Prime Tyson v Prime Joe Louis - who wins ?

walshb · 10-01-2012 12:42AM

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 · 10-01-2012 12:46AM

Tyson by savage KO in Round 1.

section4 · 10-01-2012 02:33AM

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 · 10-01-2012 02:02PM

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 · 10-01-2012 02:19PM

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 · 10-01-2012 02:33PM

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 · 10-01-2012 04:21PM

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 · 10-01-2012 04:26PM

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 · 10-01-2012 04:28PM

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 · 10-01-2012 04:56PM

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 · 10-01-2012 05:14PM

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 · 10-01-2012 05:18PM

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 · 10-01-2012 05:29PM

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 · 10-01-2012 05:31PM

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 · 10-01-2012 05:35PM

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 · 10-01-2012 05:49PM

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 · 10-01-2012 07:55PM

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 · 10-01-2012 08:00PM

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 · 10-01-2012 08:06PM

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 · 10-01-2012 08:22PM

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....

tryingmybestt · 10-01-2012 08:24PM

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.

would hatton beat duran?

would Klitschko beat Ali of foreman?

would bernard dunne beat mcguigan??

would david haye beat frazier or liston??

comment doesn't make sense

tysonslovechild · 10-01-2012 08:45PM

tryingmybestt wrote: »

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....?

louis had good power but tyson was lethal. Have to go with tyson here.
Louis would defo dominate the first few rounds but I think at about round 6 on tyson starts connecting and finishes before the tenth. I just cant see louis taking tysons shots. Plus tysons speed is fkn mental and a defence that as so awkward.

tryingmybestt · 10-01-2012 08:47PM

tysonslovechild wrote: »

louis had good power but tyson was lethal. Have to go with tyson here.
Louis would defo dominate the first few rounds but I think at about round 6 on tyson starts connecting and finishes before the tenth. I just cant see louis taking tysons shots. Plus tysons speed is fkn mental and a defence that as so awkward.

judging by your name I'd say your a bit biased lol

i'd say it would be tyson to dominate early and then louis would come on strong and win by late stoppage.....tyson was a beast but if louis survived first 4 rounds i think he could finish tyson with his combination punching

Daroxtar · 10-01-2012 08:57PM

Louis was brilliant, theres no denying that but he had nowhere near the power of a peak tyson. Not even close. And the 20 lb is a huge difference. He would have been a cruiser today. Its the difference between David haye and a real heavyweight. Tyson inside 5 or Louis never fights again due to the damage a longer fight would do

walshb · 10-01-2012 08:59PM

tryingmybestt wrote: »

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.

would hatton beat duran?

would Klitschko beat Ali of foreman?

would bernard dunne beat mcguigan??

would david haye beat frazier or liston??

comment doesn't make sense

Dunne beat Barry? Heart attack!:D

Kiko did the trick in 86 secs. Barry, half that time.

tryingmybestt · 10-01-2012 09:04PM

walshb wrote: »

Dunne beat Barry? Heart attack!:D

Kiko did the trick in 86 secs. Barry, half that time.

why does the comment i replied to from gene tunney say originally posted by me??

i didn't say it, it was gene tunney??

Littlehorny · 10-01-2012 09:55PM

Have been looking at a website which marks the top heavyweights in different categories and give them marks out of ten in them, the marks for Louis and Tyson are as follows.
Power- Louis 10, Tyson 10
Physical attributes- L 7, T 7
Hand speed- L 10, T 10
Footwork- L 7, T 8
Defense- L 8, T 9
Durability- L 8, T 8
Killer instinct- L 10, T 10
Heart- L 10, T 5
Endurance- L 9, T 8
Ring generalship- L 10, T 8
Total- Louis 89 Tyson 83

tryingmybestt · 10-01-2012 10:48PM

Littlehorny wrote: »

Have been looking at a website which marks the top heavyweights in different categories and give them marks out of ten in them, the marks for Louis and Tyson are as follows.
Power- Louis 10, Tyson 10
Physical attributes- L 7, T 7
Hand speed- L 10, T 10
Footwork- L 7, T 8
Defense- L 8, T 9
Durability- L 8, T 8
Killer instinct- L 10, T 10
Heart- L 10, T 5
Endurance- L 9, T 8
Ring generalship- L 10, T 8
Total- Louis 89 Tyson 83

this backs up exactly what i've been saying......more or less.....the main difference is heart because tyson was mentally weaker.....

i would say tyson was little faster......

it also confirms what i was saying about endurance and ring generalship....

i would say possibly power is equal but louis' power combined with his timing, accuracy and technique was better than tyson's....

Littlehorny · 10-01-2012 10:57PM

tryingmybestt wrote: »

this backs up exactly what i've been saying......more or less.....the main difference is heart because tyson was mentally weaker.....

i would say tyson was little faster......

it also confirms what i was saying about endurance and ring generalship....

i would say possibly power is equal but louis' power combined with his timing, accuracy and technique was better than tyson's....

Well Louis is ranked no.1 in the Ring magazines greatest punchers of all time so that must stand for something also what you get is that Louis scores high in every category. To quote from the website i looked at , the reason Tyson was marked down in the "heart" category is- "Tysons big flaw was he never showed the ability to come from behind when hurt and was a psychological front runner."

tryingmybestt · 10-01-2012 11:01PM

Littlehorny wrote: »

Well Louis is ranked no.1 in the Ring magazines greatest punchers of all time so that must stand for something also what you get is that Louis scores high in every category. To quote from the website i looked at , the reason Tyson was marked down in the "heart" category is- "Tysons big flaw was he never showed the ability to come from behind when hurt and was a psychological front runner."

agree 100% with that......that's exactly what he never showed!

louis was a complete fighter....on a par with ray robinson......excellent in every department....balance, speed, power, technique.....

tyson was one dimensional....his mind was not as strong as his body.....if he had ali's mind he would have been the greatest probably of all time

Prime Tyson v Prime Joe Louis - who wins ?

Comments