Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
159 messages Options
123456 ... 8
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

It's Dale
GatorPurify wrote
 Even the commentators said Mitch's performance was pathetic.
Mike scared the hell out of his adversaries and put them into survival mode. Thats what happened to Mitch and Bonecrusher. Those two men just did whatever was possible to last the distance and not get knocked out. Fighting back was the last thing on their minds.

Against Muhammad Ali, this ain't happening. When Muhammad throws those triple jabs and flurries from the distance, it would be Tyson that shuts down and goes into survival mode.

Everyone here is talking about the damn Mitch Green fight. The best fight to compare Tyson v. Ali is Tyson's fight with Pinklon Thomas. Thomas had Angelo Dundee as his trainer. He had a great chin, great size and a great jab. He knew how to time Tyson's bobbing and weaving and was busting him up bad with the jab. Tyson couldn't get inside. Muhammad was much better than Thomas. Much faster and athletic. Joe Frazier was harder to hit than tyson because Frazier's bob and weave pattern was unpredictable. Ali would know how to time Tyson's head movement the way that Buster Douglas and Pinklon Thomas did. Mike would get outboxed, beat up and KO'd late versus Muhammad Ali.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Hit Em' Hard
In reply to this post by Duggerman
Duggerman wrote
That's right. Put them both in their peak years. How does this one go?

I'll keep it short. Muhammad would win. I was watching Ali-Frazier 1 just yesterday and it was Joe's nonstop attack and body punching that wore Ali out. Tyson was dynamite too but he fought more so in spurts. Joe kept attacking. So while Tyson is using his peekaboo trying to get inside, Ali would be scoring points with his jab.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Bugs
A lot of people make the mistake of comparing Tyson to Frazier...two different styles, really.

Tyson's hook would cause Ali problems, but it wasn't Frazier's hook so much that gave Ali grief, but Frazier's tenacity. Joe just wouldn't let Ali breathe! Tyson didn't have the same sustained pressure as Joe did, and it would be a different kind of fight against Ali.

Frazier also landed quite a few right hands on Ali, and honestly if he had a better right hand, their series of fights could have been very different. But again, it was his bulldog-like tenacity that made him so competitive.

For my money, Ali is about the only heavyweight I'd make a clear favourite over Tyson. He'd mentally destroy Tyson I think.
Eh....What's Up, Doc?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Zorro
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

the boston strong boy
In reply to this post by Duggerman
ali still had his footwork but tyson was fast as well but i dont think he can put a lightening fast ali away ali wins by pts
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Shane
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Duggerman
Administrator
Muhammad Ali never fought Max Schmeling. The writer needs to scratch that off.

I still say Tyson wins. Tyson also brought something to the table that Frazier didn't...the uppercut. If Tyson lands a right hook to the body followed by a right uppercut to the chin and a left hook, Ali is gonna go. Anyone would go after that. That's the combination that got Pinklon Thomas in trouble and knocked out. The same would inevitably happen to Muhammad Ali, who fought with his hands down and would be unprepared for Tyson's quick hands on the inside.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Entaowed
This post was updated on .
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Duggerman
Administrator
Of course I read the article. Remember when I corrected the author for incorrectly stating that Ali fought Max Schmeling? I'm a journalist...I view everything objectively. I have a lot of respect for Ali. But in my honest opinion Tyson beats Ali by late TKO or decision. I've already explained why.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Entaowed
This post was updated on .
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Duggerman
Administrator
I pick Tyson to win for several reasons but I guess I'll re-explain myself. Mainly, I pick the style of Tyson to beat Ali. Ali would have had trouble with Dempsey, Marciano, Frazier (of course) and Tyson. The short, stocky powerful heavyweights that move forward, bobbing and weaving and attacking the body and cutting the ring would always give Ali fits because they can corner him and reduce his speed with the body punches.

Secondly, Ali proved many times that he could recover from one big blow. But Ali rarely took combinations. Frazier sent Ali slumping into the ropes when he tagged him with a double left hook in 1971. That's the only time I've seen him take a combination, and it hurt him. Frazier could have finished him but thought Ali was conning him.

Tyson threw "punches in bunches." I'm sure Joe Louis would have KO'd Ali as well. When you get hit by a big barrage of punches at once, you're done. That's why I rate Tyson and Louis as the best finishers of all time. They threw short, powerful, fast jolts that you couldn't defend yourself from and every punch landed right on the button.

That's why I was making the Pinklon Thomas example. Pinklon had a good chin. Like Ali, he could survive one big blow. But when Tyson struck him with a barrage of combinations, Pinklon finally went down. Tyson could never destroy Ali with one punch. In fact, no one could. But I doubt Ali (or anyone else) could survive a brutal combination from dynamite sluggers like Tyson and Louis. Evander Holyfield survived bombs from Tyson but was rarely hit with combinations. In fact, Tyson hurt Evander one time in the 5th when he landed a right hook to the body and an uppercut to the chin, also known as a combination.

