Prime Tyson v Prime Joe Louis - who wins ?

tryingmybestt

Tyson at his peak was an awesome machine....speed, power, technique he had it all...

Louis was beautiful to watch....excellent timing, colossal power and good speed....

I think louis would win by KO in the mid to late rounds after been down himself in the first couple of rounds....

I'd give the edge in power to Louis' right hand...edge in speed to Tyson....timing and counter punching to Louis

walshb

I love both, but folks who ignore the weight difference and obvious chin issues are imo naive. Tyson at peak was fit as a fiddle, a steel chin, and a ferocious puncher. Now, these traits are simply desperate for Joe Louis.

Two big bangers meet, and both we know will land and land flush, I will go with the guy who I believe had the better chin. Louis is not going to take a flush connection from Mike Tyson, and if he does, and is badly hurt, it is game over. Tyson's chin at peak was grade A.

15-20 lbs is the weight difference, and that is 15-20 lbs of solid power and muscle, not excess fat. If Louis had a Tyson chin then I reckon he wins. He does not. And, even if he won, it would be a very close fight. Who ever outboxed a peak Tyson? Or, came close to beating a peak Tyson? 1986-1989.

kryogen

For me its Tyson

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

I love both, but folks who ignore the weight difference and obvious chin issues are imo naive. Tyson at peak was fit as a fiddle, a steel chin, and a ferocious puncher. Now, these traits are simply desperate for Joe Louis.

Two big bangers meet, and both we know will land and land flush, I will go with the guy who I believe had the better chin. Louis is not going to take a flush connection from Mike Tyson, and if he does, and is badly hurt, it is game over. Tyson's chin at peak was grade A.

20 lbs is the weight difference, and that is 20 lbs of solid power and muscle, not excess fat.

I don;t think you can say Tyson's chin was grade A as he was never really tested....he rarely got hit and most of his fights were over early.......Douglas chinned him when caught clean, so did Lewis and Holyfield.....

Louis fought a higher level of opposition and although the weight difference is substantial I feel the counter punching ability of Louis would win the day....the power in his right hand is first class....he had great footwork, stamina and wasted nothing.....

also you say his chin was grade A at his peak, assuming your saying his peak is when he was younger and lighter, this contradicts your previous argument where you said that Ali maturing and gaining weight in his later years made his chin a lot better?

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

I don;t think you can say Tyson's chin was grade A as he was never really tested....he rarely got hit and most of his fights were over early.......Douglas chinned him when caught clean, so did Lewis and Holyfield.....

Louis fought a higher level of opposition and although the weight difference is substantial I feel the counter punching ability of Louis would win the day....the power in his right hand is first class....he had great footwork, stamina and wasted nothing.....

I have posetd extensively on another thread realting to Tyson. Many people agree that his chin was grade A. Tucker landed some bombs, Smith too, Bruno too. Douglas pasted Mike for ten rds before Mike finally crumbled. Even the shell of a man vs. Lewis took some pasting before crumbling. Holyfield teed off on a past peak Tyson for 11 rds before the ref stopped Tyson on his feet. No, his chin is wickedly solid, and again, down to his physiology. 20 inch solid neck. Powerful shoulders and powerful legs.

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

I don;t think you can say Tyson's chin was grade A as he was never really tested....he rarely got hit and most of his fights were over early.......Douglas chinned him when caught clean, so did Lewis and Holyfield.....

Louis fought a higher level of opposition and although the weight difference is substantial I feel the counter punching ability of Louis would win the day....the power in his right hand is first class....he had great footwork, stamina and wasted nothing.....

also you say his chin was grade A at his peak, assuming your saying his peak is when he was younger and lighter, this contradicts your previous argument where you said that Ali maturing and gaining weight in his later years made his chin a lot better?

No contradiction at all. Mike Tyson was physically made to take a shot. I said this on the other thread. He to me is similar to Chuvalo and McCall.
He also weighed 218-220 lbs at peak. That is a very solid and powerful weight too.

Tyson got knocked out in Tokyo after ten rds of pasting. Same for Holyfiled's KO of Tyson. Lewis KO'd a well past it and absolute knackered Tyson.

No contradiction at all.

Louis' opposition was far from great. I don't see it being any better than Mike's. And, who from Louis comp would have had a chance against a peak Tyson?

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

I have posetd extensively on another thread realting to Tyson. Many people agree that his chin was grade A. Tucker landed some bombs, Smith too, Bruno too. Douglas pasted Mike for ten rds before Mike finally crumbled. Even the shell of a man vs. Lewis took some pasting before crumbling. Holyfield teed off on a past peak Tyson for 11 rds before the ref stopped Tyson on his feet. No, his chin is wickedly solid, and again, down to his physiology. 20 inch solid neck. Powerful shoulders and powerful legs.

i think both would land but i think louis has the better shot and would take tyson out....who did a peak tyson really fight....a blown up light heavyweight was his crowning glory in Spinks.....louis fought the much better opponents.....tyson avoided foreman.....louis was the better boxer.....tyson was ferocious and great to watch but once the first few rounds passed he slowed down and then louis boxing ability would kick in and also his huge overhand right and combination punching....

it's one of my favourite fantasy matchups and its a very close call.....i wouldn't bet my house on louis but if i had to bet i'd bet on louis for his better boxing ability and better power

also meant to say how can you question Joe's chin....he had an excellent chin.....the shots he took from Baer was unbelievable.....schmeling had him down in first fight after a tremendous amount of punches.....other than that louis' chin was granite

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

i think both would land but i think louis has the better shot and would take tyson out....who did a peak tyson really fight....a blown up light heavyweight was his crowning glory in Spinks.....louis fought the much better opponents.....tyson avoided foreman.....louis was the better boxer.....tyson was ferocious and great to watch but once the first few rounds passed he slowed down and then louis boxing ability would kick in and also his huge overhand right and combination punching....

it's one of my favourite fantasy matchups and its a very close call.....i wouldn't bet my house on louis but if i had to bet i'd bet on louis for his better boxing ability and better power

Who did Louis fight?

