Anthony Joshua Reveals How A Fight With Mike Tyson Would Go

[GhostofDempsey]

None of those guys are remotely the power or physical person Joshua is.Faster and mobile?Nope.Joshua has excellent in an out movements and could also fight like Tyson at mid range to close range unlike those guys who needed space to punch.Biggs is nothing compared to a joshua.Tyson could have ended that fight in 2 rnds.

Bruno was a patient non combo puncher who isnt nearly as fast either.With Tyson vs Joshua you have two fast guys looking to get you out of their quick this is entirely different.Joshua doesnt move his head/feint ? Did you see how he avoided Klitchko even after the knock down?

He uses a catch counter style,hes 6'6 he doesnt waste movements bc hes exlosive and aggressive style ..Tyson was rocked/stunned briefly by a upper cut from Tucker it means nothing,no one would say he had poor defense would they? lol

Tyrell Biggs was an Olympic gold medalist, and defeated Lennox Lewis on his way to the gold. He was an accomplished amateur with well over 100 fights, 6'5", strong and a very good boxer. Tyson destroyed him in 7 rounds.

Tony Tucker was another 6'5" very muscular and strong HW. Couldn't put a dent in Tyson.

Tyson could handle the big guys. If an old Wlad can knockdown AJ I'm sure a prime Tyson would have gotten to him.

I do appreciate Joshua's modesty though. It is refreshing to see a champion who isn't an arrogant trash talker in this era of boxing.

[juggernaut666]

Tyrell Biggs was an Olympic gold medalist, and defeated Lennox Lewis on his way to the gold. He was an accomplished amateur with well over 100 fights, 6'5", strong and a very good boxer. Tyson destroyed him in 7 rounds.

Tony Tucker was another 6'5" very muscular and strong HW. Couldn't put a dent in Tyson.

Tyson could handle the big guys. If an old Wlad can knockdown AJ I'm sure a prime Tyson would have gotten to him.

I do appreciate Joshua's modesty though. It is refreshing to see a champion who isn't an arrogant trash talker in this era of boxing.

"Tyson could handle the big guys. If an old Wlad can knockdown AJ I'm sure a prime Tyson would have gotten to him. "
"

Its not about an OLD Wlad as much as a motivated one....We all know ( who studied actual Tyson fights) know he could handle big guys...but Joshua represents a DIFFERENT type of skill and style. The match up itself has no bearing on how wlad got to him bc Joshua wasnt forced to press early....you have to look at the ACTUAL match itself..and that tells me either gets knocked out before rnd 7.IF it goes late it favors AJ.

Tyson was one of the most conditioned fighters of all time...his style and the way he fought shows this...its nonsense to say modern guys lack fitness when they are throwing punches and lasinging longer at a higher weight...


what it comes down too is if someone is actually watching the fights...?Their clearly not.If someone is to muscular they call it?If someone is too soft they say it? Really they have no clue what they are talking about...it comes down to getting your hand raised and being fit .I really doubt this a pete blue character would tell anyone he claims he saw in the gym in person that they are fat to their face.....Is whyte really fat and out of shape throwing the amount of shots at his weight( and taking them ) in 12 rnd fights? That guy has no clue what hes actually trying to show...


Really it comes down to what the style/trainer/and ability of THAT fighter can do....NO poster opinion would change that.

[Graz]

http://www.givemesport.com/1094780-a...tyson-would-go

Who would win in a fight between Tyson and Joshua?

That's the question Joshua was asked during an event last month and his answer was brilliant.

"Mike Tyson would have battered me!!" he then just said "I would've taken that paycheck and accepted the result,".

"You know what I done in the sixth round against Klitschko when I took that dive... I'm joking, I would have taken a dive against Tyson."

"He was a beast! I give all credit and respect to Tyson."

AJ is a humble man. Admitting that Mike Tyson would wreck him shows his humility and character. Fact is prime Mike Tydon would destroy AJ and anyone else they put in front of him. Kudos to AJ for giving credit where it's due.

