Best heavyweight boxers from 60/70's vs 90/00's ?

sxt

I think the 90's /00 's have learnt us that if are extremely talented and extremely dedicated in the sporting realm of heavyweight boxing and you are 6 ft 5 plus and 240 ilbs plus , you can be a dominant world champion

It is hard to think that there there will ever be an dominant heavy weight boxing world champion unless they are in this category.The standard has been set and will be maintained or improved. It is hard to ignore these statistics.

Does anybody agree with that?

If you think that The boxers from the 60s /70's were more talented or tougher, that is fair enough, but do you think they would have beat the best heavyweight champs of the modern era with their substantial height and weight advantage?

Liston ,Ali , Fraizer , Foreman

Bowe ,Lewis ,Vladamir , Vitali

gene_tunney

sxt wrote: »

I think the 90's /00 's have learnt us that if are extremely talented and extremely dedicated in the sporting realm of heavyweight boxing and you are 6 ft 5 plus and 240 ilbs plus , you can be a dominant world champion

It is hard to think that there there will ever be an dominant heavy weight boxing world champion unless they are in this category.The standard has been set and will be maintained or improved. It is hard to ignore these statistics.

Does anybody agree with that?

If you think that The boxers from the 60s /70's were more talented or tougher, that is fair enough, but do you think they would have beat the best heavyweight camps of the modern era with their substantial height and weight advantage?

Liston ,Ali , Fraizer , Foreman

Bowe ,Lewis ,Vladamir , Vitali

It's pretty hard to make a case for anyone against a prime Lennox Lewis IMO. Yes, Rahman beat him but that was a lucky shot.

Rodin

You can't just leave out Tyson.

sxt

Rodin wrote: »

You can't just leave out Tyson.

His prime was definitely the late 80's

repsol

Tyson in his prime would annihilate Lewis and the rest.The Tyson that lost against Lewis and Holyfield etc was a shadow of Tyson at his peak,thanks to Don King,his ex wife and all the entourage of scrotes who lived off him.

sxt

repsol wrote: »

Tyson in his prime would annihilate Lewis and the rest.The Tyson that lost against Lewis and Holyfield etc was a shadow of Tyson at his peak,thanks to Don King,his ex wife and all the entourage of scrotes who lived off him.

When was his prime though? Do you think he would have beat a prime Vitali or Ali , or Bowe , or Foreman?

repsol

sxt wrote: »

When was his prime though?

He was in his prime when Kevin Rooney was training him before he started making ridiculous money.Watched films of him all the time because I was fighting at the time myself(amateur obviously) and he was unbelievable!They used to call out the combos in numbers and his hand speed was lightweight speed although he was a heavyweight.He destroyed the likes of Berbick and Spinks and made them look like bums even though they were not.Lewis would have beaten those guys but it would have taken him 8 or 9 rounds and they would have looked a lot better against him

Oregano_State

sxt wrote: »

When was his prime though? Do you think he would have beat a prime Vitali?

I think Tyson at his best,with a proper gameplan would have beaten anyone.

If Vitali went toe to toe with him he'd get knocked out in 2 rounds. Maybe one. If Tyson went out all guns blazing and Vitali held him off with his reach and height advantage he could possibly tire him and get a win that way.

But if Tyson was patient, his speed and power would catch Vitali out eventually.

Other sports are heavyweight boxing's worst enemy IMO. In the states, basketball and moreso NFL take all the athletic monsters. UFC and other MMA sports are also dividing up the talent.

The boxing heavyweight division needs a young, new superstar to emerge soon.

sxt

Oregano_State wrote: »

I think Tyson at his best,with a proper gameplan would have beaten anyone.

If Vitali went toe to toe with him he'd get knocked out in 2 rounds. Maybe one. If Tyson went out all guns blazing and Vitali held him off with his reach and height advantage he could possibly tire him and get a win that way.

But if Tyson was patient, his speed and power would catch Vitali out eventually.

