whos style is more entertaining to watch tyson or ali.

[butterfly1964]

without train yeah. i've been outta shape for some months. but if i get in shape i can get down to the 140 probably.but i have alot of mass as u see in some of my avatar pictures

what other sports you like?

[leff]

you never fought ali.

you perfectly understood what i meant.

[M26]

I think both styles are very entertaining to watch. But for me it's always more entertaining to watch the ko artists, such as Tyson. With speed, explosiveness and raw power, he came charging after his foes with the intention to maul. Now THAT'S entertainment!

Watching Muhammad Ali is more like watching an artist performing some kind of beautiful dance. It is awesome and fascinating, and I love it, but in terms of pure entertainment, I give the nod to Tyson and his style.

[Brassangel]

That's your reply to my lengthy post? "Ali wasn't concerned with Doug Jones..." That's it, huh. Well, then that shows a lack of concentration, or an excuse rather, for Ali when his arrogance caught him off guard. Granted, when he got his stuff together, he pulled off the fight against a vastly inferior opponent. And you can't pass all of this "phantom" or "shadow" knockdown garbage to defend the fact that he just got smacked. It's possible for any fighter to get knocked down cleanly, and he did. Patterson and Liston were well beyond their years when they fought the prime Ali. They didn't have the body movement, foot speed, hand speed, or explosiveness that Mike Tyson had, even in their primes. Ali never took on a fighter that remotely resembled the damage Tyson could do to a dancer, except maybe Frazier when he was likely beyond his years as well. Ali was still the faster fighter than Frazier, but Joe marked him up pretty bad in all three fights. As both were past their primes by the time they met, it's safe to assume from an analysts standpoint that their prime fights wouldn't have been much different.

By the way, are you 17-18 years old? That hardly makes you the "check-in" guy when it comes to Ali. Anybody who has fought like Ali since his time, or anybody who has tried his style out who visits this forum doesn't have to answer to you to make sure that they got it right. Ali's style is far easier to grasp for the average person than Tyson's is. The natural inclination of anyone in the ring is to move clockwise, like dancing in a ballroom; and it's more instinctive to rear your head away from a punch instead of attempting to counter or move side-to-side. Ali got away with it because a.) he was fast, but not of inhuman speed; and b.) he was taller than almost every opponent he faced which meant that his opponents had to punch upwards, taking away from their own reach. Since he hardly fought guys who could cut off the ring (and when he did, he got hit mind you), this was an important factor in tiring out weaker opponents.

Ali's style doesn't take hardly any energy to use, which is why he used it to tire out his opponents. Mike's style was very tiring and risky, and he still clobbered people with it. Often times he would have to go into later rounds, and he'd still be firing cannonballs as though it was the first round.

Again, while Ali was fast, he's still human. He wasn't so fast that no one could hit him, because he got hit. That's okay to admit, because Ali is human. Tyson was incredibly faster than any volume power puncher before him. Not just his hands, his feet and body movement were often what caught people standing still. It's not because they were bums; in fact, the average fighter in the 80's was faster than the average fighter in the 60's and 70's, but they didn't expect this short, stocky man with fists of dynamite to cover half of the ring in a split second. Even when they were ready for it, he still found a way to trap people. Getting cornered wasn't one of Ali's strengths in the 60's, because he hoped to just lean out of the way or dance to the left to avoid a shot. Mike's small, leveraged arms also gave him the advantage of being able to sneak shots into places where other fighters couldn't. It was more difficult to gauge where Mike's shots were going to come from as opposed to a guy like Liston, who had a gigantic reach (mostly nullified due to Ali's height), which caused many of his punches to be telegraphed. Anyone who has written about fighting against Liston will attest to this.

Height was a big deal for Tyson to overcome when he was priming, as he gave up inches to nearly everyone. Even so, he pulled it off better than anyone before him, and he did so impressively. A lot of this can be credited to his speed. He could cut off the ring against anyone human, which would include Ali. ***Again, I believe Ali would beat Mike 2/3 times, but still, for arguments' sake, it's best to be neutral and approach from both sides of the plate***

While Ali was the fastest of his day, there may have been several fighters who could have nullified even The Greatest's speed with their own in the 80's. Ali was the fastest fighter up to that point; but even Roy Jones Jr. at heavyweight, and well beyond his prime has clocked faster hand speed than Ali did in the 60's. While Ali's style was energy conserving, giving him more of an advantage as the fight went on, that doesn't mean that he was actually faster than any other heavyweight who ever stepped into the ring. Perception is everything, and controlling a fight the way Ali did proved that he not only had considerable speed, but it looked as though he had more speed than was actually present. This is just science.

Mike's style, however, required him to overcome far more than Ali's did. Combined with his own speed, which people hadn't seen since the likes of Ali, and his explosiveness, we effectively had the most exciting fighter to watch in the history of the sport. Which is of course, what this thread is all about: excitement.