Anyway, simple: Both are ferocious hitters. Tyson hits you clean, then if your chin isn't solid, you lose. Larry Holmes had a fairly good chin and he was almost killed. Now, past his best, but I don't care, had that shot hit a peak Holmes I still think he is suffering badly.

Tyson avoided Foreman????

How so?

Baer and Schmeling are good hitters, but Tyson is better, more varied, more ferocious and I would say the speed and power he lands at is bad news for Louis.

Billy Conn made it 13 or so rds vs. Louis. Others lasted the pace. I cannot see Tyson getting stopped. No way.

Littlehorny

Comparing fighters from as far back as Louis to modern day fighters is a waste of time as alot of the old timers would only be fighting at cruiserweight and light heavy today. Different era, different time, modern big men are very athletic to big guys years ago.

walshb

Littlehorny wrote: »

Comparing fighters from as far back as Louis to modern day fighters is a waste of time as alot of the old timers would only be fighting at cruiserweight and light heavy today. Different era, different time, modern big men are very athletic to big guys years ago.

That is what I am thinking. Tyson destroys most of Louis' foes. Destroys them. The likes of Charles and Walcott may do better, but neither have the power and size to beat Tyson. Anyone see Conn outboxing and fending off a peak Tyson?:eek:

Tyson competed in an era where his foes were 220 and above. Ignoring this is wrong. They may not be p4p as good as the men from years gone by who were lighter, but they were bigger and heavier, and that comes with challenges.

The likes of Pinky, Tubbs, Tucker, Smith, Biggs etc were all very capable and quite big guys. Tyson dominated all of them.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Who did Louis fight?

Anyway, simple: Both are ferocious hitters. Tyson hits you clean, then if your chin isn't solid, you lose. Larry Holmes had a fairly good chin and he was almost killed. Now, past his best, but I don't care, had that shot hit a peak Holmes I still think he is suffering badly.

Tyson avoided Foreman????

How so?

Baer and Schmeling are good hitters, but Tyson is better, more varied, more ferocious and I would say the speed and power he lands at is bad news for Louis.

Billy Conn made it 13 or so rds vs. Louis. Others lasted the pace. I cannot see Tyson getting stopped. No way.

conn got ko'd in 13 and in rd 8 in the return, both time by ko.....louis fought the much better opposition and won......i would give jersey joe walcott a chance against tyson....louis beat him twice.....Baer was a tremendous hitter...i would also give him a chance against tyson...

the best ppl tyson fought he lost....ie. holyfield, lewis...who did tyson beat that ws first class??....the holmes fight was a joke, he was out of shape and nearly 40.......louis had the power, had the jab, had the speed to match or nearly match, had the movement and boxing ability, tyson was stronger but louis' power was the neutraliser......

also before louis retired the first time he ko'd nearly everyone....he didn't go the distance with more than one or two...

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

the best ppl tyson fought he lost....ie. holyfield, lewis...who did tyson beat that ws first class??....the holmes fight was a joke, he was out of shape and nearly 40.......louis had the power, had the jab, had the speed to match or nearly match, had the movement and boxing ability, tyson was stronger but louis' power was the neutraliser......

Why make this a match when Tyson was post prison? Peak to peak it should be.

And, what about Tyson's power, not a possible neutraliser?

Holmes was past it, and guess what, Tyson exposed this by whacking him.

JJW and Charles cannot beat or compete with Tyson.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Why make this a match when Tyson was post prison? Peak to peak it should be.

And, what about Tyson's power, not a possible neutraliser?

Holmes was past it, and guess what, Tyson exposed this by whacking him.

JJW and Charles cannot beat or compete with Tyson.

I am comparing tyson before prison obviously?

tyson's power was awesome but louis' was better

no praise for ko'ing holmes, an old man out of shape, was sad to see, similar to spinks v ali

JJW would compete with tyson, might not win but would def make it interesting...

also you say tyson fought in an area of above 220lbs....holyfield was a blown up light heavy.....most of tyson's early opponents were below 200lbs....?

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

I am comparing tyson before prison obviously?
....?

It is not obvious io your are bringing in Lewis, 2002, and Holyfield, 1996.

Peak Tyson was pre prison, and pre Douglas really. Rooney was gone after the Spinks fight, and then the decline happened.

Tyson spent three years incarcertaed, this is a lot worse even that three years of inactivity. No wonder he lost a hell of a lot of his talent.

You should leave both mens post peak out of this. I never mentioned Louis getting ko'd by Marciano or beaten by Charles.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

It is not obvious io your are bringing in Lewis, 2002, and Holyfield, 1996.

Peak Tyson was pre prison, and pre Douglas really. Rooney was gone after the Spinks fight, and then the decline happened.

Tyion spent three years incarcertaed, this is a lot worse even that three years of inactivity. No wonder he lost a hell of a lot of his talent.

You should leave both mens post peak out of this. I never mentioned Louis getting ko'd by Marciano or beaten by Charles.

i was merely asking who did tyson fight....the 2 biggest names on his record ko'd him....pre prison who did he fight??....a light heavyweight?...

the fight would take place when they are in their peak but i mentioned holyfield and lewis as no other notable fights really....

louis was a genius in the ring, so accurate, tremendous body shot and the best overhand right in history......he wasted nothing and also had an iron chin....he loved fighting bigger stronger guys, he took them apart......tyson would go all out in first round but after he tasted louis' power he will be hesitant and then louis would pick him off

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

Ino praise for ko'ing holmes, an old man out of shape, was sad to see, similar to spinks v ali

....?

Yet Larry went 12 rds with Holyfield, and beat Mercer after this. C'mon, that deserves some praise. What other heavyweight today would have done that to Holmes from 1988? You are being too critical here. What heavyweight ever would have done that to the 1988 Larry?

Look at the fight. Larry was doing okay, he simply got caught with a monster shot form a peak Tyson, who then would not let him away, unlike Snipes and Shavers from years before.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Yet Larry went 12 rds with Holyfield, and beat Mercer after this. C'mon, that deserves some praise. What other heavyweight today would have done that to Holmes from 1988? You are being too critical here. What heavyweight ever would have done that to the 1988 Larry?