Other sports are heavyweight boxing's worst enemy IMO. In the states, basketball and moreso NFL take all the athletic monsters. UFC and other MMA sports are also dividing up the talent.

The boxing heavyweight division needs a young, new superstar to emerge soon.

Vitali would not only be holding Tyson off with his reach and height and weight advantage , he would be hitting him with accurate and heavy weight punches

Oregano_State

sxt wrote: »

Vitali would not only be holding Tyson off with his reach and height and weight advantage , he would be hitting him with accurate and heavy weight punches

You obviously have your opinion, but Tyson annihilated many boxers much taller than him.

I'd be willing to bet that Tyson punched harder than Vitali.

byronbay2

I don't think you can place Tyson in the all-time top rank of boxers. Certainly he was a fearsome "beast" when he arrived on the scene as a teenager, with amazing hand and head speed and frightening power but he basically beat a series of mediocre boxers (most of whom were paralysed with fear) that were beaten before they even entered the ring. When he finally faced a proper boxer (Holyfield) who didn't fear him, he couldn't cope with a battle and we know what happened next!
Of the modern boxers mentioned, Lewis was undoubtedly the best - a wonderful athlete and a technically excellent boxer in his prime. He was the undisputed champion and also retired at the right time, as so few boxers do. I certainly wouldn't give Bowe or either Klitchko brother (lumbering giants imo) any chance against him.
Overall though, I would have to take Ali and Foreman as superior, with Ali as the greatest of all. Not only was he a peerless technical boxer, the thing that set Ali apart was his ability to take horrific punishment and keep going - he's paying the price now, of course. I don't believe that any other boxer who ever lived could have taken the beating Foreman dished up in the first 5 rounds of their "Rumble In The Jungle" without being KOed. I also believe that, if Ali had not been around, Foreman would have been the undisputed world champion for 10 years or more and be universally recognised as the greatest heavyweight boxer of all time.

repsol

Oregano_State wrote: »

You obviously have your opinion, but Tyson annihilated many boxers much taller than him.

I'd be willing to bet that Tyson punched harder than Vitali.

I have seen dead people with better head movement than the Klitchkos. When a muppet like David Haye can get into the top rankings,you know heavyweight boxing is in big trouble!Can you imagine him in with Foreman/Frazier/Tyson or Liston at their peak? Start the ambulance!

sxt

Oregano_State wrote: »

You obviously have your opinion, but Tyson annihilated many boxers much taller than him.

I'd be willing to bet that Tyson punched harder than Vitali.

Tyson was a hard hitting speed merchant , his power was generated from getting in close and using his exceptional speed to volley multiple punches. Vitali and Vladamir klitschko punch alot harder than Tyson, they use their skill and extreme physical advantage to demoralise their opponents.

sxt

repsol wrote: »

I have seen dead people with better head movement than the Klitchkos. When a muppet like David Haye can get into the top rankings,you know heavyweight boxing is in big trouble!Can you imagine him in with Foreman/Frazier/Tyson or Liston at their peak? Start the ambulance!

If Vitali and Sonny Liston were to fight 1000 times , Vitali would win 1000 times.

repsol

sxt wrote: »

Tyson was a hard hitting speed merchant , his power was generated from getting in close and using his exceptional speed to volley multiple punches. Vitali and Vladamir klitschko punch alot harder than Tyson, they use their skill and extreme physical advantage to demoralise their opponents.

Every boxer generates power in the same way,its the results that differ.Tyson had unbelievable timing,accuracy,technique and skill as well as power.If punching power was only based on size/strength we would see power lifters winning belts.Really heavy handed fighters can knock someone out with a punch that may only travel a very short distance

sxt

repsol wrote: »

Every boxer generates power in the same way,its the results that differ.Tyson had unbelievable timing,accuracy,technique and skill as well as power.If punching power was only based on size/strength we would see power lifters winning belts.Really heavy handed fighters can knock someone out with a punch that may only travel a very short distance

Tyson was a force of nature when he came on the scene , his speed and power of combination was immense. He was 5 foot 11 and 30 ilbs lighter than the klitschkos though. It amazes me when people ,forget their jab , the accuracy of their punches , their power , their reach , height , weight advantages, and that they are extremely intelligent boxers and experienced fighters . Prime Vitali and prime Vladamir are in the absolute driving seat here, all day long ! !