[Mr Objecitivity]

In regard to heavyweight boxing, there is no demonstrable evidence to prove that being a 240lb heavyweight affords any advantage over being around the 220lbmark.Its very different than the lighter divisions. There are many factors at play when you start talking about knockout percentages, such as not all knockouts being the result of power. Now, I was responding to someone who thinks that Joshua having 20 plus pounds on the eighties era heavies of a similar height affords him some sort of superiority over them. As far as punch resistance, being heavier absolutely does not help in the heavyweight division. We've had 16 Stone David Tua, 15stone Holyfield and 226lb Oliver Mccall with granite chins. We've had 240lbders Wlad and Lennox with far more shaky chins. James Toney still had a great chin at heavy. A good chin is a good chin. Power is the same. Do you think the Lewis who smashed Ruddock at 227lb didn't hit as hard as the 247lb Lewis of later in he's career? Did he's chin change from being knocked down against Mccall, to flattened by Rahman? There are plenty of examples of sub 16stone heavies flattening 18 stoners. Its just not a relevant advantage in actual fights. Talking the lower weight classes it's normally frame that makes the difference. If your gonna chuck Broner in with Charlo. The size and range would be a big disadvantage there. But big frames didn't bother Tyson, and in the heavyweight division, if your a puncher at 220 you can take anyone out. If your carrying an extra 25lbs of fat or muscle it costs energy. These are 10 or 12rounders.When your tired you lose durability and become more susceptible to being knocked out. Look at Haye Chisora compared to Whyte Chisora. Whyte might have got Derrick out of there if he hadn't been gassed. The bottom line is Joshua would not have been able to use he's weight as any advantage over Prime Mike. And it's laughable to think he'd have outlasted him . Your stats on Mike versus heavier men are not taking into account that the heaviest men he fought, Lewis and particularly Williams and Mcbride were when Mike was finished. The very light guys also were at novice level, in Mikes first fights. Let's use a practical instead. How did he do against a smaller, more mobile Holyfield? How did he do against the 6 foot 4, muscular Golota. The superheavy didn't even hit him.

In regard to heavyweight boxing, there is no demonstrable evidence to prove that being a 240lb heavyweight affords any advantage over being around the 220lbmark

Actually there is and I've provided some evidence. If you perform more research, then you're bound to find more evidence.

Its very different than the lighter divisions.

Although weight advantage at heavyweight is not as significant as it is in lower weight divisions, it is still an advantage nonetheless. Especially if everything else is equal.

There are many factors at play when you start talking about knockout percentages, such as not all knockouts being the result of power.

Without making this any more complicated by adding an additional layer of speculation, rarely any knockout is PURELY a result of power.

The point is, evidence suggests that the heavier the opposition become, the lower the average knockout percentage becomes of a boxer, more often than not. Whether it's due to a lack of power or something else, is not that important.

Now, I was responding to someone who thinks that Joshua having 20 plus pounds on the eighties era heavies of a similar height affords him some sort of superiority over them.

Well, he is correct. The weight advantage absolutely is an advantage.

As far as punch resistance, being heavier absolutely does not help in the heavyweight division.

Consistent recurring evidence suggests otherwise.

We've had 16 Stone David Tua, 15stone Holyfield and 226lb Oliver Mccall with granite chins.

You're using exceptional / singular examples. Compare all three of their knockout percentage against lighter opponents to the heavier opponents, you will more often than not find that their knockout percentage suffers and decreases as opponents get heavier.

Sure, you will find rare smaller sized heavyweights who show an unusually good punch resistance along with having higher skills / abilities than other boxers in the division. However, these are rare.

We've had 240lbders Wlad and Lennox with far more shaky chins.

Again, exceptional examples don't matter as much as CONSISTENT occurrences. Based on CONSISTENCY, a boxer's knockout percentage more often than not, is lower against heavier opposition than it is against lighter opposition.

James Toney still had a great chin at heavy.

James Toney's punch resistance improved as he became heavier. If James Toney was below 200 pounds and fought someone like Samuel Peter, he'd have most likely knocked out. The extra weight improved his punch resistance.

A good chin is a good chin. Power is the same.

Not really. If we compare like for like with everything else being equal, the heavier boxer will often have more KO power and better chin.

Do you think the Lewis who smashed Ruddock at 227lb didn't hit as hard as the 247lb Lewis of later in he's career?

No, I think he punched even harder when he was heavier.

Did he's chin change from being knocked down against Mccall, to flattened by Rahman?

