Who would win: prime Ali vs prime Tyson

And who exactly did Tyson beat coming up?

Spinks? Berbick? An Aging Holmes? Smith? Green?

C’mon man.

He beat a bunch of fucking scrubs coming up.

First guy how stood up to him whooped him (Buster).

I would have loved to see Tua Blitz his ass.

Evander stood up to him and Lewis made him cry like a school girl.

Tyson is the king of looking “dominate” against chumps.

NAME ME ONE TOP GUY THAT TYSON “DESTROYED”??? That’s right, no one. Because there wasn’t any.

If you could fight him and were not intimidated (read Holyfield/Lewis), and you made him work for more than 3 rounds… he was done. Over-fucking-rated.

Hell Klitchko would kick his ass.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]nhstatemuscle wrote:
The classic ‘what if’. Different era’s so tough to say. Like most things in the world everything improves over time; advancements are always being made. Athletes today are better than those of yester-year (improved training methods, supplements, equipment, greater knowledge, etc). However regardless of, a champion of years past would be a champion today because of the same make-up…that being their mind, determination and work ethic. An Ali vs. Tyson would not, nor could not, be a one and done. It would be Tyson winning the first fight, Ali winning the second. It’s the third fight that I can’t venture a guess who would win… [/quote]

Keep in mind that as far as boxing goes, training regimes haven’t really changed… hell, they have barely changed at all haha.

It ain’t like the NFL…[/quote]

I would say that boxing is the sport where training has changed the least over the last 100 years.

Ali was WAY to smart to be beaten by Tyson. In his prime, Ali had too much movement for Tyson and a blistering, endless jab that was MADE for a style like Tyson’s. As another poster pointed out, after 3 rounds of confused ass-whuppin’ Tyson would have been totally demoralized. He would have to bite Rooney’s ears 'cause he damn sure wasn’t getting to Ali’s. No contest, Ali ALL THE WAY.

[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:

Joe Frazier gave Ali trouble in all of their matches, to say otherwise is ludicrous. And how does Joe fight? He comes in bobbing and weaving and throwing bombs.

But here’s the difference. Tyson was faster than Joe, more accurate, bigger and is superior technically. His defense is far better and his ability to cut off the ring and move to dominant angles is much better.

I don’t see it being anywhere near as easy for Ali as some people are making out. I certainly don’t think he dominates the fight the way he did to Patterson. I don’t rule out the possibility of a UD victory to Ali, but at the very least he comes away battered and bloodied.[/quote]

Good point on similar styles of Frazier and Tyson. However.

Frazier was constant pressure…never letting up…and a Will of Iron.

Tyson fighting with that type of offense. Not possible.

[quote]Hold Up wrote:

[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:

Joe Frazier gave Ali trouble in all of their matches, to say otherwise is ludicrous. And how does Joe fight? He comes in bobbing and weaving and throwing bombs.

But here’s the difference. Tyson was faster than Joe, more accurate, bigger and is superior technically. His defense is far better and his ability to cut off the ring and move to dominant angles is much better.

I don’t see it being anywhere near as easy for Ali as some people are making out. I certainly don’t think he dominates the fight the way he did to Patterson. I don’t rule out the possibility of a UD victory to Ali, but at the very least he comes away battered and bloodied.[/quote]

Good point on similar styles of Frazier and Tyson. However.

Frazier was constant pressure…never letting up…and a Will of Iron.

Tyson fighting with that type of offense. Not possible.[/quote]

Exactly.

Mike was an explosive 3 round fighter. Yes, bigger, faster and more powerful.

Joe was a 15 round swarmer who could apply constant pressure who had one key thing Mike lacked:

HEART.

That’s the difference.

There was NO QUIT in Smokin’ Joe Frazier…NONE.

Tyson was another story. Ali would have had him bedazzled and demoralized early-on, and we KNOW how much ‘quit’ there was in Tyson when things didn’t go according to plan, i.e., getting his ass handed to him.
Tyson’s fragile psyche would lead to an early exit for the ‘baddest man on the planet’.

There was NO QUIT in Smokin’ Joe Frazier…NONE.

Tyson was another story. Ali would have had him bedazzled and demoralized early-on, and we KNOW how much ‘quit’ there was in Tyson when things didn’t go according to plan, i.e., getting his ass handed to him.
Tyson’s fragile psyche would lead to an early exit for the ‘baddest man on the planet’.

Not sure why all my points have been ignored, but I find it hysterical that some brought up Liston in comparison to Tyson’s power and how Ali would fare when it’s obvious to anyone with a brain that Liston threw that fight.