Jayob10

Seems there are alot of Tyson fans in here.

"Tyson fans" are a bit like U2 fans. They say U2 fans know shag all about music outside of U2.

Tyson was indeed a force of nature, who burnt the candle at both ends. he looked phenomenal in his early contender days/days as champ.

When the level was stepped up gradually, Tyson hit a road block. Natural talent is simply not enough against those with talent and commitment.

Tyson also had a streak of quit in him when the going got really really tough.

gene_tunney

Tyson was a true great......against cans.

pitythefool

sxt wrote: »

I think the 90's /00 's have learnt us that if are extremely talented and extremely dedicated in the sporting realm of heavyweight boxing and you are 6 ft 5 plus and 240 ilbs plus , you can be a dominant world champion

It is hard to think that there there will ever be an dominant heavy weight boxing world champion unless they are in this category.The standard has been set and will be maintained or improved. It is hard to ignore these statistics.

Does anybody agree with that?

If you think that The boxers from the 60s /70's were more talented or tougher, that is fair enough, but do you think they would have beat the best heavyweight champs of the modern era with their substantial height and weight advantage?

Liston ,Ali , Fraizer , Foreman

Bowe ,Lewis ,Vladamir , Vitali

Tyson?

walshb

pitythefool wrote: »

Tyson?

On their absolute best nights Tyson had the potential/skills/tools to beat all of them.

walshb

One can diss Tyson post prison or even post Rooney, but when he was on form, committed and with Rooney in the corner he was a menace. No way any man has a comfortable night against him. No way. He could lose to an Ali or Foreman, but he would be hell for both. I personally think that he beats Foreman. Too much speed/power. Ali beats Tyson in a hell of a close match.

walshb

gene_tunney wrote: »

Tyson was a true great......against cans.

And apart from Ali, name me a HW champ who had such a great level of opposition? They all can only fight who is in their era. I would back a peak Tyson to clean out the 20s, 30s, 40s and 50s. I think a peak Tyosn beats all Ali's victims. Frazier and Foreman being real threats. I would back a peak Tyson to wipe out any Klit victim.

gene_tunney

walshb wrote: »

And apart from Ali, name me a HW champ who had such a great. level of opposition? They all can only fight who is in their era.

Tyson's level of opposition was decent. It's just that when he got to the top level he was beaten (Holyfield, Lewis).

walshb

Jayob10 wrote: »

Seems there are alot of Tyson fans in here.

"Tyson fans" are a bit like U2 fans. They say U2 fans know shag all about music outside of U2.

Tyson was indeed a force of nature, who burnt the candle at both ends. he looked phenomenal in his early contender days/days as champ.

When the level was stepped up gradually, Tyson hit a road block. Natural talent is simply not enough against those with talent and commitment.

Tyson also had a streak of quit in him when the going got really really tough.

His opp level was not stepped up gradually. He met and beat the top ranked HW men when he was the champ. No gradual increase. He then went to prison for almost 4 years. He was done by then. Prison prevented the big Holyfield showdown. Buster had prevented it in 1990.

gene_tunney

walshb wrote: »

One can diss Tyson post prison or even post Rooney, but when he was on form, committed and with Rooney in the corner he was a menace. No way any man has a comfortable night against him. No way. He could lose to an Ali or Foreman, but he would be hell for both. I personally think that he beats Foreman. Too much speed/power. Ali beats Tyson in a hell of a close match.