Lennox Lewis being knocked out by these two boxers isn't purely down to his punch resistance, but due to them being legitimately powerful enough to KO boxers of Lennox Lewis's size. At heavyweight boxing concerning legitimate power punchers, anybody could knock anybody out.

There are plenty of examples of sub 16stone heavies flattening 18 stoners.

There are more examples to the contrary. For every example you can cite of a 16 stone boxer knocking out an 18 stone boxer, there are more examples of a 16 stone boxer failing to KO an 18 stone boxer.

What does this prove? It proves that heavier opponents are more difficult to KO than lighter opponents.

Its just not a relevant advantage in actual fights.

It absolutely is!

Talking the lower weight classes it's normally frame that makes the difference. If your gonna chuck Broner in with Charlo. The size and range would be a big disadvantage there.

There is no such thing as 'frame' division / class or 'range' division / class. There are only weight divisions. Meaning, weight is the most significant factor to determining the outcome of a bout.

But big frames didn't bother Tyson

Weight of opposition absolutely did. Mike Tyson's knockout percentage decreased against heavier opponents compared to lighter opponents.

and in the heavyweight division, if your a puncher at 220 you can take anyone out.

That might be true. However, the evidence still suggests that heavier opponents are less likely to get knocked out than lighter opponents, even by power punchers like Mike Tyson or David Tua.

If your carrying an extra 25lbs of fat or muscle it costs energy.

That's not always true! There are skinnier boxers who have worse stamina than fatter / more muscular boxers.

I haven't encountered any evidence which indicates that heavier boxers usually have worse stamina than lighter boxers.

The bottom line is Joshua would not have been able to use he's weight as any advantage over Prime Mike.

Yes, he will. Heavier boxers, roughly the same size as Anthony Joshua who were bums / journeymen like Brian Nielsen and Danny Williams were able to use their size as an advantage over Mike Tyson. Because of their weight, Mike Tyson failed to KO them (Brian Nielsen quit and didn't get knocked out by Mike Tyson). Anthony Joshua is better than both of them and is roughly the same size.

So if Mike Tyson had difficulties knocking out heavier + less skilled opponents like Brian Nielsen and Danny Williams, he will have even more difficulty of not just knocking out, but overall defeating a heavier + skilled opponent like Anthony Joshua.

Your stats on Mike versus heavier men are not taking into account that the heaviest men he fought, Lewis and particularly Williams and Mcbride were when Mike was finished.

The stats represent Mike Tyson's entire career against opposition of different weight range.

Mike Tyson wasn't finished because he was still boxing when he was fighting such opposition. His KO% being lower against heavier opposition compared to lighter opposition proves that his power was less effective against heavier opposition.

Let's use a practical instead. How did he do against a smaller, more mobile Holyfield? How did he do against the 6 foot 4, muscular Golota. The superheavy didn't even hit him.

That's not a like for like comparison. That's a like for unlike comparison. You're comparing one of the greatest cruiserweights and smaller heavyweights of all time (Evander Holyfield) to a heavyweight journeyman (Andrew Golota).

A much more accurate comparison will be to compare Mike Tyson's performance against Lennox Lewis (an ATG heavier boxer) to Evander Holyfield (an ATG lighter boxer). Now, that's a like for like comparison.

Lennox Lewis defeated Mike Tyson far more convincingly / comprehensively than Evander Holyfield did. Lennox Lewis knocked Mike Tyson out in 8 rounds. Whereas Evander Holyfield took 11 rounds to stop Mike Tyson. Lennox Lewis dropped and Mike Tyson to the ground and Mike Tyson couldn't get up before the referee counted to 10. On the other hand, Evander Holyfield couldn't even drop Mike Tyson with his hardest punches and the fight was stopped whilst Tyson was still standing. Furthermore, Lennox Lewis didn't even lose a single round against Mike Tyson whilst Holyfield lost many rounds against Mike Tyson.

So all of this proves that everything being equal, the heavier boxer > the lighter boxer.

You can't make comparisons that are not like for like. Such as comparing an average heavy boxer (Andrew Golota) to an ATG lighter boxer (Evander Holyfield) and use that as an argument that the lighter boxer is better. You have to make like for like comparisons.