The Rock already covered this in The Rundown so im not sure why you guys have to make a thread about it…

[quote]audiogarden1 wrote:
The Rock already covered this in The Rundown so im not sure why you guys have to make a thread about it…[/quote]

FIGHT LIKE BUTTERFLY, STING LIKE BEE!

best post of this thread so far.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]audiogarden1 wrote:
The Rock already covered this in The Rundown so im not sure why you guys have to make a thread about it…[/quote]

FIGHT LIKE BUTTERFLY, STING LIKE BEE!

best post of this thread so far.[/quote]

Clearly because of my boxing expertise.

The best memories I have are watching dozens of fights with my father, and what always amazed me about Ali is that he was so efficient fighting while moving backward. Even when an opponent was making him back up he was still able to unleash deadly combos. Magnificent foot work as well. So light on his feet for such a tall man. And unparalleled ring smarts. That alone would give him the nod over Tyson.

Ali was great but no boxer has yet to dominate the HW division like Tyson… His knockouts were quick & brutal… Ali was more finesse also in his time fights went way longer due to rules ect…Tysons fighting style was like a crazed beast… I dont think Ali could have beat Tyson also he couldnt have beat Lenox Lewis or Vital Klitco… Ali was great for his time but the sport evloved…

[quote]thehebrewhero wrote:
Ali was great but no boxer has yet to dominate the HW division like Tyson… His knockouts were quick & brutal… Ali was more finesse also in his time fights went way longer due to rules ect…Tysons fighting style was like a crazed beast… I dont think Ali could have beat Tyson also he couldnt have beat Lenox Lewis or Vital Klitco… Ali was great for his time but the sport evloved…[/quote]

That depends how you define “dominate”

If we’re relating domination to success, Joe Louis dominated the HW division in far more successful fashion than did Tyson.

[quote]thehebrewhero wrote:
Ali was great but no boxer has yet to dominate the HW division like Tyson… His knockouts were quick & brutal… Ali was more finesse also in his time fights went way longer due to rules ect…Tysons fighting style was like a crazed beast… I dont think Ali could have beat Tyson also he couldnt have beat Lenox Lewis or Vital Klitco… Ali was great for his time but the sport evloved…[/quote]

You’re entitled to say that you don’t think he would win - that’s your opinion - but the sport has NOT evolved.

Like I said, this is a logical fallacy… other sports have evolved, but fighting is fighting. The rules haven’t changed and there haven’t been any real changes in style since the modern guard adopted some time in the 20’s or 30’s.

Hmmm. I’m an Ali guy.

However, as a discussion point…

Ali was the best of 3.3 billion. Tyson was the best of 4.8. So although boxing technique, skill etc might not have changed much, national champions from smaller countries don’t tend to be as good as those from bigger (active) populations.

My counter argument would be Klischco of 7 billion, is the worst champion of living memory.

Thoughts?

I disagree the sport has evolved its safer… Knockdown rules have changed… Guys are tested for PEDs’ ect… True fighting is fighting but the sport of boxing and how promoters now run the show has changed it dramatically. On that note training has evolved through time… There are much better ways for fighters to work on speed, power, ect… Also nutrition science supplements ect… All sports and athletes evolve through time

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Not sure why all my points have been ignored, but I find it hysterical that some brought up Liston in comparison to Tyson’s power and how Ali would fare when it’s obvious to anyone with a brain that Liston threw that fight. [/quote]

I for one wasn’t trying to ignore your posts, but we have both beat this horse a bunch in the combat forum.

Liston was so mobbed up that there really should be question marks on most of his fights. He is also another fighter who’s “prime” wasn’t fully in the light.

Growing up Tyson was my favorite fighter. I liked him before he won the title. IF he had the in ring IQ/“heart” of any of the fighters talked about in this thread he would have been even more epic. I am simply not sold on the idea that Cus could have steered him right or built that into him. Irish mentioned the Teddy Atlas incident, granted only one data point for Tyson when Cus was around.

I think if Tyson was able to get Ali in trouble early, than it goes his way. At his best he was a supremely destructive force in the ring. The reason I pick Ali is that he has the advantages if that doesn’t happen. He always had a great gas tank. Four factors that Ali would bring to the table make him a special foil for Tyson:

1.)Gas Tank-

Ok, for the record I don’t think it is fair to say that Tyson would gas so much as simply use up the fissile material needed to bring that much ass whooping. Still, those of us picking Ali all seem to hold any damage done by Ali would happen in the later rounds so Ali having a big enough tank to get to those rounds and be effective is pretty damn important. Also, how long is this fight? 10, 12, 16 rounds? I think longer is better for Ali.