Prime Tyson beats Ali easily IMO, within first 6 rounds anyway.

walshb

gene_tunney wrote: »

Tyson's level of opposition was decent. It's just that when he got to the top level he was beaten (Holyfield, Lewis).

And please don't forget that the Holyfield loss was 1996 after he was incarcerated for almost 4 years. Don't even mention the Lewis loss. That's like me dissing Ali for losing to Spinks. A bit of perspective is seriously needed.

Lewis at peak vs. Mike at peak? I got Tyson by KO.

I also think Mike at peak would have been too much for Holyfield at peak.

gene_tunney

walshb wrote: »

And please don't forget that the Holyfield loss was 1996 after he was incarcerated for almost 4 years. Don't even mention the Lewis loss. That's like me dissing Ali for losing to Spinks. A bit of perspective is seriously needed.

Lewis at peak vs. Mike at peak? I got Tyson by KO.

I also think Mike at peak would have been too much for Holyfield at peak.

I think Buster Douglas would have been too much for a peak Tyson....oh wait

walshb

gene_tunney wrote: »

Prime Tyson beats Ali easily IMO, within first 6 rounds anyway.

Saying this would lead many to think that you rate Mike very highly at peak. Do you?

gene_tunney

walshb wrote: »

Saying this would lead many to think that you rate Mike very highly at peak. Do you?

Yes, I do.

byronbay2

walshb wrote: »

Lewis at peak vs. Mike at peak? I got Tyson by KO.

I didn't come on here to diss Tyson or big-up Lewis but the Tyson-appreciation society here is a bit OTT.
First things first: Tyson was never a proper heavyweight to begin with. Built like a brick sh*thouse, yes, but 5' 11" - my hole! My friend has a picture taken with Tyson, where he is at least 2 inches taller - my friend is 5' 11". Even Holyfield was looking down at Tyson!
Tyson beat some big men but nobody of the calibre of Lewis/Foreman. A big man (Buster Douglas) beat him convincingly when supposedly at his peak. Tyson, peak or otherwise, would imo have no chance against the huge men (Lewis was a genuine 6' 5") previously mentioned - proper heavyweights but also athletes and excellent boxers.
On another issue, I don't see how anyone could rate the Klitchkos above Lewis. In his last fight, well past his best, Lewis accounted for a peak Vitali in 6 rounds, albeit on a TKO due to a cut.

walshb

byronbay2 wrote: »

I didn't come on here to diss Tyson or big-up Lewis but the Tyson-appreciation society here is a bit OTT.
First things first: Tyson was never a proper heavyweight to begin with. Built like a brick sh*thouse, yes, but 5' 11" - my hole! My friend has a picture taken with Tyson, where he is at least 2 inches taller - my friend is 5' 11". Even Holyfield was looking down at Tyson!
Tyson beat some big men but nobody of the calibre of Lewis/Foreman. A big man (Buster Douglas) beat him convincingly when supposedly at his peak. Tyson, peak or otherwise, would imo have no chance against the huge men (Lewis was a genuine 6' 5") previously mentioned - proper heavyweights but also athletes and excellent boxers.
On another issue, I don't see how anyone could rate the Klitchkos above Lewis. In his last fight, well past his best, Lewis accounted for a peak Vitali in 6 rounds, albeit on a TKO due to a cut.

The same Douglas who quit vs. Tucker who Mike went on to beat convincingly. Tucker was a big dude. Bonecrusher too. Ruddock too. Tyson beat plenty of HW men. He was a HW. He was 218 lbs. Yes, he was short. And? Not a SHW, but big enough and heavy handed enough to KO Lewis. BTW, did you forget that Lewis was clean Ko'd twice? By men not near as deadly as a peak Tyson.