So this means that more often than not:

Heavier ATG boxer > lighter ATG boxer

Heavier journeyman boxer > lighter journeyman boxer

Heavier bum > lighter bum


Of course, a lighter ATG boxer (Evander Holyfield) > heavier journeyman (Andrew Golota), but that's not a like for like comparison again.

You seriously comparing a one legged totally shot Tyson who fought Williams to him in he's prime. The heavier fighters he failed to stop was because he had no condition because he was shot.

These are all unacceptable excuses. Mike Tyson failed to KO Danny Williams after landing multiple of his hardest punches before suffering any injury. When a boxer is able to land his hardest punches on his opponent over and over again without being able to KO them (like Mike Tyson did against Danny Williams), then it's a testament to their power being less effective than anything to do with them being 'shot'. Being 'shot' can only be an acceptable excuse if a boxer was unable to land their power punches in the first place because their opponents were very skilled, defensively and offensively. This wasn't the case with Danny Williams and some of the other heavier opponents he faced like Brian Nielsen and Kevin Mcbride.

How did he do against Golota and Saverese when he was still half decent?

Lou Savarese was the only non-bummy opponent Mike Tyson ever stopped / knocked out that was above 6 foot 3 inches. The Golota bout was a no contest.

He's head movement cancels out Joshua's power.

Mike Tyson's head movement didn't cancel out the power of a feather fist in Buster Douglas.

Whyte wobbled Joshua. Tyson knocks him out.

And Herbie Hide destroyed Tony Tucker in 2 rounds, the same guy that Mike Tyson couldn't even drop in 12 rounds.

So no, it's highly unlikely Mike Tyson knocks Joshua out.

[Mr Objecitivity]

"One could reasonably argue that Mike Tyson would be nothing more than a minor irritant / nuisance to some of the biggest top modern heavyweights in size like Anthony Joshua and Wladimir Klitschko. "

Well you COULD but that would be foolish.

"This mainly stems from the fact that Mike Tyson's knockout power looked significantly ineffective against modern sized heavyweights on a consistent basis. Thus, it's debatable if Mike Tyson even has the power to KO someone with the size + skill of Anthony Joshua or even hurt him easily. "

Its not debatable at all,( skills dont lie) Tyson EASILY hits harder than anyone Joshua has fought or probably will. you can take a less effective Tyson like say Holyfield but thats not what we are doing here.Even so the upper cut he buckled Holy with would n=knock out most and we all know Holy was roided up with already a great PROVEN chin.

'To me, this is a near mismatch in favor of Anthony Joshua.'

This simply isnt true bc Tyson is a bit sharper on the counter punching and faster...power is debatable ...this is as tough as it gets. Tyson is MUCH better than you rank him.No one in HW history had his equal of power /speed and hes the best defensive fighter of all time...while Joshua thinks he has no chance against Tyson himself...i would caution joshua would be by far his most dangerous opponent.Even if he doesnt think so......


"So my verdict on this fight is a brutal knockout victory for Anthony Joshua inside 1-3 rounds. I doubt Mike Tyson is even going to see past the first round in all honesty."

If thats the case its bc both are going for the knockout in fast fashion...Joshua is a CAUTIOUS first fighter...Tyson would bethe favored to end this early bc he BETTER at initiating the first blow and is a better finisher than even Joshua. Theres no way you can tell me this is a mismatch when they both have great ability to end fights .


Your the exact opposite of blue pete who doesn't grasp how good AJ is and you dont with Tyson...both you guys are wrong.

I would only give Joshua a slight edge when i see him at 95%...hes about 90% now in his overall ability.I still need to see a bit more...by no stretch is this a one sided fight,Tyson is too on point( PRIME) and Joshua has all the talent in the world at 6'6 which COULD help nullify him.

Well you COULD but that would be foolish.

it wouldn't be because the facts do support this notion.

Tyson EASILY hits harder than anyone Joshua has fought or probably will.

Anthony Joshua fought Wladimir Klitschko and I don't see any reason to believe that Mike Tyson hits harder than Wladimir Klitschko. Wlad has a higher / better knockout percentage / record than Mike Tyson in virtually every department.

No one in HW history had his equal of power /speed and hes the best defensive fighter of all time

For me, Wladimir Klitschko easily surpasses Mike Tyson in all of those departments.

The reason why I stated it's a mismatch in favor of Joshua was because of Mike Tyson's significant failures against heavyweights of Joshua's size.

