Who was the most dominant fighter in their prime: Tyson, Jones or Pacquiao ?

[Stoppage]

You don't think that had anything to do with Douglas' unwillingness to lose? His constant jab in Mikes face? His determination, grit, hunger, and motivation to win at absolutely any cost?

It most certainly did.

Mike Tyson, unbeaten, in no wars... at 23 years old... was absolutely prime when he got knocked out... because he executed a wrong game plan, or didn't use all the tools in his arsenal has nothing to do with it.

You seem to not be reading my posts carefully.

I said that starting after the Spinks fight, he seemed to be decreasing in his overall boxing ability. Not punching ability. Boxing ability.

I also said that Douglas, on that night, would've still given a prime Tyson a challenge. He came in with a good game plan and had great determination. I don't even know how the outcome would be if he fought an '88 version of Tyson, that night.

All I'm saying is that it wasn't a prime Tyson. He had the prime punching power but not the prime boxing skill.

[BOX-A-LOT]

I don't understand how Mike was more dominant than PAC. Have y'all look at Mike's resume and have y'all look who he has lost too.

PAC over Mike and it ain't even up for debate!

[THE REED]

You seem to not be reading my posts carefully.

I said that starting after the Spinks fight, he seemed to be decreasing in his overall boxing ability. Not punching ability. Boxing ability.

I also said that Douglas, on that night, would've still given a prime Tyson a challenge. He came in with a good game plan and had great determination. I don't even know how the outcome would be if he fought an '88 version of Tyson, that night.

All I'm saying is that it wasn't a prime Tyson. He had the prime punching power but not the prime boxing skill.

Only AFTER the spinks fight? He stopped Bruno in the 5th and his very next fight he knocked the guy out in the first round....

Again, I'm sorrry... but he was a consistent prime wrecking ball going into the Buster Douglas fight.

Just because you "think" he wasn't using the same boxing fundamentals, really doesn't justify the guy being in the absolute prime of his life, and coming off what? 8 consecutive knockout wins, and everyone one of them in about 8 rounds or less.

Mike Tyson was absolutely positively prime at 23 years old when he fought Buster Douglas.

[THE REED]

I don't understand how Mike was more dominant than PAC. Have y'all look at Mike's resume and have y'all look who he has lost too.

PAC over Mike and it ain't even up for debate!

Pac just went life and death with Marquez LAST March.

[BOX-A-LOT]

Pac just went life and death with Marquez LAST March.

Yeah against a great fighter. Mike Tyson wasn't exactly competitive against Holy, Lennox.

[THE REED]

Yeah against a great fighter. Mike Tyson wasn't exactly competitive against Holy, Lennox.

Well this thread is about PRIME dominance... did I make something up somewhere?

And I am not defending Mike Tyson in the first place.

[SplitSecond]

Yeah against a great fighter. Mike Tyson wasn't exactly competitive against Holy, Lennox.

word, i deeply believe mike tyson is by far the most overrated fighter of all time, larry holmes was old and spinks is another overrated boxer

[THE REED]

And can we not bring up Lennox as a fighter that fought a prime Mike Tyson? Thanks. Holyfield didn't even fight a prime Mike Tyson. That was after he had been knocked out and went to prison for 3 years.

[SuperKing]

Only AFTER the spinks fight? He stopped Bruno in the 5th and his very next fight he knocked the guy out in the first round....

Again, I'm sorrry... but he was a consistent prime wrecking ball going into the Buster Douglas fight.

Just because you "think" he wasn't using the same boxing fundamentals, really doesn't justify the guy being in the absolute prime of his life, and coming off what? 8 consecutive knockout wins, and everyone one of them in about 8 rounds or less.

Mike Tyson was absolutely positively prime at 23 years old when he fought Buster Douglas.

Thats true hence the reason Douglas was a 42/1 underdog before the fight

[Stoppage]

Only AFTER the spinks fight? He stopped Bruno in the 5th and his very next fight he knocked the guy out in the first round....

Again, I'm sorrry... but he was a consistent prime wrecking ball going into the Buster Douglas fight.

Just because you "think" he wasn't using the same boxing fundamentals, really doesn't justify the guy being in the absolute prime of his life, and coming off what? 8 consecutive knockout wins, and everyone one of them in about 8 rounds or less.

Mike Tyson was absolutely positively prime at 23 years old when he fought Buster Douglas.

What do you mean only? How does that raise any sort of su****ion?

He fired his best trainer Kevin Rooney. Some could even say that Rooney perfected Tyson's style more than Cus D'Amato. It was pretty obvious in the Bruno and Williams fight that he was relying on pure punching power. He didn't have the boxing skills he had, while Rooney was training him. If you can watch Tyson's fights, starting from the Holmes fight up to the Williams fight, and say his boxing ability didn't deteriorate at all, you must be blind.

I "think" he wasn't in his prime. Just like you "think" he was. This is a debate, isn't it? It's all about opinion.

And so what if he came off eight knockout victories? Six of them were in his prime and two weren't. He still always had punching power.

Stop repeatedly mentioning age, as if it's the number one factor to determine the prime of a fighter.