2.)Ali COULD fight backing up-

Tyson ate guys who tried to box/circle out on him for lunch. Spinks is the prime example. Ali however was simply in another class at backing up, but still being able to land damaging shots. I contend that Tyson was always vulnerable when he closed and started to launch a punch. His footwork, speed, timing, and overall menace minimized this opening, but it was always there. When most guys are forced to back up they lost any ability to capitalize on Tyson’s vulnerability (Holifield did this by stepping in, rather than back). Ali could still land telling shots.

3.)Chin-

This goes with 2. The proven way to take Tyson apart was to hit him as he comes in. Douglas did it. Holifield did it. Lewis did it. Granted none of those fights are considered “prime” Tyson, but the fighters aren’t mentioned as being in Ali’s league either. Ali had one of the great chins in boxing history. Certainly Tyson could still KO him, but he is less likely to do it as easily as against a fighter with only a “good” chin. If that translates into taking more time, than this magnifies 1 and 2.

4.)Mental Factors- I HATE putting this in here, but it is really the biggest one. If it wasn’t on the list than the fact Ali left years of his life in the ring against Frazier, and the idea that Tyson would be more of a buzz saw than Joe, would turn this into a pick 'em fight to me. Tyson wins if he hurts Ali early and often. He does damage. Ali tries to back up and survive. Instead he is battered and goes somewhere before the half way point of a 12 round fight. Or Tyson doesn’t and gets decisioned or KO’d late in the fight.

The problem is Ali made a big deal out of pre-fight hype and shenanigans. He would have made fun of Mike. He would have questioned his manhood. He would have found a way to pull the race card. He would have done any and everything to get Tyson to implode. I think Tyson would have been especially vulnerable to this behavior.

I don’t believe the “best” Tyson was without the mental issues that he displayed later when frustrated in the ring. He just never got tested by anyone enough to need to dig deep enough that he came up lacking. I am not sold that the theoretical “prime” Tyson would have developed the ability to adapt and overcome to having his first couple game plans shot to hell.

Regards,

Robert A

[quote]Irish Daza wrote:
Hmmm. I’m an Ali guy.

However, as a discussion point…

Ali was the best of 3.3 billion. Tyson was the best of 4.8. So although boxing technique, skill etc might not have changed much, national champions from smaller countries don’t tend to be as good as those from bigger (active) populations.

My counter argument would be Klischco of 7 billion, is the worst champion of living memory.

Thoughts?[/quote]

I wouldn’t agree that Klitchscko is the worst champion

He’s the most BORING

But he wins. He made David Haye look silly.

So a man has to be given credit where its due, he is a skilled fighter. It’s just his skill is one that is not entertaining in the least.

But it actually brings me to the point I want to make about people saying Tyson beat no one: Before prison tyson beat everyone there WAS to beat. The reason nobody remembers most fighters from that era is because no-fuckin-body remembers any fighters of that era BEFORE tyson.

Its not that they are “scrubs” - they are not name fighters because boxing was no longer a name sport at the time. It was in a huge downturn popularity wise, you had gone from a bunch of great personalities and rivalries to boxing politics and boring thugs fighting for various belts.

Everyone who claims Tyson ducked person doesn’t seem to want to acknowledge that person wasnt even fucking around to fight Tyson at the time. For example, Lennox was still a fuckin amateur when Tyson unified the belts. Holyfield was a cruiserweight no one gave a shit about.

Like it or not, the Tyson media storm turned boxing into a household sport again, for a time. What happened after tyson left the game?

Well, what does the HW division look like today? :\

In terms of overall greatness Ali far surpasses Tyson. Tyson in his prime however was imo the perfect storm. His head movement, precision punching hand/head speed, as well as his power and aggressiveness was something no other heavyweight has even come close to having. I don’t think of Ali vs. Tyson as the classic boxer vs. puncher, I think of it as a boxer vs. a swarmer, in this case this is where Tyson has the advantage. Outside of the decline of Tysons head movement one of the most overlooked things was he began head hunting, and tying up. If you watch his early fights when Tyson got inside he worked, and his punches were accurate. I don’ see Ali out moving Tyson, nor do I see the rope a dope tactic working on an accurate quick handed fighter like Tyson. I see Ali taking a beating and having the fight stopped in the later rounds, or else Tyson coasting after gassing late and winning on the cards.

I think Foreman/Tyson, or maybe even Tua/Tyson, Ibeabuchi/Tyson would be much more intrigueing and fun to watch fights.