Look at the fight. Larry was doing okay, he simply got caught with a moster shot form a peak Tyson, who then would not let hom away, unlike Snipes and Shavers from years before.

come on ......move on from the holmes fight....i understand it's difficult to mention other fights because there aren't really any others.......tyson didnt't have the wins against great fighters in his peak....and past his peak he lost against great fighters.....also it is accepted he avoided big george.....holmes was a shadow of his former self....a shot fighter who didn't have the legs to move away....as he was a longe range fighter if he couldn't move away from tyson the fight was over before it started

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

i was merely asking who did tyson fight....the 2 biggest names on his record ko'd him....pre prison who did he fight??....a light heavyweight?...

the fight would take place when they are in their peak but i mentioned holyfield and lewis as no other notable fights really....

louis was a genius in the ring, so accurate, tremendous body shot and the best overhand right in history......he wasted nothing and also had an iron chin....he loved fighting bigger stronger guys, he took them apart......tyson would go all out in first round but after he tasted louis' power he will be hesitant and then louis would pick him off

Again, show me any of Louis' opponents that would have troubled Tyson? Any.

Look, for either of us to be so sure is silly. I will simply say that 20 lbs extra of muscle, and a steel chin, and a massive hitter, will probably beat Joe Louis.

I really believe that the best Tyson takes anything Louis has. I saw nobody come close to even hurting Tyson from 1986-1989. Not even hurting him.

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

come on ......move on from the holmes fight....i understand it's difficult to mention other fights because there aren't really any others.......tyson didnt't have the wins against great fighters in his peak....and past his peak he lost against great fighters.....also it is accepted he avoided big george.....holmes was a shadow of his former self....a shot fighter who didn't have the legs to move away....as he was a longe range fighter if he couldn't move away from tyson the fight was over before it started

I never harped on about the Holmes fight. It was you who brought up that comment of him deserving NO praise. I simply queried this comment.

"Accepted" he avoided George? I would live to see the evidence or articles that really back this up. Anyway, no way George beats the best Tyson.

Maybe the younger George has a good chance. No way the older George.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Again, show me any of Louis' opponents that would have troubled Tyson? Any.

Look, for either of us to be so sure is silly. I will simply say that 20 lbs extra of muscle, and a steel chin, and a massive hitter, will probably beat Joe Louis.

I really believe that the best Tyson takes anything Louis has. I saw nobody come close to even hurting Tyson from 1986-1989. Not even hurting him.

who did tyson fight during 86-89 to test his chin????????????

louis had a better chin.....how can u say tyson could take louis' right hand?? it's one of the hardest punches in boxing history, harder than any of tyson's hooks.......louis was a better boxer....more accurate and bigger puncher, that's his recipe for success...

as i said in an earlier thread i wouldn't bet my house on louis as i see it as a close call but i would go for louis if i had to choose

actually i would give the older george a better chance of ko'ing tyson than the younger one, although i believe both would.....he was too big and powerful, determined, tough and could take a shot

tyson's promoter wanted nothing to do with big george....they were offered big money for the fight but turned it down

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

who did tyson fight during 86-89 to test his chin????????????

louis had a better chin.....how can u say tyson could take louis' right hand?? it's one of the hardest punches in boxing history, harder than any of tyson's hooks.......louis was a better boxer....more accurate and bigger puncher, that's his recipe for success...

as i said in an earlier thread i wouldn't bet my house on louis as i see it as a close call but i would go for louis if i had to choose

actually i would give the older george a better chance of ko'ing tyson than the younger one, although i believe both would.....he was too big and powerful, determined, tough and could take a shot

tyson's promoter wanted nothing to do with big george....they were offered big money for the fight but turned it down

Problem seems to be you are so definitive. How can you possibly tell if Louis hit harder? How?

Also, in my view Tyson's chin was Grade A. I am not the only person to think this.

I am basing my pick on my logic. Two bangers meet, one giving away 20 lbs of muscle, and both able to land flush, I will go with the heavier man with the chin that I feel is sturdier.

I also find it odd that you would bet the house, yet also think it's close?

Louis is a tremendous fighter who IMO was text book perfect with his fists. I just believe that the first rds against Tyson may never see Louis show his talents. Tyson stared so fast and aggressive. Louis was there to be hit, and clean, and he would be weighing 200 lbs. It's a bad recipe.

Now, Tyson at peak was very fit, took a hell of a shot and had a sneaky defense too. Louis I reckon gets tagged and reacts worse than Mike.

Are you really going to dismiss the 20 lbs weight difference? And, also, Baer could bang, but Mike brough a whole different kind of power and variation.

Inside Tyson would be stronger too. And, as you said, Tyson in close was a very good fighter.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Problem seems to be you are so definitive. How can you possibly tell if Louis hit harder? How?

Also, in my view Tyson's chin was Grade A. I am not the only person to think this.

I am basing my pick on my logic. Two bangers meet, one giving away 20 lbs of muscle, and both able to land flush, I will go with the heavier man with the chin that I feel is sturdier.

i don't think you can generalise so much by saying bigger man wins......how many times in history has the smaller man won??...

tyson had a good chin but do did louis so i think the chin is irrelevant...

IMO louis is the harder puncher....he is listed as the hardest puncher in history......i'm giving my opion, not stating fact......

tyson was heavier but so what.....louis was taller, had better reach, more power IMo and in the opinion of most experts....better timing, accuracy, boxing ability, counter punching and better variety and jab......every punch he threw was so controlled, no wild swings like tyson sometimes threw leaving himself exposed...

IMO louis wins by ko...mid to late rounds

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

i don't think you can generalise so much by saying bigger man wins......how many times in history has the smaller man won??...

tyson had a good chin but do did louis so i think the chin is irrelevant...

IMO louis is the harder puncher....he is listed as the hardest puncher in history......i'm giving my opion, not stating fact......

tyson was heavier but so what.....louis was taller, had better reach, more power IMo and in the opinion of most experts....better timing, accuracy, boxing ability, counter punching and better variety and jab......every punch he threw was so controlled, no wild swings like tyson sometimes threw leaving himself exposed...

IMO louis wins by ko...mid to late rounds

Well, having never seen Tyson being hurt at peak, I think it's difficult for me to see him being stopped at peak. Very fit athlete.