And, you know by now that I've rated Tyson #1 in terms of head to head. I don't think anyone beats him at his peak. Tyson and Louis were the only heavyweights to combine speed, power, accuracy, perfect timing and countering abilities. But Tyson cut the ring better, applied more pressure, had a better chin and was much harder to hit. I'm very confident that he'd knock out Joe Louis. I don't think Tyson could knock out everyone, but he'd put them in survival mode and get a decision as he did with Green, Tucker, Smith and Tillis.

Speaking of those fights, I know those fighters can't be compared to Ali. None of them are in his league. However, they used several Ali tactics to give Tyson trouble and avoid getting knocked out. They were tall fighters with long reach that ran and held when Tyson got close. Ali would use those tactics even better. However, those guys had better defense than Ali. They didn't fight with their hands down the way Ali did. They didn't lean back from incoming punches either. When Tyson catches Ali against the ropes with his hands down, it's over. You can't make those fundamental errors against intelligent bombers like Louis and Tyson. One mistake and the fight is over right then and there.

I started a thread on here about the Tyson-Tillis fight and I scored it in favor of Tillis. I'm being honest...Tyson lost that fight in my opinion. The fight was a learning experience for him. Look back through the threads and see if you find it. If not, I'll bump it up to the front page. Tyson should have lost that fight, but he was still being seasoned. It's like Cassius Clay almost getting knocked out by Henry Cooper.

Now, Ali was the greater fighter in terms of his resume and overall legacy. Tyson was like a comet that soared across the night sky. His prime was only three years. (1985-88). However, I don't think anyone beats Tyson during that short prime with Kevin Rooney calling the shots from his corner. Tyson was too young and immature to handle the money and fame, so he went downhill quickly and was mentally washed up as a fighter by the age of 23. If Cus D'Amato had lived and Tyson wasn't influenced by Don King and Robin Givens, I believe Tyson would have surpassed Rocky Marciano's record of 49-0. I don't see Holyfield, Bowe or Lewis beating him in their primes.

There are several people I'd pick to beat Ali, not just Tyson. I'd pick Lennox Lewis to beat Ali, too. Not because I'm a big Lennox fan, but because Lennox would take advantage of Ali's fundamental flaws. Again, styles make fights.

This is all my opinion. Remember that there are three pages of this thread where we've analyzed this fantasy match-up.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Zorro
Duggerman wrote
I pick Tyson to win for several reasons but I guess I'll re-explain myself. Mainly, I pick the style of Tyson to beat Ali. Ali would have had trouble with Dempsey, Marciano, Frazier (of course) and Tyson. The short, stocky powerful heavyweights that move forward, bobbing and weaving and attacking the body and cutting the ring would always give Ali fits because they can corner him and reduce his speed with the body punches.

Secondly, Ali proved many times that he could recover from one big blow. But Ali rarely took combinations. Frazier sent Ali slumping into the ropes when he tagged him with a double left hook in 1971. That's the only time I've seen him take a combination, and it hurt him. Frazier could have finished him but thought Ali was conning him.

Tyson threw "punches in bunches." I'm sure Joe Louis would have KO'd Ali as well. When you get hit by a big barrage of punches at once, you're done. That's why I rate Tyson and Louis as the best finishers of all time. They threw short, powerful, fast jolts that you couldn't defend yourself from and every punch landed right on the button.

That's why I was making the Pinklon Thomas example. Pinklon had a good chin. Like Ali, he could survive one big blow. But when Tyson struck him with a barrage of combinations, Pinklon finally went down. Tyson could never destroy Ali with one punch. In fact, no one could. But I doubt Ali (or anyone else) could survive a brutal combination from dynamite sluggers like Tyson and Louis. Evander Holyfield survived bombs from Tyson but was rarely hit with combinations. In fact, Tyson hurt Evander one time in the 5th when he landed a right hook to the body and an uppercut to the chin, also known as a combination.

And, you know by now that I've rated Tyson #1 in terms of head to head. I don't think anyone beats him at his peak. Tyson and Louis were the only heavyweights to combine speed, power, accuracy, perfect timing and countering abilities. But Tyson cut the ring better, applied more pressure, had a better chin and was much harder to hit. I'm very confident that he'd knock out Joe Louis. I don't think Tyson could knock out everyone, but he'd put them in survival mode and get a decision as he did with Green, Tucker, Smith and Tillis.

Speaking of those fights, I know those fighters can't be compared to Ali. None of them are in his league. However, they used several Ali tactics to give Tyson trouble and avoid getting knocked out. They were tall fighters with long reach that ran and held when Tyson got close. Ali would use those tactics even better. However, those guys had better defense than Ali. They didn't fight with their hands down the way Ali did. They didn't lean back from incoming punches either. When Tyson catches Ali against the ropes with his hands down, it's over. You can't make those fundamental errors against intelligent bombers like Louis and Tyson. One mistake and the fight is over right then and there.

I started a thread on here about the Tyson-Tillis fight and I scored it in favor of Tillis. I'm being honest...Tyson lost that fight in my opinion. The fight was a learning experience for him. Look back through the threads and see if you find it. If not, I'll bump it up to the front page. Tyson should have lost that fight, but he was still being seasoned. It's like Cassius Clay almost getting knocked out by Henry Cooper.

