffries]

He took down a Holmes( in his 30's) I can't see why he couldn't take down Ali in his 30's(the one that beat Foreman) who was already showing signs of Parkinson's. If Ali tried a rope-a-dope I could see him going down very..VERY fast to a fighter like Tyson.

Comparing the fat, slow, 38 year old version of Holmes that fought Tyson to the Ali that fought the fight of his life to beat Foreman is pretty comical. I'm a little sick of hearing excuses for Tyson against Douglas (a 42 to 1 underdog against the extremely overrated at the time Tyson,) Holyfield (who owned him in both fights,) Lewis (who wasn't much younger than Tyson at the time he demolished him,) etc. Pounding a few tomatoe cans and geriatrics (like "bonecrusher" Smith) when he was younger does not qualify him for any top 10 list.

[The Iron Man]

If course there are reasons why tyson lost to douglas. If he fought him 10 times before all the **** that happend he would of won every single time. He caught tyson at almost the worst time in his career, Bruno could of beaten tyson but he style was all wrong as you all know power is the last thing to go. Age is not a massive factor in a fighters prime. As we said earlier tyson outclassed lewis wen they spared as youngsters, and tyson peaked at a much younger age. And due to managers die/getting sackd/don king/robin givens. He slowly diminished, were as the opposite happend for Lewis..new trainer etc. How could he have been over rated at that time? and how does he not qualify for the top 10? Youngest Ever Champ-Undisputed Champ-2 time champ-first to combine 3 different belts-Lineal Champ-37 fights unbeaten-4yr reign-One of the fastest and Mos devistating Punchers.

[them_apples]

Comparing the fat, slow, 38 year old version of Holmes that fought Tyson to the Ali that fought the fight of his life to beat Foreman is pretty comical. I'm a little sick of hearing excuses for Tyson against Douglas (a 42 to 1 underdog against the extremely overrated at the time Tyson,) Holyfield (who owned him in both fights,) Lewis (who wasn't much younger than Tyson at the time he demolished him,) etc. Pounding a few tomatoe cans and geriatrics (like "bonecrusher" Smith) when he was younger does not qualify him for any top 10 list.

speaking of comical, calling Holmes at 38 slow is pretty ******, Holmes beat some big names in his comeback, thats living evidence that he did NOT suck at 38.

Lewis, got his ass beat during their young days, Lewis has said himself in documentaries that Tyson scared the **** out of him, Tyson wore no head gear whilst Lewis did, and Lewis still would get cut up and beaten.

AND, ali at 35 was showing signs of parkinsons, He used thinking to defeat Foreman, not physical attributes, so yes a 38 year old Holmes was in better shape than a 34-35 year old Ali. If you knew anything about The Tyson douglas fight you would know they are not excuses but the raw truth.

Thats just as lame as saying Berbick was better than Ali because he beat him.

[Hawkins]

Let me start off by saying I love Mike Tyson. Sentimentally,one of my all-time favorite fighters but I have trouble with him being mentioned in the breath of the some of the divisions all time greats.

Skill-wise Tyson had some of the most complete skills of any heavyweight in history. The handspeed, combination punching, defense, power plus add in that awesome intimidation factor and he was the total package. I don't know if there is any heavyweight in history with those kind of tools at their disposal so in that aspect I can agree he had the potential to be the sports pound-for-pound greatest of all time.

However, I think when judging his body of work against the all-time greats is where the problem comes in. He has one win against a great fighter (Spinks), he has two wins against one decent heavyweight (Ruddock) and two brutal beatings against a very skilled, but lazy fighter (Douglas) and an all-time great (Holyfield). Then you look at the rest of the competition he faced, and see how absolutely weak the division was in the 80's and realize its nigh on impossible to compare him evenly with other legendary heavyweights.

Is it Tyson's fault that he was in one of the weakest decades in the division's history? Of course not. But you would also expect that if he was the fighter that everyone claimed he wouldn't have gotten slapped around as badly as he did against Douglas and Holyfield.

People argue that he wasn't in his physical prime when he fought Douglas and I disagree. I don't think his physical prime really started a decline until after the second Holyfield fight. Up to that point his biggest weakness was discipline. Once he left the folds of everything Cus built around him he ceased to be anything remotely like the fighter he was. The defense and combinations were largely gone. The training discipline out the window. He was reduced to being nothing more than a headhunter. There were brief flashes of the old Tyson at times over the years but never enough to warrant a belief that he would ever be anything like he was.

Tyson's biggest enemy was listening to the people in his life he were only looking out for themselves. Robin Givens & Don King. He elected to split with Rooney & Co. in order to get the fast, big money with Don King and he paid the price. Where Rooney kept Mike disciplined, King surrounded him yes men and allowed him to do what he wanted. If King actually gave a damn he would have made sure Mike had a better training group than Rory Holloway, John Horn and that other moron who served as a trainer. I mean damn, they didnt even know enough to bring and endswell and ice and were reduced to using a rubber glove filled with ice water. What does that tell you about the people Mike surrounded himself with?

Anyways, it's possible Tyson could have been the best to ever lace up the gloves given his original skillset but we'll never really know because he doesn't have the resume to make comparisons. Having said that I think the Tokyo version of Douglas and Holyfield possessed all that needed to be had to defeat Tyson at anytime period. Granted, a Rooney trained Tyson would have faired much better against both but a talented fighter that didn't fear Tyson and took the fight directly to him was the ultimate key to beating Mike at any point in his career.

That's just my opinion tho'.


Hawk.

[lyrical]

Prime Tyson is the best fighter ever. Tyson who beat Spinks would have beaten ANY fighter of any era

[Hawkins]

Prime Tyson is the best fighter ever. Tyson who beat Spinks would have beaten ANY fighter of any era

Are you implying that Michael Spinks was as good as any heavyweight in history?