Tyson vs Lewis Primes

[Benny Leonard]

prime lewis would beat prime tyson i know its very hard 2 accept for some of you on here cuz lewis is british and tyson is a yank i know its hard 2 come to terms with

Maybe for some but not me. And I wonder how many Brits are doing the same.

I picked option 3 because I could see it going either way depending on how things play out.

[Benny Leonard]

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.

Well when you are a not a boxer/fighter anymore, you will give a bad performance.

Tyson was accustomed to throwing one shot at a time at that point; didn't have good stamina; no game-plan; no jab; etc.
He was inclined to clinch at this point more then ever. Tyson's short arms shouldn't be a problem when someone smothers him (if trained).
He had no strategy in that fight other than take Holyfield's head off.
And the Jab gets you your range.

[Benny Leonard]

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

That's true. In some of his fights like the Thomas fight and Smith fight Tyson was a head-hunter. But there were other fights where Tyson did concentrate on the body. It really depended on what Rooney allowed him to get away with. With the Thomas fight it did seem that the game-plan was to take Thomas out early and he almost did in that first round...so the going for the head was very tempting.

My point with body-shots is that Tyson did have a good body attack. And at least I think, if Tyson did hit Holyfield to the body and hurt him even slightly, Rooney would have picked up on it and told Mike to **** away. And anything that seemed to work, Mike would follow suit.




And what weight are we putting Holyfield at because he was huge by the time Tyson got him.

[LEFTYGUNZZ]

The Tyson that knocked out Spinks crushes any version of Lennox Lewis.

The Tyson before Robin Givens and Don king got involved the Tyson that used movement and could actually slip the jab and bounce to an angle and nail you. That Tyson wins easily over lewis between the fear factor he possesed prior to his losses to Douglas and Holyfield and the pure speed and power. Many forget the first two rounds in their actual fight weren't that easy for lewis. Tyson actually hurt him in the first round. It was only after the jab found a home and Tyson was very predictable with his head movement avoiding the jab by leaning to his left and right into Lennox uppercut.

A Tyson in his hayday 1986-1989 would have rolled over Lewis and anyone else you put in front of him. To say Lewis was too big for Tyson is foolish if you look at pretty much all of his opponents they wre all bigger then mike. At 5'11" in the Heavy Weight Division you are almost always at a disadvantage in height and reach. Razor Ruddock and Frank Bruno were both around the same size as Lewis and tyson took care of business pretty easily. he man handled Andrew Golatta as well.

I think even the Tyson that fought Holyfield the first time would have beaten Lewis. To me Lewis was a great Champ very underated and under appreciated in his time. He had a great jab and powerful uppercut. His chin was suspect although in the fight he had with Vitali he showed some grit getting hit with some pretty big punches and firing back on Vitali. To me Lewis fought Tyson at the prime time when Tyson had pretty much lost all interest in boxing and fought primarily for money. he was misguided in life and in the ring. On that night Lewis proved he was better. Prime for Prime Tyson would have Ko'd him inside of 3 rounds....Lefty

[God's messenger]

What a joke this thread is, prime Tyson would beat any other prime fighter. He was a monster.

[LEFTYGUNZZ]

Kelly wasn't beaten before he entered the ring. Spinks put up a shambolic performance. In the end you could sense he wasn't too bothered about being beaten because consciously or subconsciously he'd already accepted it.

I mean, Larry Holmes put up a bit of a performance. Probably because he was experienced enough and smart enough to see through the Tyson hype machine. Unfortunately he no longer possessed the tools to finish the job. Prime Holmes would have put Mike to sleep.

Nah probably not Tyson don't get enough credit for his chin. He has a good beard Lewis pounded the man for 8 rounds with jabs caught him coming in with big right hands and leaning into the uppercut before Mike finally fell down for good. Holyfield TKO him by the reff jumping in Tyson didn't end the fight on the canvas. I don't even count the fights after the Lewis fight because they were more like specacles then fights....Lefty

I don't know about putting Tyson to sleep but I believe a prime Holmes wins a comfortable decision.

Poet

This is very possible but I still think we should give Tyson credit for being the only one to ever put Holmes to sleep. Check the records but I think Larry won some 20-25 fights after he lost that fight to Tyson. So to say he was completely past it is nonsense....Lefty

[LEFTYGUNZZ]

What a joke this thread is, prime Tyson would beat any other prime fighter. He was a monster.

Tyson 1986-1989 KO's Lewis any version of Lewis.....Tyson was a machine until he got a taste of drugs and women....Lefty

[them_apples]

Teddy Atlas may not be the best person to ask for predictions because he loves to pick the underdog, but I remember hearing him discuss the Holmes fight on Ringside-Tyson, and maybe I'm reading to much into it, but it seemed Teddy thought it wouldn't have mattered if Holmes was in his prime or not and he based it off of what Cus said and style matchups.

Holmes wasn't shot enough to suffer a KO in 4 rounds. He wasn't showing signs of being shot. Losing close decisions to Spinks doesn't mean you are shot. He proved it after he came back and beat Mercer, as well as going the distance with Holyfield in a competitive fight. Rediculous to say Holmes was "shot". He had seen better days of course, but his age is getting exaggerated greatly.

If he was knocked out by Spinks prior, and suffered another KO right after losing to Tyson, then he would have been shot.

so disappointing that I have to look like a huge Tyson nuthugger just because everyone is discrediting all of Tysons wins. Most of you are just "assuming". Lewis has a joke of a Career himself if we go into detail.


Holmes and Spinks were both perfect opponent's for mike to look good beating up IMO. Holmes had Ali's syndrome and never kept his hands up his entire career. This is why Shavers caught him, and why Mike knocked him out.

[Mugwump]

Hamed isn't anywhere near Mike Tysons status. I don't even think Hamed made the HOF.

You're saying this, but how do you back it up? There are striking similarities between Hamed and Tyson. As stated previously - both arrived on the scene young, both blew their divisions apart - in spectacular fashion - and unified. Are you claiming that Tyson beat a better standard of opponent than Hamed whilst undefeated? I can't see how anyone could agree with that. The main difference between Hamed & Tyson is that Tyson's first defeat was at the hands of a second-rate fighter and he was left horizontal. Hamed's first defeat was at the hands of a HOF legend - and he stayed on his feet. The argument that Tyson was on some kind of mental downslope at the time therefore you shouldn't hold his performance against him doesn't wash because Hamed's head was in a thousand pieces before the Barrera fight (he didn't train a jot!). Afterward both fighters were shot. Perhaps Tyson gets an extra point for making a comeback, but it was as a mediocre fighter (certainly not worthy of the gushing praise that exists on NSB) who's only weapon was his name. I mean, you can't claim his victory over Bruno was a feat of boxing excellence - Bruno was terrified of him and didn't throw a punch in anger!

I'm sorry, but if Tyson is up there with the boxing greats then Hamed must also be. I can't think of any argument to include the former and exclude the latter that doesn't reek of double-standards.

[lennon]

Lewis also got knocked out twice in his "prime".

Wow, Lewis had a long prime then in your opinion, thats 7 years! If he had a 7 yr prime he is surely the greatest, i mean people like you also have Tyson at a 1 or 2 year prime, excuses excuses for his loss to Buster because hey, by then he was past his prime lol, otherwise he would be invinsible! lol. Holyfield probably had a ten minute prime since he has every excuse in the book, being small, having a cold, having a heart attack, having too many wars, having a sore shoulder, being old [for the last 20 years lol] all excuses for him not to be in his prime at every lossbut according to you, Lewis was always in his prime, especially when he lost !!!!! 7 years apart!!!!