Prime Iron Mike versus Joshua or Wilder today

[Mr Objecitivity]

It would most likely look like this. Neither Joshua nor Wilder would have a chance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvoIlc5nYNE

Do you realize how small a heavyweight Mike Tyson was? He would probably be stomped on by these giants and be squashed like a bug. They would be looking down on Mike Tyson like an irrelevant insect.

Mike Tyson was the greatest heavyweight in history P4P and inch for inch (relative to his own size). However, he poses very little threat to the elite super heavyweights.

[Elroy The Great]

tyson was eating in that clip. sure, he dipped some but many landed.

mike 5'10'' 71 r

razor 6'3'' 82 r 2x
the truth 6'4'' 80+ r
holmes same as razor
bruno same as razor
biggs 6'5'' 80+ r
bonecrusher same as bruno
rebalta same as biggs
on and on...

not once did anyone roll out ''i cant believe mike beat up those giant SUPER HWs !!!!!!!''

holy 6'1'' 78'' r no comp.

once he faced a real threat, tyson is a midget

[Elroy The Great]

''mike tyson is an ATG because he was able to destroy unskilled guys who had height and reach advantages !''

[Mr Objecitivity]

''mike tyson is an ATG because he was able to destroy unskilled guys who had height and reach advantages !''

Mike Tyson was the greatest heavyweight for someone his size. However, he might not be in an ABSOLUTE sense. Again, I challenge you to find any boxer who was overall the same size as Mike Tyson with anywhere near the accomplishments at modern heavyweight (boxers weighing above 200 pounds). Otherwise, FACTUALLY Mike Tyson is the greatest heavyweight of all time for anyone his size overall.

mike 5'10'' 71 r

razor 6'3'' 82 r 2x
the truth 6'4'' 80+ r
holmes same as razor
bruno same as razor
biggs 6'5'' 80+ r
bonecrusher same as bruno
rebalta same as biggs
on and on...

not once did anyone roll out ''i cant believe mike beat up those giant SUPER HWs !!!!!!!''

holy 6'1'' 78'' r no comp.

once he faced a real threat, tyson is a midget

Just because nobody talked about Mike Tyson's size limitations / disadvantages doesn't mean they weren't there. The same way just because nobody believed the Earth was round 5000 years ago doesn't mean it wasn't. The same way just because nobody talked about computers 5000 years ago doesn't mean it wouldn't one day exist.

None of those BIG boxers you've listed were skillful BIG heavyweights. They were extremely low skilled. Skillful big heavyweights are boxers like Klitschkos, Lennox Lewis and Luis Ortiz who know how to use their size advantages really well.

Furthermore, size advantages includes the combination of height, reach and weight with weight being the most important factor. Thus, your list actually proves my point, that even against lesser skilled opponents, Mike Tyson's KO% suffered if they were simply that much heavier despite having less skills. For example, Razor Ruddock outweighed Mike Tyson by only 11 pounds in their first fight and Mike Tyson couldn't truly KO him but had to settle for a standing stoppage. In their second bout, Mike Tyson was outweighed by over 20 pounds by Ruddock and he Tyson couldn't even score a standing stoppage against Ruddock, never mind a clean knockout when he was outweighed by an even bigger margin. The same applies to Bonecrusher Smith who was extremely low skilled but Mike Tyson still failed to KO him and had to settle for a decision. Why? Because again, he was simply too heavy for Mike Tyson to be affected by his punches coming from his tiny hands and fists.

Mike Tyson's KO% became worse and worse against opponents weighing above 230 pounds, irrespective of whether their skill level.

Those taller boxers you've listed with long reach were simply too light to complement their height and reach advantages. Having height and reach advantages whilst being outweighed doesn't help as much. Jose Ribalta may have been 6 foot 6, but he was only 211 pounds (2 pounds less than Mike Tyson). Yet, despite Ribalta being at best a journeyman and despite Mike Tyson having the weight advantage, it still took Tyson 10 rounds to KO Ribalta (more than any other boxer that knocked Ribalta out). Why? Because of the significance of having height advantage (which is still lesser than having a weight advantage).

[Elroy The Great]

Mike Tyson was the greatest heavyweight for someone his size. However, he might not be in an ABSOLUTE sense. Again, I challenge you to find any boxer who was overall the same size as Mike Tyson with anywhere near the accomplishments at modern heavyweight (boxers weighing above 200 pounds). Otherwise, FACTUALLY Mike Tyson is the greatest heavyweight of all time for anyone his size overall.




Just because nobody talked about Mike Tyson's size limitations / disadvantages doesn't mean they weren't there. The same way just because nobody believed the Earth was round 5000 years ago doesn't mean it wasn't. The same way just because nobody talked about computers 5000 years ago doesn't mean it wouldn't one day exist.

None of those BIG boxers you've listed were skillful BIG heavyweights. They were extremely low skilled. Skillful big heavyweights are boxers like Klitschkos, Lennox Lewis and Luis Ortiz who know how to use their size advantages really well.