Listed as harder puncher means nothing. This is something that cannot be proved. Both were heavy hitters. Liston belongs too, as does Foreman and Shavers. It's not possible to tell.

I would add that both Tyson and Loius are IMO the most deadly punchers because of the speed, variation and delivery of their shots.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Well, having never seen Tyson being hurt at peak, I think it's difficult for me to see him being stopped at peak. Very fit athlete.

Listed as harder puncher means nothing. This is something that cannot be proved. Both were heavy hitters. Liston belongs too, as does Foreman and Shavers. It's not possible to tell.

I would add that both Tyson and Loius are IMO the most deadly punchers because of the speed, variation and delivery of their shots.

tyson didnt fight anyone at his peak to be hurt....his chin should of gotten better as he got older and heavier and lifted more weights....but he got stopped a few times

yes tyson had power, but i feel louis had more. im not trying to prove it i'm giving my opinion.....louis was more accurate and had the best timing i've ever seen.....louis was IMO the most complete fighter ever beside SRR and i think it's a toss up between the two.....

louis had it all and more variety and creativity than tyson....tyson had good variety but he overpowered ppl rather than picking the perfect shots like Louis.....both were great fighters but louis IMO was the greatest heavyweight bar none

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

tyson didnt fight anyone at his peak to be hurt....his chin should of gotten better as he got older and heavier and lifted more weights....but he got stopped a few times

He fought the best heavies on earth. 15/16 and 17 stone men and you say this? None capable of hurting him? Smith, a massive hitter. Bruno, a massive hitter. Thomas, a very good hitter; Tucker could also whack. Ruddock, a monster hitter. This is a bit silly now.

Again, who did Louis fight? You know about the "bum of the month?" The men Tyson fought were I bet much more dangerous.

This is getting silly.

Chin shoud have gotten better? But, what about his poorer defense, age, prison time, and stamina all being well past it? You saying when this is taken into consideration that the chin should have been better than when at peak? His chin was still taking the shots, remember?? vs.Holyfield he was stoped on his feet. Lewis was 2002, not even worth a reply.

You keep bringing in post prison Tyson...

And, Tyson did not just overpower. He knocked men out with single shots.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

He fought the best heavies on earth. 15/16 and 17 stone men and you say this? None capable of hurting him? Smith, a massive hitter.
Bruno, a massive hitter. Thomas, a very good hitter; Tucker could also whack. Ruddock, a monster hitter. This is a bit silly now.

Again, who did Louis fight? You know about the "bum of the month?" The men Tyson fought were I bet much more dangerous.

This is getting silly.

Chin shoud have gotten better? But, what about his poorer defense, age, prison time, and stamina all being well past it? You saying when this is taken into consideration that the chin should have been better than when at peak?

You keep bringing in post prison Tyson...

tyson was rocked by Bruno....Tillis and Tucker gave him problems too.....

tyson was vulnerable when people fought back...

Louis fought very good fighters like Walcott, Max Baer, Bud Baer, Conn etc. etc......these are all time greats and he beat them, some of them twice...

what all time greats did tyson beat or even very good fighters did he beat in convincing fashion......spinks was best win and everyone knows he was afraid to come out of the dressing room, not the mark of a great fighter.....

the point about the chin getting better with age and added weight is your philosphy.....i don't agree with it but i was using your logic......if tyson's chin was so good he shouldn't have been knocked out by a light heavyweight

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

tyson was rocked by Bruno....Tillis and Tucker gave him problems too.....

tyson was vulnerable when people fought back...

Louis fought very good fighters like Walcott, Max Baer, Bud Baer, Conn etc. etc......these are all time greats and he beat them, some of them twice...

what all time greats did tyson beat or even very good fighters did he beat in convincing fashion......spinks was best win and everyone knows he was afraid to come out of the dressing room, not the mark of a great fighter.....

the point about the chin getting better with age and added weight is your philosphy.....i don't agree with it but i was using your logic......if tyson's chin was so good he shouldn't have been knocked out by a light heavyweight

Rocked by Bruno for all of a millisecond..

Hurt? No, no no!

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Rocked by Bruno for all of a millisecond..

Hurt? No, no no!

watch the fight, the first one, he was badly staggered and nearly went down...definitely hurt

who hurt louis beside schmeling whom he revenged with one of the most brutal performances in boxing history if not the most brutal

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

the point about the chin getting better with age and added weight is your philosphy.....i don't agree with it but i was using your logic......if tyson's chin was so good he shouldn't have been knocked out by a light heavyweight

No no no....

Age and peak maturity and are a whole lot different than being in prison for three years, losing a lot of stamina and then being well past peak.

My views on chin are very very clear; not my fault you are picking parts and leaving out parts.

My four points still stand. They are there to see.

Age and maturity are important, but also require other things, like NOT spending three years inside, and not being well past your peak days.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

No no no....

Age and peak maturity and are a whole lot different than being in prison for three years, losing a lot of stamina and then being well past peak.

My views on chin are very very clear; not my fault you are picking parts and leaving out parts.

My four poinst still stand. They are there to see....

Age and maturity are important, but also require other things, like NOT spending three years inside, and not being well past your peak days.

you are totally contradicting yourself!

earlier you gave an example of Ali who's chin got better in later years as he put on wieght and got stronger......Ali like Tyson was out for more than 3 years and was past his peak......wheres your logic????????

also when tyson fought holyfield he was about 30, young for a heavy and he was in peak physical condition, weighing his peak wieght and heavily muscled....looking an even more awesome specimen than he did in his earlier years so i don't think his chin eroded due to him being old or out of shape....he was still young and in tremendous shape....it was other aspects of his game that were eroded such as movement etc......his ability to take a punch wouldn't have eroded

barney4001

walshb wrote: »

Rocked by Bruno for all of a millisecond..

Hurt? No, no no!