If thats the case its bc both are going for the knockout in fast fashion

No, it's because of Mike Tyson's struggles against opponents who were roughly the same size as Joshua, but who were of a much lower caliber (such as Danny Williams, Brian Nielsen, Kevin Mcbride and so forth so on).

Tyson would bethe favored to end this early bc he BETTER at initiating the first blow and is a better finisher than even Joshua.

Mike Tyson couldn't finish Danny Williams and Brian Nielsen early (both roughly the same size as Joshua but are inferior), despite throwing his hardest punches on them multiple times. Thus, he is even less likely to do it against Anthony Joshua.

This is true. And sometime dont have to be equal such as the Breazeale who weighed over 260 vs Izu who was 230 and landing crushing shots to Breazeale yet tired out doing so against an inferior talent and still lost ( a prediction i also made and was told i knew nothing about boxing on here and by SO called you tube experts ? SMH

Lewis himself ate some shots from Tyson when weighing 250 he also weighed around that PURPOSELY for Vitali bc he SELF said (he wanted to match him physically,and he did).and even Holmes stated in the Witherspoon win ,had he weighed more than what was about 210/213 he would not have struggled for that fight....

im not even going to argue or explain things with that other guy bc he doesnt get it. Heaven FORBID if i told him the difference between 70's Foreman and 90's ,on top of that his post style causes migraines of reading one giant sentance ...lol


You simply CANT use Tyson as a measuring stick though.....he had the tools and cornerman to beat anyone at any given time. One could see the differance in Joshsua's power punching from 235 to over 245 from 2 years ago.His speed declined slightly but the guy is a true SHW,i like him about 245.

I have no disagreements with this.

[Kigali]

None of those guys are remotely the power or physical person Joshua is.Faster and mobile?Nope.Joshua has excellent in an out movements and could also fight like Tyson at mid range to close range unlike those guys who needed space to punch.Biggs is nothing compared to a joshua.Tyson could have ended that fight in 2 rnds.

Bruno was a patient non combo puncher who isnt nearly as fast either.With Tyson vs Joshua you have two fast guys looking to get you out of their quick this is entirely different.Joshua doesnt move his head/feint ? Did you see how he avoided Klitchko even after the knock down?

He uses a catch counter style,hes 6'6 he doesnt waste movements bc hes exlosive and aggressive style ..Tyson was rocked/stunned briefly by a upper cut from Tucker it means nothing,no one would say he had poor defense would they? lol

[bluepete]

Actually there is and I've provided some evidence. If you perform more research, then you're bound to find more evidence.



Although weight advantage at heavyweight is not as significant as it is in lower weight divisions, it is still an advantage nonetheless. Especially if everything else is equal.



Without making this any more complicated by adding an additional layer of speculation, rarely any knockout is PURELY a result of power.

The point is, evidence suggests that the heavier the opposition become, the lower the average knockout percentage becomes of a boxer, more often than not. Whether it's due to a lack of power or something else, is not that important.



Well, he is correct. The weight advantage absolutely is an advantage.



Consistent recurring evidence suggests otherwise.



You're using exceptional / singular examples. Compare all three of their knockout percentage against lighter opponents to the heavier opponents, you will more often than not find that their knockout percentage suffers and decreases as opponents get heavier.

Sure, you will find rare smaller sized heavyweights who show an unusually good punch resistance along with having higher skills / abilities than other boxers in the division. However, these are rare.



Again, exceptional examples don't matter as much as CONSISTENT occurrences. Based on CONSISTENCY, a boxer's knockout percentage more often than not, is lower against heavier opposition than it is against lighter opposition.



James Toney's punch resistance improved as he became heavier. If James Toney was below 200 pounds and fought someone like Samuel Peter, he'd have most likely knocked out. The extra weight improved his punch resistance.



Not really. If we compare like for like with everything else being equal, the heavier boxer will often have more KO power and better chin.



No, I think he punched even harder when he was heavier.



Lennox Lewis being knocked out by these two boxers isn't purely down to his punch resistance, but due to them being legitimately powerful enough to KO boxers of Lennox Lewis's size. At heavyweight boxing concerning legitimate power punchers, anybody could knock anybody out.