Furthermore, size advantages includes the combination of height, reach and weight with weight being the most important factor. Thus, your list actually proves my point, that even against lesser skilled opponents, Mike Tyson's KO% suffered if they were simply that much heavier despite having less skills. For example, Razor Ruddock outweighed Mike Tyson by only 11 pounds in their first fight and Mike Tyson couldn't truly KO him but had to settle for a standing stoppage. In their second bout, Mike Tyson was outweighed by over 20 pounds by Ruddock and he Tyson couldn't even score a standing stoppage against Ruddock, never mind a clean knockout when he was outweighed by an even bigger margin. The same applies to Bonecrusher Smith who was extremely low skilled but Mike Tyson still failed to KO him and had to settle for a decision. Why? Because again, he was simply too heavy for Mike Tyson to be affected by his punches coming from his tiny hands and fists.

Mike Tyson's KO% became worse and worse against opponents weighing above 230 pounds, irrespective of whether their skill level.

Those taller boxers you've listed with long reach were simply too light to complement their height and reach advantages. Having height and reach advantages whilst being outweighed doesn't help as much. Jose Ribalta may have been 6 foot 6, but he was only 211 pounds (2 pounds less than Mike Tyson). Yet, despite Ribalta being at best a journeyman and despite Mike Tyson having the weight advantage, it still took Tyson 10 rounds to KO Ribalta (more than any other boxer that knocked Ribalta out). Why? Because of the significance of having height advantage (which is still lesser than having a weight advantage).

i see.... mike tyson was the greatest bum beater of all time ?!?!?!?

all of his ''skills'' evaporated once he fought a big man with skills ?!?!?!

by those standards, everyone is an ATG. even tex cobb.

lmao @ accomplishments. id rate tua ahead of tyson and put every dollar i had on tua ko'ing tyson. but tua has no accomplishments.

[Mr Objecitivity]

all of his ''skills'' evaporated once he fought a big man with skills ?!?!?!

by those standards, everyone is an ATG. even tex cobb.

lmao @ accomplishments. id rate tua ahead of tyson and put every dollar i had on tua ko'ing tyson. but tua has no accomplishments.

all of his ''skills'' evaporated once he fought a big man with skills ?!?!?!

No, his skills couldn't make up for his lack of size against big heavyweights boxers who also had skills themselves.

lmao @ accomplishments. id rate tua ahead of tyson and put every dollar i had on tua ko'ing tyson. but tua has no accomplishments.

Except David Tua never became the heavyweight champion, which Mike tyson did. Except David Tua never became the undisputed champion, which Mike Tyson did. Except David Tua never became the youngest heavyweight champion of the world, which Mike Tyson did. Except Mike Tyson has an even better knockout percentage than David Tua. Need I go on?

I've already stated many times in the past that David Tua, along with James Toney are the only other heavyweight boxers of Mike Tyson's size to compete at the 'TOP' level of the heavyweight division. However, even they didn't accomplish as much as Mike Tyson AT heavyweight.

by those standards, everyone is an ATG. even tex cobb.

By what 'standards' exactly and what relevance does Tex Cobb have? Also, I never claimed Mike Tyson was an ATG heavyweight (assuming that's what you're trying to imply).

[Elroy The Great]

No, his skills couldn't make up for his lack of size against big heavyweights boxers who also had skills themselves.



Except David Tua never became the heavyweight champion, which Mike tyson did. Except David Tua never became the undisputed champion, which Mike Tyson did. Except David Tua never became the youngest heavyweight champion of the world, which Mike Tyson did. Except Mike Tyson has an even better knockout percentage than David Tua. Need I go on?

I've already stated many times in the past that David Tua, along with James Toney are the only other heavyweight boxers of Mike Tyson's size to compete at the 'TOP' level of the heavyweight division. However, even they didn't accomplish as much as Mike Tyson AT heavyweight.



By what 'standards' exactly and what relevance does Tex Cobb have? Also, I never claimed Mike Tyson was an ATG heavyweight (assuming that's what you're trying to imply).

1) thats what ive been saying. mike tyson was a beast vs big guys with little to no skill.

why in the fnck would/should there be an award/accolade for such a fighter

2) are you trying to tell me tua wouldnt have KILLED berbick, smith, thomas and tucker ?!?!?!?!?!? holy fncking shlt !!!!!!!!!!!! how far do you see mike lasting with tuas resume ?

3) mikes accomplishments are laughable. morrison would have beaten the guys mike did. fncking joe hipp would have beaten a couple of those guys. bragging about ANYONE beating those crackhead champs is hysterical !!!!!!!

4) you may not be claiming mike to be an ATG but youre going out of your way to give him credit for being a bum beater extraordinaire.

