prime ali vs prime tyson

[cassiusthegreat]

never mind LondonRingRules he's a bitter old **** who ******s small children

as for ali vs tyson pfft who cares it's been done to death and most of the ****s who try to break down dream fights opinions don't mean **** because they have never stepped in the ring them selves

pick apart a fight all you want it doesn't mean **** anyone of them could win


oh and again LondonRingRules please die

[sleazyfellow]

This is what I have to say to the poster above.

You'll eat his ******* alive?

[them_apples]

No he wasn't. Tyson didn't like to fight on the inside and would tie his man up when he got there. Tyson preffered to fight at mid-range where he could get maximum leverage into his punches. If you have really watched Tyson you would know that.


Poet

thats a common misconception that people seem to think Tyson was an inside fighter, speaking of video games even EA sports seems to treat Tyson as an inside fighter. Truth is, he absolutely did nothing on the inside when he got there, it's almost as if his trainers never told him what to do.

Really, Tyson was a mid range fighter that would slip under his opponent's punches and counter them while they were throwing - or about to throw a punch (this is what would probably make his knockout's look so spectacular, and got him his fanbase)

I think he automatically gets the label of an inside fighter because he's short and stocky. Same thing goes how people compare his style to Frazier (which I have done) when really they are quite different.

Really, according to the boxing textbook, Tyson is a counter puncher - just it happens so fast and he's always coming forward, so it doesn't appear that way. Slipping under a punch and countering with a hook is a counter though non the less - watching his fights that's what he liked to do.

[StarshipTrooper]

thats a common misconception that people seem to think Tyson was an inside fighter, speaking of video games even EA sports seems to treat Tyson as an inside fighter. Truth is, he absolutely did nothing on the inside when he got there, it's almost as if his trainers never told him what to do.

Really, Tyson was a mid range fighter that would slip under his opponent's punches and counter them while they were throwing - or about to throw a punch (this is what would probably make his knockout's look so spectacular, and got him his fanbase)

I think he automatically gets the label of an inside fighter because he's short and stocky. Same thing goes how people compare his style to Frazier (which I have done) when really they are quite different.

Really, according to the boxing textbook, Tyson is a counter puncher - just it happens so fast and he's always coming forward, so it doesn't appear that way. Slipping under a punch and countering with a hook is a counter though non the less - watching his fights that's what he liked to do.

Bingo!

That's it really. At first glance you look at Tyson and think "short, stocky short-armed fighter = inside fighter". First glances can be decieving though. That's why I always asked if some one has really WATCHED him fight: I mean, put away the fan mind, stop getting entertained, and just watched the fights like you're a scientist over a microsope. What you're likely to see then can be quite different than what you see as a fan.

Poet

[StarshipTrooper]

You'll eat his ******* alive?

Poet

[warp1432]

I'd pick Ali over a good distance, with Tyson being competitive early on.

Off topic though, Am I the only one had Liston-Ali 1 pretty close through 6. I think it was either 57-57 or 58-56 for Ali. It was by no means a blowout like the second fight or how it is described. Ali lands some great shots, but Liston has some effect with his pressure.

[La_Vibora]

This is a tough call. On one hand I could see Ali winning a decision, then again I could see Tyson winning as well. I could see Ali outboxing any fighter that ever lived, however, even he admitted that he has the most trouble with the Frazier/Marciano/Dempsey type fighters that fight out of the crouch. At the same time, there are too many questions to ask, for instance how many rounds is the fight? If it is 15 then I would probably lean towards Ali winning a decision, if it is only a 12 or even 10 rounder then I would lean to Tyson. Also, is Cus still alive when this fight takes place? The reason I ask is because Cus really seemed to know Ali's style, in fact he was trying to talk Jose Torres into moving up to heavyweight to fight Ali. I am not sure how much stock you want to put into this clip starting at 1:10, but Cus had an idea of how to defeat Ali:



Regardless, I would have love to have seen the fight, but I think Tyson would have given Ali fits, since stylistically he is a bad matchup for the Greatest.

[res]

[QUOTE=La_Vibora;4697554]
If it is 15 then I would probably lean towards Ali winning a decision, if it is only a 12 or even 10 rounder then I would lean to Tyson.




So you think Tyson could win a decision?

[TheCheetah]

If it's 15 Rounds Ali all day

If 10 Tyson has a chance

[LondonRingRules]

never mind LondonRingRules he's a bitter old **** who ******s small children

** Nonsense!

Youre nicely endowed young twin sister told me I was sweet BEFORE your hormone therapy after the operation we begged you not to have.

Most Ali fans will admit he should have at least a couple more losses on his record, so it's the height of inanity to think that he could just walk through any great at any point in his career when he struggled against a wide variety of fighters more so than Tyson.

You chaps have actually damned Ali to defeat by making him the overwhelming favorite in fights he was too often quite lethargic and could be upset. Ali made his chops by overcoming huge odds as the underdog in Liston and Foreman fights. The reason oddsmakers made him the massive underdog was because of those established weaknesses in the ring that led to 5 official defeats and all those struggles.

Tyson was always the overwhelming favorite up to the Lewis fight where he finally slips below even. At the lowest ebb of Tyson's career, his talent and ferocity was such that talented fighters like Doublas and Holyfield were made big underdogs. There was never a bigger monster that was gonna smash Tyson like a bug or even hold him close like a Frazier. Tyson was The MONSTER!

So you dears have created a dilemma in your rush to ignorance. You've made Ali the odds MONSTER against your self described "prime" Tyson who, by your definition had to have been the undefeated best trained fighter in the history of the sport teamed up with his HOF team.

"Prime" Ali has no such history of dismantling a fighter of that caliber any more than Tyson has a history of going into fights being the overwhelming underdog.

Facts are that the public will close those odds by taking the sweet upset odds more than they will risk losing their principle bet for a pittance against Tyson. Given that you chaps lack the savvy understanding of the game that charactorizes the oddmakers, gonna be a mad rush to claim the sweet odds, bankrupting you dears a week before the fight, so it won't matter who wins in your world as you'll be out of biz and out of the loop of the real world.