There are more examples to the contrary. For every example you can cite of a 16 stone boxer knocking out an 18 stone boxer, there are more examples of a 16 stone boxer failing to KO an 18 stone boxer.

What does this prove? It proves that heavier opponents are more difficult to KO than lighter opponents.



It absolutely is!



There is no such thing as 'frame' division / class or 'range' division / class. There are only weight divisions. Meaning, weight is the most significant factor to determining the outcome of a bout.



Weight of opposition absolutely did. Mike Tyson's knockout percentage decreased against heavier opponents compared to lighter opponents.



That might be true. However, the evidence still suggests that heavier opponents are less likely to get knocked out than lighter opponents, even by power punchers like Mike Tyson or David Tua.



That's not always true! There are skinnier boxers who have worse stamina than fatter / more muscular boxers.

I haven't encountered any evidence which indicates that heavier boxers usually have worse stamina than lighter boxers.



Yes, he will. Heavier boxers, roughly the same size as Anthony Joshua who were bums / journeymen like Brian Nielsen and Danny Williams were able to use their size as an advantage over Mike Tyson. Because of their weight, Mike Tyson failed to KO them (Brian Nielsen quit and didn't get knocked out by Mike Tyson). Anthony Joshua is better than both of them and is roughly the same size.

So if Mike Tyson had difficulties knocking out heavier + less skilled opponents like Brian Nielsen and Danny Williams, he will have even more difficulty of not just knocking out, but overall defeating a heavier + skilled opponent like Anthony Joshua.



The stats represent Mike Tyson's entire career against opposition of different weight range.

Mike Tyson wasn't finished because he was still boxing when he was fighting such opposition. His KO% being lower against heavier opposition compared to lighter opposition proves that his power was less effective against heavier opposition.



That's not a like for like comparison. That's a like for unlike comparison. You're comparing one of the greatest cruiserweights and smaller heavyweights of all time (Evander Holyfield) to a heavyweight journeyman (Andrew Golota).

A much more accurate comparison will be to compare Mike Tyson's performance against Lennox Lewis (an ATG heavier boxer) to Evander Holyfield (an ATG lighter boxer). Now, that's a like for like comparison.

Lennox Lewis defeated Mike Tyson far more convincingly / comprehensively than Evander Holyfield did. Lennox Lewis knocked Mike Tyson out in 8 rounds. Whereas Evander Holyfield took 11 rounds to stop Mike Tyson. Lennox Lewis dropped and Mike Tyson to the ground and Mike Tyson couldn't get up before the referee counted to 10. On the other hand, Evander Holyfield couldn't even drop Mike Tyson with his hardest punches and the fight was stopped whilst Tyson was still standing. Furthermore, Lennox Lewis didn't even lose a single round against Mike Tyson whilst Holyfield lost many rounds against Mike Tyson.

So all of this proves that everything being equal, the heavier boxer > the lighter boxer.

You can't make comparisons that are not like for like. Such as comparing an average heavy boxer (Andrew Golota) to an ATG lighter boxer (Evander Holyfield) and use that as an argument that the lighter boxer is better. You have to make like for like comparisons.

So this means that more often than not:

Heavier ATG boxer > lighter ATG boxer

Heavier journeyman boxer > lighter journeyman boxer

Heavier bum > lighter bum


Of course, a lighter ATG boxer (Evander Holyfield) > heavier journeyman (Andrew Golota), but that's not a like for like comparison again.



These are all unacceptable excuses. Mike Tyson failed to KO Danny Williams after landing multiple of his hardest punches before suffering any injury. When a boxer is able to land his hardest punches on his opponent over and over again without being able to KO them (like Mike Tyson did against Danny Williams), then it's a testament to their power being less effective than anything to do with them being 'shot'. Being 'shot' can only be an acceptable excuse if a boxer was unable to land their power punches in the first place because their opponents were very skilled, defensively and offensively. This wasn't the case with Danny Williams and some of the other heavier opponents he faced like Brian Nielsen and Kevin Mcbride.



Lou Savarese was the only non-bummy opponent Mike Tyson ever stopped / knocked out that was above 6 foot 3 inches. The Golota bout was a no contest.



Mike Tyson's head movement didn't cancel out the power of a feather fist in Buster Douglas.



And Herbie Hide destroyed Tony Tucker in 2 rounds, the same guy that Mike Tyson couldn't even drop in 12 rounds.