This has nothing to do with Tyson OTT appreciation. It's pointing out facts.

byronbay2

Certainly, Lewis's weakness was his laziness in training. He seemed only to train to a level he felt was enough to beat who he was fighting. He was caught flush by McCall (a decent boxer imo, when his mind was on the game) early on and always looked sluggish at altitude (and unfit) against Rahman. As you know, he avenged both of these defeats easily when his mind was focussed on the rematch.
The other thing I would argue about Lewis is that he improved as a boxer throughout his career (Manny Stewart must take a lot of credit) and fought at his best in his early thirties. Tyson was a meteor that was burnt out even before he went to prison the first time. In fact there is an argument for saying he was never the same fighter after sacking Kevin Rooney in 1988.

walshb

byronbay2 wrote: »

In fact there is an argument for saying he was never the same fighter after sacking Kevin Rooney in 1988.

I agree. Boxing at the highest level can see the slightest change/let up or slackening off cost a fighter. Mike was known to be partying and not training as hard as he was pre Givens. Once Rooney went, he really started to slide. Rooney was a powerful motivator in Mike's championship reign. I don't know about you guys, but Tyson in Tokyo looked a step slower and a step lazier; and that was before Buster even began to work him over.

T-K-O

byronbay2 wrote: »

I didn't come on here to diss Tyson or big-up Lewis but the Tyson-appreciation society here is a bit OTT.
First things first: Tyson was never a proper heavyweight to begin with. Built like a brick sh*thouse, yes, but 5' 11" - my hole! My friend has a picture taken with Tyson, where he is at least 2 inches taller - my friend is 5' 11". Even Holyfield was looking down at Tyson!
Tyson beat some big men but nobody of the calibre of Lewis/Foreman. A big man (Buster Douglas) beat him convincingly when supposedly at his peak. Tyson, peak or otherwise, would imo have no chance against the huge men (Lewis was a genuine 6' 5") previously mentioned - proper heavyweights but also athletes and excellent boxers.
On another issue, I don't see how anyone could rate the Klitchkos above Lewis. In his last fight, well past his best, Lewis accounted for a peak Vitali in 6 rounds, albeit on a TKO due to a cut.

Not the Klitchkos ....Vitali.

Lewis won the fight and from memory it was close maybe Lewis slightly ahead on the cards. Anyway it was a close fight. Vitali deserves his spot and he could mix it with any HW of any generation

cowzerp

T-K-O wrote: »

Not the Klitchkos ....Vitali.

Lewis won the fight and from memory it was close maybe Lewis slightly ahead on the cards. Anyway it was a close fight. Vitali deserves his spot and he could mix it with any HW of any generation

Vitali was 4-2 ahead and this is a fact.

T-K-O

cowzerp wrote: »

Vitali was 4-2 ahead and this is a fact.

I wouldn't doubt you.

I didn't bother to check on-line. Personally I always thought Vitali was ahead but after debating the issue for many years on various forums, I could not recall the official score.

cowzerp

Yeah all judges had it 4 rd to 2 to vitali.
To me vitali was just an improved version of Lewis with more killer instinct.

walshb

Still a very close affair no matter what the official scores read. I had Vitali ahead. No way Lewis was ahead, but he was closing and staying with Vitali all the way.

Rodin

sxt wrote: »

When was his prime though? Do you think he would have beat a prime Vitali or Ali , or Bowe , or Foreman?

Absolutely. Nobody could have lived with him

Rodin

gene_tunney wrote: »

Tyson's level of opposition was decent. It's just that when he got to the top level he was beaten (Holyfield, Lewis).

Tyson fought Lewis a full 16 years after he first became world champion. He was clearly a shadow of his former self.

The question will always be, who is/was the best fighter AT THEIR PEAK. Tyson all the way for me.

barney4001

for my tuppence worth I think a prime Ali or Foreman were the best around over the years

byronbay2

cowzerp wrote: »

Yeah all judges had it 4 rd to 2 to vitali.
To me vitali was just an improved version of Lewis with more killer instinct.

