Tyson vs Lewis Primes

[them_apples]

The only problem with that is Tyson was never a consistant body puncher even when he was with Rooney. He certainly had the potential to be a superior one but potential has to be turned to the actual for it to matter. Tyson's instinct was always to go for the head: He would frequently start with some good body punches but never kept it up. He couldn't resist the urge to headhunt and this is true of Tyson throughout his Rooney prime.

Poet

Also the fact that Holyfield was smothering him, it was very hard to land body shots when Holyfield was slipping in uppercuts. Bad as it sounds, Mike would have the best luck if he actually backed up a bit and got in his comfort range.

since Mike never backed up in his prime either, I find it very hard to pick him over Holyfield.

[Mugwump]

lol who did Hamed beat? Kevin Kelly?

Who did Tyson beat - Trevor Berbick? Spinks? lol

[them_apples]

Who did Tyson beat - Trevor Berbick? Spinks? lol

why do you discredit Spinks? you act like he was a nobody. Spinks was worlds apart from Kevin Kelly.

[Dave Rado]

why do you discredit Spinks? you act like he was a nobody. Spinks was worlds apart from Kevin Kelly.

As was a past his prime but far from shot Holmes.

And whereas Tyson would have beaten Douglas 9 times out of 10, Hamed would never have beaten Barrera.

Barrera is comparable in quality with Holyfield though, but Tyson was a shell of the boxer-puncher he once was by the time that fight happened - although I agree with others that a prime Holyfield would probably have beaten even a prime Tyson. Even that isn't a slam dunk, though, IMO.

Having said all that, training and motivational issues did play a big part in the severity of Hamed's decline, just as they did in Tyson's. And Hamed's ability is under-rated by some (and over-rated by others), IMO - he had a lot of talent.

One thing that really bugs me, though, about a lot of tabloid British ATG lists is that they rate Hamed higher than people like Jimmy Wilde, Ted Lewis, Bob Fitzsimmonds, and Ken Buchanan, all of whom were a lot better. Serious lack of historical perspective, there.

[Silencers]

I think it's a bad stylistic fight for Tyson, Lewis' height, reach, jab and uppercut would have given Tyson a lot of trouble.

[Abstraction]

A Prime Tyson would be too quick for Lewis imo.

IMO, Tyson would sooner or later get passed his jab.

[Mersey]

Lewis would win.

Why?

I'm British and Lewis is in my avatar.

But I'm not biased.

[pcr405]

Lewis would win, hes bigger better stamina can ko tyson easy better jab.

[Axl Rose]

people are arguing that Tyson had problem with taller fighters( Mitch Green,Bonecrusher smith, Tillis, Douglas, Ribalta,Tucker etc)

the fact is that none of these fighters was even near to hurt Tyson, he took one uppercut from Tucker in the first round but that was it. He was never shaken or cut in any of these fights. Smith, Tucker and Green was running and holding. Remember that Green is a fighter who has never been klnocked down in hes career.

Just think about Lewis who struggeled so hard against Mercer, Bruno, Holyfield(especially in the rematch) Tucker, McCall and Rahman. Those gouys were all landi9ng punches against him...and Tyson was by fare a much heavier puncher then all those fighters.

Tyson in hes prime was a fighter that could throw 5-6-7 punches in a row. After he came out of prison you never saw that again. i think that is a key factor.

Tyson by KO

[Dave Rado]

Lewis beat every opponent he ever faced professionally.




Ottke did not KO Mike Tyson, and Ottke was never undisputed.

My point in mentioning Ottke was that your implication that Lewis would have won simply because he beat every opponent he faced is way too simplistic. You can make a case that Lewis would have won, but the reason you gave isn't valid. And his KO over that version of Tyson, who Danny Williams and Kevin McBride also knocked out, was not one of his best or most meaningful wins.