I rmember the fight and Bruno sure did hurt Tyson, and Bruno was a fearsome hitter,but Tyson in his prime would have walked through most of the best heavies of any era with the exception of Ali maybe Frazier also

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

you are totally contradicting yourself!

earlier you gave an example of Ali who's chin got better in later years as he put on wieght and got stronger......Ali like Tyson was out for more than 3 years and was past his peak......wheres your logic????????

also when tyson fought holyfield he was about 30, young for a heavy and he was in peak physical condition, weighing his peak wieght and heavily muscled....looking an even more awesome specimen than he did in his earlier years so i don't think his chin eroded due to him being old or out of shape....he was still young and in tremendous shape....it was other aspects of his game that were eroded such as movement etc......his ability to take a punch wouldn't have eroded

I have enjoyed debating with you but your picking certain points while deliberately missing others ruins it.

I refuse to go back and explain what makes a good chin.

Tyson getting stopped when past his peak, after three years inside, and still able to take a whack has nothing whatsoever to do with a man maturing physically and helping him take a shot better. Nothing. Also, Tyson's chin was still SOLID, what let him down was that he was no longer able to sustain his pace; he was past his peak. His stamina and conditioning were no longer near peak, hence he couldn't last the pace and was stopped. The chin was STILL solid.

You really think Tyson aged 30 after three years in prison is peak physical condition? More peak than 1986-1989? More committed, sharper, faster, mentally more focused? Really?

I think you really need to know what three years inside can do. It is not even close to the same as being inactive from fighting for three years. It surely has to have more an impact BOTH physically and mentally.

gene_tunney

Tyson by savage KO in Round 1.

section4

barney4001 wrote: »

I rmember the fight and Bruno sure did hurt Tyson, and Bruno was a fearsome hitter,but Tyson in his prime would have walked through most of the best heavies of any era with the exception of Ali maybe Frazier also

ali was not a heavy hitter. and he would not have walked through a lot of guys, foreman, liston, shavers , lyle just a few from before his era and there are many more.. and he was hurt by bruno, i remember it well because i wanted tyson to win

walshb

Yes, I remember the shot Bruno landed, a very clean left hook. Big deal. It rocked Mike for all of a brief time. Bruno was a big powerful man with a heavy punch, he had the ability to rock anyone when he clean connected. Tyson took the shot, rocked, and within no time was okay, that is the point.

To the match. I would be rooting non stop for Louis.Tyson is a scummy individual, but his combination of power, speed, chin, size and fierce aggression, are IMO just too difficult to overlook against Louis, who was there to be hit CLEAN, who would be giving away almost 20 lbs of solid muscle to a man, who when at peak, was a s fit as a fiddle and who took a great shot.

cowzerp

Both had very good chins and both had very good power, i think Louis had more skills and options to win though so unless mike takes him out round 1-4 then i think he loses and not only loses but ends up quitting because he struggles to get anywhere with Louis, Tyson is 1 of my favourite ever, ahaead of Louis but he fought poor opposition in reality and lost to all the names he fought in the 2nd part of his career, like it or not thats all we can base it on, i believe Holyfield would have won the 1st original planned fight anyway as Tyson did not like been bullied and not having it all his own way

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

Both had very good chins and both had very good power, i think Louis had more skills and options to win though so unless mike takes him out round 1-4 then i think he loses and not only loses but ends up quitting because he struggles to get anywhere with Louis, Tyson is 1 of my favourite ever, ahaead of Louis but he fought poor opposition in reality and lost to all the names he fought in the 2nd part of his career, like it or not thats all we can base it on, i believe Holyfield would have won the 1st original planned fight anyway as Tyson did not like been bullied and not having it all his own way

I believe Holyfield may have won fight 1, but again, this still would not have been peak Tyson. I don't think Holyfield beats the best Tyson from his championship reign. Tyson had not got the mental character once those who were really influential had gone, Rooney! Still very tough and formidable, as his wins over Ruddock showed us. Ruddock was a big big guy with a massive punch who hit Tyson with everything, and Mike still was there right till the end and won. I don't think Holyfiled will KO that Tyson.

Also, stick any champ in prison for three years and can you be sure any of them come out and still are the best? It's not like he was useless, still very tough and game, but serioulsy, three years inside is hardly conducive to a successful comeback. He was bound to be found wanting in some areas.

tryingmybestt

cowzerp wrote: »

Both had very good chins and both had very good power, i think Louis had more skills and options to win though so unless mike takes him out round 1-4 then i think he loses and not only loses but ends up quitting because he struggles to get anywhere with Louis, Tyson is 1 of my favourite ever, ahaead of Louis but he fought poor opposition in reality and lost to all the names he fought in the 2nd part of his career, like it or not thats all we can base it on, i believe Holyfield would have won the 1st original planned fight anyway as Tyson did not like been bullied and not having it all his own way

agree with all of that totally

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

I have enjoyed debating with you but your picking certain points while deliberately missing others ruins it.

I refuse to go back and explain what makes a good chin.

Tyson getting stopped when past his peak, after three years inside, and still able to take a whack has nothing whatsoever to do with a man maturing physically and helping him take a shot better. Nothing. Also, Tyson's chin was still SOLID, what let him down was that he was no longer able to sustain his pace; he was past his peak. His stamina and conditioning were no longer near peak, hence he couldn't last the pace and was stopped. The chin was STILL solid.

You really think Tyson aged 30 after three years in prison is peak physical condition? More peak than 1986-1989? More committed, sharper, faster, mentally more focused? Really?

I think you really need to know what three years inside can do. It is not even close to the same as being inactive from fighting for three years. It surely has to have more an impact BOTH physically and mentally.

i said tyson was at his peak weight !,,,i already stated he had eroded skills such as movement etc........!


i think tyson in prison for 3 years is similar to ali being out of the ring for nearly 4.....in fact it may have been healthier as all he could do was train and there were no unhealthy distractions.......

louis just has too much for tyson, your focusing so much on 20lbs weight difference....i think this is offset by louis' superior power, boxing ability, determination, counter punching ability, etc.

louis was excellent in all departments.....tyson could not fight going backwards, was slightly one dimensional.....never boxed.....when his all out attack didn't work he didn't have a plan b....

tyson was a beast and i don't think the ability of either man to take a punch would decide the outcome.....you seem to think this and the fact tyson is heavier would decide the fight for tyson.......i believe louis' better skills and power would win against tyson's heavier frame....i think both have great chins and if i had to pick i'd say louis' was better