All 3 judges had Vitali ahead when the fight was stopped but that does not tell the full story. Klitchko dominated the first 3 rounds and caught Lewis with a solid shot in the second that looked for a few seconds like it would lead to a KO. However, Lewis gradually got into gear, drew the 4th and imo won the 5th and 6th. He was well on top when the fight was stopped, albeit behind on the scorecards.

unknown13

repsol wrote: »

Tyson in his prime would annihilate Lewis and the rest.The Tyson that lost against Lewis and Holyfield etc was a shadow of Tyson at his peak,thanks to Don King,his ex wife and all the entourage of scrotes who lived off him.

Nonsense. Lewis would still beat him. Lewis was such a brilliant and clever fighter. A prime Tyson wouldn't beat Lewis, he would certainly do better than he did against Lewis in the fight they had.

walshb

unknown13 wrote: »

Nonsense. Lewis would still beat him. Lewis was such a brilliant and clever fighter. A prime Tyson wouldn't beat Lewis, he would certainly do better than he did against Lewis in the fight they had.

It is not at all nonsense. Tyson from 2002 was an absolute shell. Tyson from 1996 was also well past his prime. 4 years inside. It may be a bit too confident to think (for certain) that a peak Tyson annihilates the best Lewis, but it's not nonsense to think that Tyson could beat him.

Prime Lewis would be hell for anyone. I just think that Prime Tyson would find that jaw with a clean shot. I don't trust Lewis's chin here. The same way I don't trust it vs. a prime Foreman. Lewis with a chin may well have been the best HW ever. Lewis hasn't got a glass chin, but one cannot look past the two heavy KO losses. He was caught clean and he dropped badly. Now, even alert and on form, Tyson surely can whack him clean, and Tyson was a hell of a finisher, as well as a more deadly all around hitter than slob like Rahamn.

cowzerp

unknown13 wrote: »

Nonsense. Lewis would still beat him. Lewis was such a brilliant and clever fighter. A prime Tyson wouldn't beat Lewis, he would certainly do better than he did against Lewis in the fight they had.

I'd pick peak Tyson over Lewis, Lewis been proper Ko'd twice the main reason-Tyson to me is 1 of my favourite Boxers ever but in reality not 1 of the best ever, on his day he was ferocious but in reality never beat anybody who would be considered a great, and when he lost to Evander he lost to another washed up man who had been banned from Boxing for having a dodgy heart-Evander was simply the better tougher man as he always would have been.

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

I'd pick peak Tyson over Lewis, Lewis been proper Ko'd twice the main reason-Tyson to me is 1 of my favourite Boxers ever but in reality not 1 of the best ever, on his day he was ferocious but in reality never beat anybody who would be considered a great, .

But one could say that about your man, Vitali. Who did he beat that was great?

The best can only beat what is front of them.

cowzerp

walshb wrote: »

But one could say that about your man, Vitali. Who did he beat that was great?

The best can only beat what is front of them.

That's true, and Tyson lost to any great he ever faced-Vitali would bash Tyson, either way.

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

That's true, and Tyson lost to any great he ever faced-Vitali would bash Tyson, either way.

Peak to peak I say it's a hell of a fight. No way Vitali bashes him. No man came close to bashing a peak Tyson. Yes, after prison and 1996 onwards he suffered. Who wouldn't?

Gauss

cowzerp wrote: »

That's true, and Tyson lost to any great he ever faced-Vitali would bash Tyson, either way.

You can't really use that as an argument as that version of Tyson was a different man altogether.

walshb

Gauss wrote: »

You can't really use that as an argument as that version of Tyson was a different man altogether.

My point exactly. 1996 when Mike lost to a great. And that great was himself past his best.

cowzerp

Gauss wrote: »

You can't really use that as an argument as that version of Tyson was a different man altogether.

Look if you have power and aggression you can beat average boxers easily-In the 1st half of his career he fought lot's of handbags(that includes the top ranked lads back then)in The worst weight division ever bar Marciano's, He lost to a very average Buster Douglas.