[Mr Objecitivity]

1) thats what ive been saying. mike tyson was a beast vs big guys with little to no skill.

why in the fnck would/should there be an award/accolade for such a fighter

2) are you trying to tell me tua wouldnt have KILLED berbick, smith, thomas and tucker ?!?!?!?!?!? holy fncking shlt !!!!!!!!!!!! how far do you see mike lasting with tuas resume ?

3) mikes accomplishments are laughable. morrison would have beaten the guys mike did. fncking joe hipp would have beaten a couple of those guys. bragging about ANYONE beating those crackhead champs is hysterical !!!!!!!

4) you may not be claiming mike to be an ATG but youre going out of your way to give him credit for being a bum beater extraordinaire.

1) thats what ive been saying. mike tyson was a beast vs big guys with little to no skill.

Yes, which is still impressive when taking into consideration that it's something no other boxer of Mike Tyson's size (height, weight and reach combined) accomplished. It may look poor from an Absolute perspective, but when taking into consideration Mike Tyson's size (or lack of), it isn't.

why in the fnck would/should there be an award/accolade for such a fighter

What 'award' / 'accolade'?

are you trying to tell me tua wouldnt have KILLED berbick, smith, thomas and tucker

No, I don't think David Tua would've 'killed' them. He may have beaten them, sure! Could he have beaten them more convincingly than Mike Tyson? Maybe! However, I go by what actually has happened than what could've and should've. Since David Tua hasn't FACTUALLY accomplished what Mike Tyson has, what David Tua could've done remains pure speculation. Thus, as it stands, Mike Tyson > David Tua in terms of ACTUAL and FACTUAL accomplishments.

how far do you see mike lasting with tuas resume ?

I 'think' Mike Tyson would've beaten Chris Byrd, Ike Ibeaubuchi and Monte Barrett (all of which beat David Tua). I think Mike Tyson also beats everyone else David Tua beat. However, it still remains speculation.

mikes accomplishments are laughable. morrison would have beaten the guys mike did. fncking joe hipp would have beaten a couple of those guys. bragging about ANYONE beating those crackhead champs is hysterical !!!!!!!

I couldn't understand what you wrote there. It's so unclear that it doesn't even deserve a reply. Perhaps clarify what you wrote?

you may not be claiming mike to be an ATG but youre going out of your way to give him credit for being a bum beater extraordinaire.

Straw man fallacy! Perhaps understand my argument first before trying to represent what my argument is. I'm not giving Mike Tyson 'credit' for 'being a bum beater'. I'm arguing, Mike Tyson achieved more at modern heavyweight boxing (opponents weighing above 200 pounds) than any other boxer his own size (in height, weight and reach). That's an indisputable fact!

[Elroy The Great]

Yes, which is still impressive when taking into consideration that it's something no other boxer of Mike Tyson's size (height, weight and reach combined) accomplished. It may look poor from an Absolute perspective, but when taking into consideration Mike Tyson's size (or lack of), it isn't.

What 'award' / 'accolade'?

No, I don't think David Tua would've 'killed' them. He may have beaten them, sure! Could he have beaten them more convincingly than Mike Tyson? Maybe! However, I go by what actually has happened than what could've and should've. Since David Tua hasn't FACTUALLY accomplished what Mike Tyson has, what David Tua could've done remains pure speculation. Thus, as it stands, Mike Tyson > David Tua in terms of ACTUAL and FACTUAL accomplishments.

I 'think' Mike Tyson would've beaten Chris Byrd, Ike Ibeaubuchi and Monte Barrett (all of which beat David Tua). I think Mike Tyson also beats everyone else David Tua beat. However, it still remains speculation.

I couldn't understand what you wrote there. It's so unclear that it doesn't even deserve a reply. Perhaps clarify what you wrote?

Straw man fallacy! Perhaps understand my argument first before trying to represent what my argument is. I'm not giving Mike Tyson 'credit' for 'being a bum beater'. I'm arguing, Mike Tyson achieved more at modern heavyweight boxing (opponents weighing above 200 pounds) than any other boxer his own size (in height, weight and reach). That's an indisputable fact!

1) yeah, mike was one of a kind. just not a great one of a kind.

2) you created an award for mike; ''the best lil hw ever (if you ignore the FACT he NEVER beat a LEGITIMATE hw)''

3) cause tua isnt known for KILLING BUMS !!!!!! only mike is skilled enough to do that !!!!! you go by what actually happened and turn around to make excuses for why things HAPPENED the way they did......tua has an easier time with mikes resume than vice versa.

4) are you really trying to compare their resumes ?!?!?!? from ruiz on, check it out.

5) what im saying is mike didnt beat anyone a number of mediocre guys couldnt have beaten, when he fought them. morrison, hipp, tua, holy, bowe, ruiz, ike....all would have been the youngest hw champ had they been FORTUNATE enough to have the chance mike did.

6)

[Elroy The Great]

prior to tyson fighting the following names, whats the 1st thing that comes to ''your'' (anyones) mind....

berbick
p thomas
bonecrusher
t tucker

!!!!!!!!!!!