So no, it's highly unlikely Mike Tyson knocks Joshua out.

Talk about cherry picking, although I do admire the amount of effort you put into your reply. The evidence you stated that the higher the weight of fighter Tyson fought the more resistant they were to his punches was a good case of seeing half the story. Like I told you, the lighter guys were largely at the beginning of hes career, low level types who he crushed. The better fighters were in he's championship reign obviously. The very heavy men largely were when he was on the downside of he's career. For Nielsen, who he stopped, we actually have a case of Tyson himself coming in at 240lbs, and admitting that he didnt feel the power he usually had in interview after. He also fought Williams at a heavier, far more muscular weight, and when he was well past he's prime. Nobody disputes this was a shot Tyson, including Danny himself, who I've spoke to many times and trained beside at the Lynn AC boxing club in camberwell. Tyson had Williams seriously wobbled, then injured his knees. Who knows if he would've stopped him in the next few rounds. He hurt Berbick and Thomas in the first rounds of their fights, and uninjured, stopped them. It proves nothing that Williams got through the first round. Anyone Tyson stopped after the first wasn't impervious to he's power, he just took more than one round. It's idiotic to use this as an example of weight improving punch resistance. I've given you examples of much lighter men with good chins, the best in the division, and you come back with the "one off" excuse. What these "one offs" prove is that weight isn't connected to chin. Where's the actual evidence here? Where's the evidence James Toneys chin got better with the extra weight? This is just your opinion and connected to nothing. James Toney had a good chin and great skills. Head movement. It's harder to hit a moving target. You can't get full weight into the shots. That's why Mike never had trouble with power. Ruddock hit him with decent shots, but not the kind of shot that nearly killed Dokes.Think about it. We are talking about a peak Tyson here, not a shot one. Why do you keep comparing fights that happened at different stages? Holyfield actually did drop Tyson in their first fight for your information. Keep this truthful. And that version of Tyson was still much better than the seven years older fighter of the Lewis fight. Remember too, that Tyson came in at 233 in that fight. He looked like crap. Heavier, less mobile, less stamina. It makes you slower. It sapps your energy. The fact that you even dare to compare these two performances show how badly you want this extra weight thing to be right. As for the stamina issue, all you have to do is watch Whyte, who I've shared a gum with fighting Chisora or even Joshua. Look how slow the pace is. Watch some of the eighties heavyweight fights. The proof is before your eyes. Joshua, as big as he is, wobbled against Whyte clearly. Whyte isn't a big puncher, as he's proved in several fights at UK level. He's an accumulation puncher.But he still hurt Joshua. The weight doesn't prevent that. It does force you to fight at a slower pace. Beating a 41 year old Wlad, coming off a loss, who was stopped descively three times in he's career because he's own chin was shaky, despite he's weight, and who's best win is either Haye or Povetkin, smaller men who he couldn't stop, proves nothing about Joshua's comparison to the eighties crop of heavies. He has a high guard, little head movement, fights at a much lower pace, looked gassed by the fourth against Whyte, and has a very dentable chin, which he showed in the only two wins of consequence on he's record. Now he's beating some of the best skilled heavies of all time. In your mind.

[bluepete]

"Tyson could handle the big guys. If an old Wlad can knockdown AJ I'm sure a prime Tyson would have gotten to him. "
"

Its not about an OLD Wlad as much as a motivated one....We all know ( who studied actual Tyson fights) know he could handle big guys...but Joshua represents a DIFFERENT type of skill and style. The match up itself has no bearing on how wlad got to him bc Joshua wasnt forced to press early....you have to look at the ACTUAL match itself..and that tells me either gets knocked out before rnd 7.IF it goes late it favors AJ.

Tyson was one of the most conditioned fighters of all time...his style and the way he fought shows this...its nonsense to say modern guys lack fitness when they are throwing punches and lasinging longer at a higher weight...


what it comes down too is if someone is actually watching the fights...?Their clearly not.If someone is to muscular they call it?If someone is too soft they say it? Really they have no clue what they are talking about...it comes down to getting your hand raised and being fit .I really doubt this a pete blue character would tell anyone he claims he saw in the gym in person that they are fat to their face.....Is whyte really fat and out of shape throwing the amount of shots at his weight( and taking them ) in 12 rnd fights? That guy has no clue what hes actually trying to show...