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

I believe Holyfield may have won fight 1, but again, this still would not have been peak Tyson. I don't think Holyfield beats the best Tyson from his championship reign. Tyson had not got the mental character once those who were really influential had gone, Rooney!

i don't think someones mental character is decided by who they have around them.....tyson's character shouldn't have changed so drastically in a couple of years......i think he was always mentally flawed and he wasn't exposed during his peak because he wasn't tested by a great fighter such as holyfield and lewis....


if anything Ali's mental character got tougher as he got older so i don't feel you can excuse tyson's losses post prison to him becoming mentally weaker

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

walshb wrote: »

i don't think someones mental character is decided by who they have around them.....tyson's character shouldn't have changed so drastically in a couple of years......i think he was always mentally flawed and he wasn't exposed during his peak because he wasn't tested by a great fighter such as holyfield and lewis....


if anything Ali's mental character got tougher as he got older so i don't feel you can excuse tyson's losses post prison to him becoming mentally weaker

Yes, it is very possible that Mike was always flawed, certainly his behaviour later career showed this. He relied on a real strict regime. Ali was simply always mebtally stable. Thing is: When at peak with Cus, Rooney and Jacobs and Cayton, Tyson never showed a weak character. He was the complete machine like fighter. That is just how it was. He did not show that weak character until after Rooney went and after he spent three years inside. Physically and mentally he was never the same after these episodes.

I am NOT attributing his post prison losses on only the mental aspect.

Look at the physical fighter. Slower, poorer defense, less sharp, less head movement etc. He was not the same in both mind and body, and how could he be? 3 years inside a prison is not something that can be dismissed

I ask again, what champ would still retain all his talents if he spent three solid years incarcertaed?

This fantasy fight should be Mike at peak vs. Joe at peak. You wanna' start bringing in post prison, then how about Louis getting whacked by Rocky, getting well outpointed by Ezzard Charles? Charles was very very good, but no way does any Charles beat any Tyson; just not big or powerful enough to take Mike's shots.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

tryingmybestt wrote: »

Yes, it is very possible that Mike was always flawed, certainly his behaviour later career showed this. He relied on a real strict regime. Ali was simply always mebtally stable. Thing is: When at peak with Cus, Rooney and Jacobs and Cayton, Tyson never showed a weak character. He was the complete machine like fighter. That is just how it was. He did not show that weak character until after Rooney went and after he spent three years inside. Physically and mentally he was never the same after these episodes.

I am NOT attributing his post prison losses on only the mental aspect.

Look at the physical fighter. Slower, poorer defense, less sharp, less head movement etc. He was not the same in both mind and body, and how could he be? 3 years inside a prison is not something that can be dismissed

I ask again, what champ would still retain all his talents if he spent three solid years incarcertaed?

This fantasy fight should be Mike at peak vs. Joe at peak. You wanna' start bringing in post prison, then how about Louis getting whacked by Rocky, getting well outpointed by Ezzard Charles? Charles was very very good, but no way does any Charles beat any Tyson; just not big or powerful enough to take Mike's shots.

i don't think mikes mental flaws were exposed during his 'peak' because he didn't face adversity, he had it all his own way, ko'ing everyone quite easily although he showed signs of it against tillis and tucker....in these fights when he couldn't ko them easilly he slowed down and ran out of ideas...

i'm not debating whether or not tyson was the same after prison, it's obvious he wasn't....i was saying his chin shouldn't have diminished against holyfield as he was only 30 and in good physical shape.....obviously his skills eroded and were affected by prison but i don't see how prison would affect the ability of him to take a shot....

prime v prime louis wins IMO....tyson dangerous for first 4-5 rounds then louis take over.......imagine if over 15 rounds.....tyson would be lost....

i was never matching the post prison up against louis....i was highlighting flaws in his mental character that were exposed post prison as i believe this is relevant to his peak as i believe he always had these flaws.....when things didnt go his way he didnt have a plan b.....

Louis winds IMO....you feel Tyson.......it's great to have differences of opinion

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

walshb wrote: »

i'm not debating whether or not tyson was the same after prison, it's obvious he wasn't....i was saying his chin shouldn't have diminished against holyfield as he was only 30 and in good physical shape.....obviously his skills eroded and were affected by prison but i don't see how prison would affect the ability of him to take a shot....

prime v prime louis wins IMO....tyson dangerous for first 4-5 rounds then louis take over.......imagine if over 15 rounds.....tyson would be lost....

His CHIN did not diminish. How many times do I have to say this. His chin was still taking full whacks for 11 rds vs Holyfiled. Don't you think it was due to him being less a fighter physically, speed wise, defense wise, stamina wise etc?? That is what a big layoff will do, that is what prison time will do etc. That is why I explained the whole chin issue with points. How stamina, conditioning etc all play a part. Even a steel chinned man can be KO'd IF he is not prepared physically. And, Mike was still on his feet when the ref stopped the Holyfield fight. The chin was grand!

The chin was always solid..........Always. Mike simply was not the same specimen, machine or all around physical fighter in 1996 as opposed to 1986.

You may well be right that he always had the mental flaws, but, fact is that when with the right people, and focused, he never showed the flaws. That is a fact. And, he was up against some very capable and big and powerful men.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

tryingmybestt wrote: »

His CHIN did not diminish. How many times do I have to say this. His chin was still taking full whacks for 11 rds vs Holyfiled. Don't you think it was due to him being less a fighter physically, speed wise, defense wise, stamina wise etc?? That is what a big layoff will do, that is what prison time will do etc. That is why I explained the whole chin issue with poinst. How stamina, conditioning etc all play a part. Even a steel chinned man can be KO'd IF he is not prepared physically. And, Mike was still on his feet when the ref stopped the Holyfield fight. The chin was grand!

The chin was always solid..........Always. Mike simply was not the same specimen, machine or all around physical fighter in 1996 as opposed to 1986.