Now, Ali was the greater fighter in terms of his resume and overall legacy. Tyson was like a comet that soared across the night sky. His prime was only three years. (1985-88). However, I don't think anyone beats Tyson during that short prime with Kevin Rooney calling the shots from his corner. Tyson was too young and immature to handle the money and fame, so he went downhill quickly and was mentally washed up as a fighter by the age of 23. If Cus D'Amato had lived and Tyson wasn't influenced by Don King and Robin Givens, I believe Tyson would have surpassed Rocky Marciano's record of 49-0. I don't see Holyfield, Bowe or Lewis beating him in their primes.

There are several people I'd pick to beat Ali, not just Tyson. I'd pick Lennox Lewis to beat Ali, too. Not because I'm a big Lennox fan, but because Lennox would take advantage of Ali's fundamental flaws. Again, styles make fights.

This is all my opinion. Remember that there are three pages of this thread where we've analyzed this fantasy match-up.
Solid post. As I've said before, I'm probably the oldest person on this forum and I've seen Tyson and Ali both at their best. Muhammad was the real deal but Tyson would be too dangerous. Tyson didn't punch as much as Frazier but when he threw, it counted. Ali suffered from left hooks against Frazier but Tyson had more in his arsenal. Frazier had more heart than Tyson but Tyson was more talented. Its a shame the guy blew it so early in his career. But does he beat Tyson? I say yes.

I read the article and it says that old guys are pro-Ali. Well, I'm an older guy and I'm pro Tyson. Ali's jab wouldn't matter against Tyson who would slip it and get inside to do damage. Also, I'm smart enough to know that Tyson would not KO Ali quickly. It would happen late. You have to take your time grinding down Ali and go for the kill when the time is right. I think Tyson gets him late.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Entaowed
This post was updated on .
In reply to this post by Duggerman
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Michelle
Tyson would knock Ali's pretty brains out.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Shane
Michelle wrote
Tyson would knock Ali's pretty brains out.
The girl's got a point. Shake yo booty baby!!

**waits for Entawoed to come in here and talk about how I'm being morally wrong and disrespecting women, while not realizing that I actually know this girl in real life**
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Entaowed
This post was updated on .
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Duggerman
Administrator
^^Michelle's in that pic. I went to college with her. I know several of the people that post here personally.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Hit Em' Hard
In reply to this post by Entaowed
Entaowed wrote
Thaks Duggerman.  Though I always read all of a thread.  What you said before I noted, but that did not address the detailed arguments in the great article you posted.  You did offer some new specifics here, & there are some good points.

I certainly could see an argument for Tyson, but Ali would win more often.  That is an admirably neutral thing to claim that Tyson got a gift decision against Tillis.  Though it was during his prime, you can argue not his "top 'o the heap" prime, & the comparison to Ali-Cooper in that regard is apt.

Though I do not think Tyson improved enough after that fight to handle the much better peak Ali.  He also never showed he became very effective at either infighting or avoiding being tied up.  There are 6 of 9 categories that the article gives Ali the advantage, & a greater degree of advantage in what they are superior at.  Particularly important is the heart, chin, & psychological advantages.

Tyson had more "tools" that wr great than Frazier.  Yet:

1) He Tyson would not throw nearly as many punches.  That is a huge difference.

2) It is a big fallacy, a totally inaccurate comparison of peak to peak, to consider '70's Ali against peak anyone.  That was not his peak.  Now would Frazier give Tyson the same problems at his peak?  I do not think as much, enough so that without holding he would win.  That he was more vulnerable to left hooks does not mean that he would get hit with as many when he was much faster.

A big part of what i wrote was their post peak 8 years of fighting when they both were churning out victories.  Does you referral to Tyson's
 high peak & fading mean you AGREE with me that Ali would win the vast majority of head to heads, Ali '70-'78, Tyson '95-'03?




Zorro, you wrote "but does he beat Tyson?  I say yes".  You must have meant to type Ali there.
Both Ali and Tyson had the ingredients to exploit the flaws in each other. I agree with AJ's sentiment that Ali puts himself in danger by fighting with his hands low and that could lead to disaster against Tyson, especially if Tyson lands three or four consecutive power punches at once. But Ali had the whereitall to wrap his arms around you and grip you in a clinch to clear his head if he was hurt. Its a good fight if they're both at their peaks and Tyson would land some good shots and threaten Ali but he wouldn't win. I see it this way-- Ali controls the early rounds. Tyson lands some bombs and hurts Ali somewhere around round 5 or 6, and then Ali regains control and finishes the fight by picking Tyson apart.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

Entaowed
This post was updated on .
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Muhammad Ali (1967) Versus Mike Tyson (1988)

It's Dale
Muhammad was better in the 60s. That was the peak of his powers. He thought so little of Joe Frazier that he stood his ground and tried in vain to knock him out early. When he couldn't, he realized he didn't have the speed and reflexes he used to and got beat up pretty bad. Ali developed more power as he aged but it slowed his speed which hurt his ability to stay out of trouble. I like Tyson ok but I don't think he'd beat 1971 Ali either. He may knock out Ali post-Thrilla in Manilla. Any other version of Ali outsmarts him.
123456 ... 8