Really it comes down to what the style/trainer/and ability of THAT fighter can do....NO poster opinion would change that.

I train at Keddles gym. I know Whyte and if he asked me, I'd say that I think he'd do better at around 225.He absolutely carries extra weight around the midriff. You think that he's stamina looked good when old Derek was dying on the ropes in their fight? It's you who has no clue what your taking about. Your the one pointing to guys "weight advantage" when anyone who's been in a ring knows that it doesnt make you hit harder. It doesnt help you take a shot. It sapps your energy. Haye hits harder than Whyte. He also moved better, being lighter, and when he had Derek hurt, he got him out. Being gassed leads to stoppages, having energy helps you go for the stoppage when you got a guy going. Having and extra 25lb round your waist, or on your lats and biceps does nothing for either. The truth clearly bothers you since you refer to me answering others. It's too bad. For every Breazale beating a cruiserweight who put on 25lb of unnecessary muscle I can give you a smaller guy who smashed a bigger guy, particularly at heavyweight.

[juggernaut666]

it wouldn't be because the facts do support this notion.



Anthony Joshua fought Wladimir Klitschko and I don't see any reason to believe that Mike Tyson hits harder than Wladimir Klitschko. Wlad has a higher / better knockout percentage / record than Mike Tyson in virtually every department.



For me, Wladimir Klitschko easily surpasses Mike Tyson in all of those departments.

The reason why I stated it's a mismatch in favor of Joshua was because of Mike Tyson's significant failures against heavyweights of Joshua's size.



No, it's because of Mike Tyson's struggles against opponents who were roughly the same size as Joshua, but who were of a much lower caliber (such as Danny Williams, Brian Nielsen, Kevin Mcbride and so forth so on).



Mike Tyson couldn't finish Danny Williams and Brian Nielsen early (both roughly the same size as Joshua but are inferior), despite throwing his hardest punches on them multiple times. Thus, he is even less likely to do it against Anthony Joshua.



I have no disagreements with this.

"it wouldn't be because the facts do support this notion."

Tyson never was close to remotely losing until he departed with Rooney and that is an actual fact not your statistic of irrelevance to the year EVERYONE knows when the era we are using is the 80's ,and even pre prison one could see vindictive Tyson vs Tillman/Bruno /Williams and Ruddock.

" Anthony Joshua fought Wladimir Klitschko and I don't see any reason to believe that Mike Tyson hits harder than Wladimir Klitschko. Wlad has a higher / better knockout percentage / record than Mike Tyson in virtually every department."

It doesnt really matter who hit harder , Tyson EASILY poses more threat to Joshua style wise (we all know Wlad can be beat if pressured bc he likes to calculate his moves ) Tyson would force Joshua into his own world and have to fend off HUGE shots coming his way . Joshua is NOT a clincher or staller ,you know this though .

"Mike Tyson couldn't finish Danny Williams and Brian Nielsen early (both roughly the same size as Joshua but are inferior), despite throwing his hardest punches on them multiple times. Thus, he is even less likely to do it against Anthony Joshua. "

Well it looks like weve reached the end here !

[juggernaut666]

I train at Keddles gym. I know Whyte and if he asked me, I'd say that I think he'd do better at around 225.He absolutely carries extra weight around the midriff. You think that he's stamina looked good when old Derek was dying on the ropes in their fight? It's you who has no clue what your taking about. Your the one pointing to guys "weight advantage" when anyone who's been in a ring knows that it doesnt make you hit harder. It doesnt help you take a shot. It sapps your energy. Haye hits harder than Whyte. He also moved better, being lighter, and when he had Derek hurt, he got him out. Being gassed leads to stoppages, having energy helps you go for the stoppage when you got a guy going. Having and extra 25lb round your waist, or on your lats and biceps does nothing for either. The truth clearly bothers you since you refer to me answering others. It's too bad. For every Breazale beating a cruiserweight who put on 25lb of unnecessary muscle I can give you a smaller guy who smashed a bigger guy, particularly at heavyweight.

Guy give it up ,theres a reason why k.o percentages drop the HEAVIER the opposition weighs on average . Im done with you too,utter nonsense with about everything you posted above !