You may well be right that he always had the mental flaws, but, fact is that when with the right people, and focused, he never showed the flaws. That is a fact. And, he was up against some very capable and big and powerful men.[/QU

I'm the one saying his chin did not diminish post prison.....you were saying it did due to prison etc.!!!

i'm saying his chin did not diminish therefore his chin was not A1, although very good, as he was stopped plenty of times.....YOU said his chin had dimiished due to prison etc....!!!!!


tyson was not the same post prison in terms of skill, reflexes etc.....but his chin did not change....he was ko'd by holyfield, lewis etc......therefore your previous argument that Tyson would beat Louis due to Tyson being heavier and having a better chin is TOTALLY flawed......tyson did not have a better chin, if anything his was less than Louis'.....as mentioned previously the chin was not an important factor as both had good chins.....therefore your argument that tyson would beat louis due to being 20lbs heavier and better chin doesn't stack up.....you seem to be confusing things....it was you who focused on the importance of tysons chin being better than louis'...

i think the chin is irrelevant as both are good and i fell louis will beat tysondue to being superior in most other areas besides speed

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

walshb wrote: »

tryingmybestt wrote: »

I'm the one saying his chin did not diminish post prison.....you were saying it did due to prison etc.!!!

Where did I say that Mike Tyson's chin diminished due to prison?

I am sure I said his speed, reflexes, stamina and conditioning would have suffered.

And, that these suffering, can affect a fighter's ability to take a shot, shake a shot etc.

Or, that losing the traits above may see a fighter not making it 12 rds due to weaker defense, poorer conditioning etc.

But, for actual ability to take a single flush shot, Mike's chin was always solid. The fact that NOW he was not the same physical fighter meant that he was not avoiding as many shorts, nor was he as fit, and nor was he as sharp and leathal with his own shots. It all adds up.

I am done here. If you insist on using post prison 1996-2002 Tyson and using this man to try and argue why Louis wins then what is the point.

Also, you using this man as the same man as 1986 to argue this silly "chin" debate is pointless.

1996 Mike Tyson was no way the same fighter physically and mentally as the 1986 version.
This difference will most likely affect his abilty to go 12 rds and to beat the best opposition

His chin: Was solid in 1986, was solid in 1996, was solid in 2002. BUT, fact is that he was not as fit, as sharp, as conditioned, as motivated etc. Now, when you consider this, it has to then makes sense that the 1996-2002 man may not be as effective as the 1986 man, in ALL areas.

There is NOTHING at all flawed with this line of thinking. It makes perfect sense.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

I love both, but folks who ignore the weight difference and obvious chin issues are imo naive. Tyson at peak was fit as a fiddle, a steel chin, and a ferocious puncher. Now, these traits are simply desperate for Joe Louis.

Two big bangers meet, and both we know will land and land flush, I will go with the guy who I believe had the better chin. Louis is not going to take a flush connection from Mike Tyson, and if he does, and is badly hurt, it is game over. Tyson's chin at peak was grade A.

15-20 lbs is the weight difference, and that is 15-20 lbs of solid power and muscle, not excess fat. If Louis had a Tyson chin then I reckon he wins. He does not. And, even if he won, it would be a very close fight. Who ever outboxed a peak Tyson? Or, came close to beating a peak Tyson? 1986-1989.

this was your original post !!


i disagree with your reasoning for tyson winning.....he dint have better chin and wasnt as mentally tough

the weight was offset by louis superior skills, versatility and power

i was highlighting mikes weaknesses in his chin as it was relevant as it was your main reasoning for him winning the fight

Why do u say his chin was better than Louis'???

Louis took shots from Baer etc......he had a granite chin

i don't think their chin was an important factor as both had good ones but if anything i believe louis' was better.....as i said before tyson was vulnerable more than louis

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

this was your original post !!


i disagree with your reasoning for tyson winning.....he dint have better chin and wasnt as mentally tough

the weight was offset by louis superior skills, versatility and power

i was highlighting mikes weaknesses in his chin as it was relevant as it was your main reasoning for him winning the fight

Why do u say his chin was better than Louis'???

Louis took shots from Baer etc......he had a granite chin

i don't think their chin was an important factor as both had good ones but if anything i believe louis' was better.....as i said before tyson was vulnerable more than louis

Ok, back to some normaility. Please, let us use the best versions of both. I never once used Louis form the late 40s.

Do I know if Mike's chin at peak is better? No, nor do you know that Joe's was. We can only make educated guesses. To me Mike had a rock solid chin at peak. Great fitness, great power, great speed, decent defense and was a ferocious finisher.

I cannot ignore that Mike was 20 lbs heavier, nor will I say that Baer or anyone else Louis met was near as "efficient" a killer/hitter. I believe Mike was overall a far deadlier hitter than Max Baer.

I just think that Tyson is too fast a starter and if he lands flush, which he will, then Louis is gone. If he is not immediately gone, and badly hurt, Tyson closes the show.

I believe at peak Mike's defense, bob and weave, fast attacks, are a better defense than anything Joe has. Joe was right there in front of you. Also, Mike's fitness was very good, added to the solid chin, I see him making the distance here. Who ever came remotely close to stopping Tysin at peak? Nobody even troubled him much.

Inside I believe that the 20 lbs of muscle will play a big part.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Ok, back to some normaility. Please, let us use the best versions of both. I never once used Louis form the late 40s.

Do I know if Mike's chin at peak is better? No, nor do you know that Joe's was. We can only make educated guesses. To me Mike had a rock solid chin at peak. Great fitness, great power, great speed, decent defense and was a ferocisous finisher.

I cannot ignore that Mike was 20 lbs heavier, nor will I say that Baer or anyone else Louis met was near as "efficient" a killer/hitter. I believe Mike was overall a far deadlier hitter than Max Baer.

I just think that Tyson is too fast a starter and if he lands flush, which he will, then Louis is gone. If he is not immediately gone, and badly hurt, Tyson closes the show.

I believe at peak Mike's defense, bob and weave, fast attacks, are a better defense than anything Joe has. Joe was right there in front of you. Also, Mike's fitness was very good, added to the solid chin, I see him making the distance here. Who ever came remotely close to stopping Tysin at peak? Nobody even troubled him much.

Inside I believe that the 20 lbs of muscle will play a big part.

