Better FINISHER: Pacquiao or (PRIME 80s) Tyson

[badass316]

No, at the end of the day you may argue that Pac is the greater "P4P" fighter. But overall, he is not the greater fighter compared to Tyson. Again, why?
Because Tyson was a HW and would take Pac's head off had they fought.

There is a reason why Ali said he was the Greatest, Greatest HW, but SRR was the greatest "P4P" fighter to ever live. Ali beats SRR in a boxing match...just like Tyson does with Pac.

LMAO... Wow... You can't possible believe what you're saying. That has got to be one of the most ridiculous reasoning I have seen on this MB. Given by this straw-man logic, the best fighters in boxing history are all HWs because they were all bigger than everyone else.

When Ali claimed he was the greatest, I'm pretty sure he wasn't just saying he was the greatest in just the HW division, but the greatest in any division.

And you consider Pacquiao to be the greater P4P fighter but yet you consider Tyson to be the greater fighter? You're contradicting yourself in every way shape or form. Maybe what you mean to say is that Tyson would beat Pacquiao SIMPLY because he was the bigger guy, not necessarily because he was the better fighter (which he was not).

[badass316]

Winning the HW title >>>>>>> than shopping in the boy's department.

So winning the HW title once against someone like John Ruiz for example is greater than winning multiple titles in multiple weight classes? Right.

[DontHitMyNuts]

pac might be a competitive finisher at the lower weights compared to the higher weights

(above JWW)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HliNmW06zfc

tyson is a better finisher, but pac is close.

he literally destroys champs / competition in the lighter weights. if you want to accuse him of steroids, you ought to watch his earlier fights. ****ers relentless

[ThePunchingBag]

They're pretty close, though I give the edge to Tyson.

Early Pac was KOing bums in 1 or 2 rounds.

Tyson was doing the same.

Pac couldn't finish big stars (Marquez, Barrera, DLH, Cotto, Clottey) in the same fashion.

Tyson couldn't either (Smith, Tucker, Douglas, Holyfield, Lewis).

You can't say Pac is a worse finisher than Tyson when both of them had trouble finishing against elite level opponents yet both finished bums in 1 to 2 rounds.

[them_apples]

You can disagree with me all you want...and I know you are a good poster...however, prove me wrong.

Who beats Tyson that Pac has fought?


So in the end, when you really want to look at the truth, without all the bull**** Mommie protection rules, and going back to the original way with how boxing was intended, one division, Tyson is the greater fighter because not only would he beat every single opponent Pac fought, he would also beat Pac and Pac stands little chance of beating who Tyson fought.

well obviously yea, but thats not how boxing works..thats how a street fight works. Boxing has weight classes. They would beat him and his opponents based on size alone.

[Benny Leonard]

LMAO... Wow... You can't possible believe what you're saying. That has got to be one of the most ridiculous reasoning I have seen on this MB. Given by this straw-man logic, the best fighters in boxing history are all HWs because they were all bigger than everyone else.

When Ali claimed he was the greatest, I'm pretty sure he wasn't just saying he was the greatest in just the HW division, but the greatest in any division.

And you consider Pacquiao to be the greater P4P fighter but yet you consider Tyson to be the greater fighter? You're contradicting yourself in every way shape or form. Maybe what you mean to say is that Tyson would beat Pacquiao SIMPLY because he was the bigger guy, not necessarily because he was the better fighter (which he was not).

Actually, yes. Remember, we use P4P when discussing the lower weight divisions...for a reason. Remember, again, ancient boxing had only one weight division, for a reason: to see who was ultimately the best.

I think Ali felt SRR was greater overall "P4P" wise but overall as far as who is the Greatest at the end of the day, without the P4P nonsense, he was. He was HW Champ...#1.

No, I am not contradicted myself. P4P is different than overall. P4P measures you by your size and how effective you are with your size compared to others your size. Pac has gone beyond his natural size limitations and beat higher opposition as he moved up compared to his "natural" size self. Now, I'm not saying Pac is necessarily better that way either, but that would be the debate for P4P who is better. Pac has the better names on that scale as well. Now were they at their best when he fought them? that's debatable too.
Tyson fought bigger fighters too, but were they better than Pac's bigger fighters? debate.
Tyson certainly never backed down from a fighter because he was "to tall" or was "to big" or didn't need "catch-weights."


"Bigger" is a part of what you are. And you can be big and not know how to fight. In the end, Tyson was the greater fighter because he would win in a fight. Taking away size is like taking away other attributes, like power, speed, endurance, etc.
Pac isn't exactly a "expert" tactician either. Tyson was certainly better at moving his head and making people miss (when he was trained for it) compared to Pac. And Tyson's combinations and accuracy was better than Pac's.

[Benny Leonard]

So winning the HW title once against someone like John Ruiz for example is greater than winning multiple titles in multiple weight classes? Right.

Overall, when you want to get down to the truth, yeah.



Imagine only one division like they had in ancient boxing. Would Pac beat Ruiz?
And how would Ruiz fare against Pac's opposition and how would Pac fair against Ruiz's opposition?

The HW crown is the harder crown to win.

[Benny Leonard]

well obviously yea, but thats not how boxing works..thats how a street fight works. Boxing has weight classes. They would beat him and his opponents based on size alone.

That's how "modern" boxing works that has been set-up to capitalize on more fights, more champions, to make more money, by pitting fighters closer to their size together for competition.

But Boxing was originally set-up to see who was the best. One division.

Just because you change the rules doesn't mean you change the true meaning to it all. Who is the best?
Same reason why if there was a HW fight between a Prime Tyson vs. Prime Ali, on the same night as Prime SRR vs. Prime SRL, Tyson/Ali would have more viewers. HW is King.

[them_apples]

That's how "modern" boxing works that has been set-up to capitalize on more fights, more champions, to make more money, by pitting fighters closer to their size together for competition.

But Boxing was originally set-up to see who was the best. One division.

Just because you change the rules doesn't mean you change the true meaning to it all. Who is the best?
Same reason why if there was a HW fight between a Prime Tyson vs. Prime Ali, on the same night as Prime SRR vs. Prime SRL, Tyson/Ali would have more viewers. HW is King.

HW is king to the general public. but you can still see whos the best for their size.

In a school yard fight if a 200 lb kid beats up a 130 lb kid, people don't shame the 130lb kid, they just say (ah that guy was too big). Boxing has changed that to allow skill to be involved. It would be pointless to have amazing athletes left out because some big sloppy guy can't be hurt by a smaller quicker guy.

[Benny Leonard]

HW is king to the general public. but you can still see whos the best for their size.

In a school yard fight if a 200 lb kid beats up a 130 lb kid, people don't shame the 130lb kid, they just say (ah that guy was too big). Boxing has changed that to allow skill to be involved. It would be pointless to have amazing athletes left out because some big sloppy guy can't be hurt by a smaller quicker guy.

Yes, but in a fight to the death, who would you rather be? That 200 lb kid that is living or the 130 lb kid that is dead?
Now, who is the best?
The answer: the result.


That's what the Greeks wanted to find out...who was the best.

When Tyson lost to Douglas, who mentioned the size difference?

Funny thing is, Tyson was seen as a giant yet he was the one looking up to his opponents.