[Verstyle]

what other sports you like?

i used to do high school wrestling for 2years and track for 7years. and I loved playin football but I really never played in school

[M26]

That's your reply to my lengthy post? "Ali wasn't concerned with Doug Jones..." That's it, huh. Well, then that shows a lack of concentration, or an excuse rather, for Ali when his arrogance caught him off guard. Granted, when he got his stuff together, he pulled off the fight against a vastly inferior opponent. And you can't pass all of this "phantom" or "shadow" knockdown garbage to defend the fact that he just got smacked. It's possible for any fighter to get knocked down cleanly, and he did. Patterson and Liston were well beyond their years when they fought the prime Ali. They didn't have the body movement, foot speed, hand speed, or explosiveness that Mike Tyson had, even in their primes. Ali never took on a fighter that remotely resembled the damage Tyson could do to a dancer, except maybe Frazier when he was likely beyond his years as well. Ali was still the faster fighter than Frazier, but Joe marked him up pretty bad in all three fights. As both were past their primes by the time they met, it's safe to assume from an analysts standpoint that their prime fights wouldn't have been much different.

By the way, are you 17-18 years old? That hardly makes you the "check-in" guy when it comes to Ali. Anybody who has fought like Ali since his time, or anybody who has tried his style out who visits this forum doesn't have to answer to you to make sure that they got it right. Ali's style is far easier to grasp for the average person than Tyson's is. The natural inclination of anyone in the ring is to move clockwise, like dancing in a ballroom; and it's more instinctive to rear your head away from a punch instead of attempting to counter or move side-to-side. Ali got away with it because a.) he was fast, but not of inhuman speed; and b.) he was taller than almost every opponent he faced which meant that his opponents had to punch upwards, taking away from their own reach. Since he hardly fought guys who could cut off the ring (and when he did, he got hit mind you), this was an important factor in tiring out weaker opponents.

Ali's style doesn't take hardly any energy to use, which is why he used it to tire out his opponents. Mike's style was very tiring and risky, and he still clobbered people with it. Often times he would have to go into later rounds, and he'd still be firing cannonballs as though it was the first round.

Again, while Ali was fast, he's still human. He wasn't so fast that no one could hit him, because he got hit. That's okay to admit, because Ali is human. Tyson was incredibly faster than any volume power puncher before him. Not just his hands, his feet and body movement were often what caught people standing still. It's not because they were bums; in fact, the average fighter in the 80's was faster than the average fighter in the 60's and 70's, but they didn't expect this short, stocky man with fists of dynamite to cover half of the ring in a split second. Even when they were ready for it, he still found a way to trap people. Getting cornered wasn't one of Ali's strengths in the 60's, because he hoped to just lean out of the way or dance to the left to avoid a shot. Mike's small, leveraged arms also gave him the advantage of being able to sneak shots into places where other fighters couldn't. It was more difficult to gauge where Mike's shots were going to come from as opposed to a guy like Liston, who had a gigantic reach (mostly nullified due to Ali's height), which caused many of his punches to be telegraphed. Anyone who has written about fighting against Liston will attest to this.

Height was a big deal for Tyson to overcome when he was priming, as he gave up inches to nearly everyone. Even so, he pulled it off better than anyone before him, and he did so impressively. A lot of this can be credited to his speed. He could cut off the ring against anyone human, which would include Ali. ***Again, I believe Ali would beat Mike 2/3 times, but still, for arguments' sake, it's best to be neutral and approach from both sides of the plate***

While Ali was the fastest of his day, there may have been several fighters who could have nullified even The Greatest's speed with their own in the 80's. Ali was the fastest fighter up to that point; but even Roy Jones Jr. at heavyweight, and well beyond his prime has clocked faster hand speed than Ali did in the 60's. While Ali's style was energy conserving, giving him more of an advantage as the fight went on, that doesn't mean that he was actually faster than any other heavyweight who ever stepped into the ring. Perception is everything, and controlling a fight the way Ali did proved that he not only had considerable speed, but it looked as though he had more speed than was actually present. This is just science.

Mike's style, however, required him to overcome far more than Ali's did. Combined with his own speed, which people hadn't seen since the likes of Ali, and his explosiveness, we effectively had the most exciting fighter to watch in the history of the sport. Which is of course, what this thread is all about: excitement.

A very good post!

How ever, I have to point out that Joe Frazier definitely was in his prime when he fought Muhammad Ali the first time. This was his "prime fight". He was probably never better than he was in this fight.

Further, Mike Tyson lost much of his explosiveness beyond round 5. He could still knock you cold, but not like "it was the first round".

This is not to take anything away from your arguments though.

[Verstyle]

A very good post!

How ever, I have to point out that Joe Frazier definitely was in his prime when he fought Muhammad Ali the first time. This was his "prime fight". He was probably never better than he was in this fight.

Further, Mike Tyson lost much of his explosiveness beyond round 5. He could still knock you cold, but not like "it was the first round".

This is not to take anything away from your arguments though.

actually if u watch the tony tucker fight he stays the same the whole fight. Thats why its my favorite of all timee cause he really doesnt tire

[Southpaw Stinger]

Ali in his prime was really entertaining. Tyson was entertaining in a different way so I like em both. I like Ali better though!

[blockhead]

tyson was boring when he was good because he won too fast. the only fight that was exciting that i saw tyson fight was against douglas. so ali.

[supaduck]

I disagree, it was entertaining to watch him dispose of his opponents quickly (i.e spinks), it made him ****ing seem so awesome that nobody could beat him... Until he slipped up and went downhill.

Ali was a much more exciting fighter overall. But i'd have to say I enjoy watching Tyson more. He was ****ing like a mighty midget (compared to his 6'3 foes).