You said Tyson would win because he had better chin and was heavier.....those were the reasons you gave.....i don't agree his chin was better and i don't think the 20lbs was so important:

Breakdown:

Speed: Advantage tyson, although louis had good speed too
Timing: Advantage Louis, one of the best ever
Accuracy: Advantage louis, one of the most accurate ever
Counter punching: Advantage louis, he was an excellent counter puncher, tyson never did
Footwork: equal, louis used less energy as he slid rather than bounced in
Chin: equal
Power: advantage louis, along with his accuracy and timing his power was more devastating than tysons
Power late in fight: advantage louis, evident when ko'ing ppl late, if tyson didnt ko early it usually went distance or he lost e.g. tillis, green, tucker, smith etc.
Strength: advantage tyson, although louis was very strong tysons extra weight would count
Fitness: equal
Stamina: advantage louis
Defence: advantage tyson slightly
Jab: advantage louis
Height: advantage louis
Reach: advantage louis
Mental tougness: clear advantage to Louis

Louis by Ko in rounds 7- 11

gene_tunney

So Joe Louis would knock out Mike Tyson? I've heard it all now.

In reality any op athlete from any sport would crush their equivalent from a bygone era. That's the reason records are constantly being broken.

I love Tyson, but he was very overrated. That said he would absolutely molest Joe Louis, it would look like a man against a prepubescent boy.

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

You said Tyson would win because he had better chin and was heavier.....those were the reasons you gave.....i don't agree his chin was better and i don't think the 20lbs was so important:

Breakdown:

Speed: Advantage tyson, although louis had good speed too
Timing: Advantage Louis, one of the best ever
Accuracy: Advantage louis, one of the most accurate ever
Counter punching: Advantage louis, he was an excellent counter puncher, tyson never did
Footwork: equal, louis used less energy as he slid rather than bounced in
Chin: equal
Power: advantage louis, along with his accuracy and timing his power was more devastating than tysons
Power late in fight: advantage louis, evident when ko'ing ppl late, if tyson didnt ko early it usually went distance or he lost e.g. tillis, green, tucker, smith etc.
Strength: advantage tyson, although louis was very strong tysons extra weight would count
Fitness: equal
Stamina: advantage louis
Defence: advantage tyson slightly
Jab: advantage louis
Height: advantage louis
Reach: advantage louis
Mental tougness: clear advantage to Louis

Louis by Ko in rounds 7- 11

Ok, forget the chins. I said I think Mike's is better, just a hunch

Now...

Fitness and stamina, kind of far too similar, explain why you are using two of them?

At peak, when did Mike ever look gassed, jaded, or really tired? He didn't.

Mental toughness? Again, at peak, which is where the match tales place, Mike didn't show bad character or weakness. Too subjective an area either way

You know the keay area here may just be defence. Both massive hitters, and I do think Mike's defence was noticeably better. He may be the one landing easier, and flusher. That is bad for Louis

Foot speed is also an area you missed,. Tyson closed the gap so quickly. I see him negating the Louis jab, and always getting close. Joe's feet weren't quick in the sense that he could move fast to retreat or avoid an oncoming and bob and weave Tyson.

Height and reach are also in Louis' favor, but forever Mike was meeting and destroying men who were bigger than he, AND, bigger than Joe.

Accuracy? Again, I think this is negated because Joe's defence wasn't great. Tyson wouldn't need to be deadly accurate, just himslef, he will land and will land flush. It is not like Louis will be dipping, ducking and fleet foot moving.

Power late in fight? Just because some men went the distance with Mike does not mean he had not got the power. Louis had men who went the distance too. Some men are simply too difficult to put away. I believe that this area you are using is well off. It's not possible to tell who had the more effective power late in a fight.

Mike was still throwing bombs vs. Smith and Tucker and Tillis; he just couldn't get them out.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Ok, forget the chins. I said I think Mike's is better, just a hunch

Now...

Fitness and stamina, kind of far too similar, explain why you are using two of them?

At peak, when did Mike ever look gassed, jaded, or really tired? He didn't.

Mental toughness? Again, at peak, which is where the match tales place, Mike didn't show bad character or weakness. Too subjective an area either way

You know the keay area here may just be defence. Both massive hitters, and I do think Mike's defence was noticeably better. He may be the one landing easier, and flusher. That is bad for Louis

Foot speed is also an area you missed,. Tyson closed the gap so quickly. I see him negating the Louis jab, and always getting close. Joe's feet weren't quick in the sense that he could move fast to retreat or avoid an oncoming and bob and weave Tyson.

Height and reach are also in Louis' favor, but forever Mike was meeting and destroying men who were bigger than he, AND, bigger than Joe.

Accuracy? Again, I think this is negated because Joe's defence wasn't great. Tyson wouldn't need to be deadly accurate, just himslef, he will land and will land flush. It is not like Louis will be dipping, ducking and fleet foot moving.

Power late in fight? Just because some men went the distance with Mike does not mean he had not got the power. Louis had men who went the distance too. Some men are simply too difficult to put away. I believe that this area you are using is well off. It's not possible to tell who had the more effective power late in a fight.

Mike was still throwing bombs vs. Smith and Tucker and Tillis; he just couldn't get them out.

By fitness I mean getting in shape for start of fight and by stamina i mean maintaining that fitness throughout fight...

I acknowledged tyson's defence was better

I covered foot speed in FOOTWORK

Mental toughness - mike showed his lack of it later in career.....this means he was always flawed during his peak.....although wasn't properly tested during his peak so it didn't show but if he fought louis during his peak then his mental flaws would be exposed....BEFORE YOU SAY ANYTHING I AM COMPARING THEM DURING THEIR PEAK, I'M MERELY SAYING TYSON'S FLAW WAS SHOWN LATER IN HIS CAREER WHEN HE THEN ONLY FOUGHT OTHER GREAT FIGHTERS, MENTAL FLAWS WERE ALWAYS THERE, THEY'RE NOT LIKE PHYSICAL FLAWS THAT COULD APPEAR LATER IN CAREER HAVING NOT BEEN THERE BEFORE !

louis' defence wasn't as obvious as tysons with his hands up, he employed slips, subtle slides of the feet, pulling body back and rolling with punches, old school defence, not as easy to spot.....I did acknowledge already tyson's was better though

Power late in fight is my opinion, similar to your guess about the chins

Mike was worried about his stamina against green and tillis and he acknowledges this in an interview....