BOXING - Tyson vs. Paul - who else is stoked?

[Ankerwycke]

I tend to think of Tyson as someone who could have been one of the truly greats, but when he lost Cus D'Amato and Don King took over his management, Tyson lost his ability to train with the intensity that was required to maintain his skills at the level he had reached previously, at least for his style, and he could not adapt. His early record was amazing though. And he held the unified title and lost and regained the heavyweight title, which argues for a high ranking in history,

When he was in top shape, he was an amazing fighter, with a very effective style.

Who would you back to beat Tyson at his peak?

I’d probably back Ali and Foreman.

Frazier had the heart but I think Tyson would have been too fast and strong for him, and Marciano was a smaller version of Frazier.

I‘m not sure about Liston, he destroyed Floyd Patterson who was a smaller less ferocious version of Tyson.
But Patterson ( a favourite of mine) wouldn’t have lived with Tyson either, and I’ve got my doubts whether Louis or Dempsey could have handled Tyson.

But Cassius Clay beat Sonny Liston, and I’d back all of the above to beat Jake Paul.

 

[The Knize]

Who would you back to beat Tyson at his peak?

I’d probably back Ali and Foreman.

Frazier had the heart but I think Tyson would have been too fast and strong for him, and Marciano was a smaller version of Frazier.

I‘m not sure about Liston, he destroyed Floyd Patterson who was a smaller less ferocious version of Tyson.
But Patterson ( a favourite of mine) wouldn’t have lived with Tyson either, and I’ve got my doubts whether Louis or Dempsey could have handled Tyson.

But Cassius Clay beat Sonny Liston, and I’d back all of the above to beat Jake Paul.

My analysis is about the same as yours. Tyson at his peak under Cos D was a real force in the ring. I think Ali, Foreman, and Liston. I think I am with the general thinking that Liston was underrated. On the other hand, he was much older that his listed age. I do not think Frazier could have taken him. I do not know Louis or Dempsey well enough to say much. Patterson was destroyed twice by Liston, so probably not. Marciano was relatively small as I recall. Tyson at his best, and he did not stay at his best, could probably take him, but underestimating Marciano was a dangerous thing. Ken Norton because of style might have given Tyson trouble.

But Tyson at his peak I think we are really talking Ali, Liston, and Foreman. Ali because he could adjust to find a way to win against anyone it seems. I think Liston and Foreman could keep Tyson at a distance and punish him with powerful blows until he was knocked out or gassed out. But Tyson as his peak was hard to hit and had a powerful punch himself.

I am not an expert at this. Styles make fights they say. Tyson's style was very hard to execute, but when executed well was hard to beat.

 

[slimshavy]

Yeah, I'm pretty jacked, but I feel a little guilty watching a man of Tysons age in the ring. I'd hate to see him get hurt.

Tyson still looks fast and powerful, but if Paul can survive a few rounds, Mike will have to tire quickly and I think Paul can take him out.

He just has to dodge Tyson's uppercuts for the first 90 seconds and then he can stick and move and get some counterpunches in. Then just last three rounds and wait for the decision.

I mean, that's how I always beat Tyson. That and the magic number 007-373-5963.

 

[DrStrange]

He just has to dodge Tyson's uppercuts for the first 90 seconds and then he can stick and move and get some counterpunches in. Then just last three rounds and wait for the decision.

I mean, that's how I always beat Tyson. That and the magic number 007-373-5963.

 

[Ankerwycke]

My analysis is about the same as yours. Tyson at his peak under Cos D was a real force in the ring. I think Ali, Foreman, and Liston. I think I am with the general thinking that Liston was underrated. On the other hand, he was much older that his listed age. I do not think Frazier could have taken him. I do not know Louis or Dempsey well enough to say much. Patterson was destroyed twice by Liston, so probably not. Marciano was relatively small as I recall. Tyson at his best, and he did not stay at his best, could probably take him, but underestimating Marciano was a dangerous thing. Ken Norton because of style might have given Tyson trouble.

But Tyson at his peak I think we are really talking Ali, Liston, and Foreman. Ali because he could adjust to find a way to win against anyone it seems. I think Liston and Foreman could keep Tyson at a distance and punish him with powerful blows until he was knocked out or gassed out. But Tyson as his peak was hard to hit and had a powerful punch himself.

I am not an expert at this. Styles make fights they say. Tyson's style was very hard to execute, but when executed well was hard to beat.

I liked Ken Norton but I can’t help thinking Tyson would have done an Earnie Shavers on him.

 

[The Knize]

I liked Ken Norton but I can’t help thinking Tyson would have done an Earnie Shavers on him.

Maybe Norton would have learned from the the Shavers fight! It is fun to read up on various folks analyses of fighter's styles and fights. I think the general thought was that Shavers had one of the most powerful right hands ever. And that his style was to try to set up that punch, which was devastating. So a slugger. But his weakness was lack of stamina. Norton was a swarmer, something like Joe Frazier, but was unorthodox in style, particularly as I read it, defensive style, which was an advantage. He was also very fit. Apparently he tried to get Shavers to punch himself out and when the bout in the later rounds by having much more left in the tank himself. But Norton did not figure out how to get Shavers to punch himself out, without Norton getting beaten to a pulp in the process. Shavers did go 15 rounds with Ali, though.

Tyson's peek a boo style, as I read it, was very energy intensive--lots of head movement for one, which combined with holding the arms/hand high made for strong defense. lots of punches thrown, always aggressive moving forward. I guess it is something of a swarming offense, too. When Tyson was at his best, his stamina adequate for this style, although many commentators question his stamina even early on in his career. It is true that most of Tyson's fights did not last many rounds. So in some ways Tyson was like Shavers, in that he wanted to get off hard punches early.

So Norton versus Tyson could be like Shavers versus Norton. Norton can't stop Tyson from coming in hard early and landing heavy blows. Or swarmer versus swarmer, neither fighter can do anything decisive early, and the fighter with more gas in the tank a the end takes it.

I, too, tend to think that Tyson in his prime would have overwhelmed Norton early. Punches in bunches. I think the general thinking is that to beat a swarmer it is good to have a long reach and keep the swarmer back and away from one. Norton did not have that.

 

[DrStrange]

I liked Ken Norton but I can’t help thinking Tyson would have done an Earnie Shavers on him.

I recall Shavers landing a solid one on Ali's jaw
like I've never seen anybody else do.
Perfect form, accuracy, and power; imagine Babe Ruth hitting a Tee-ball.
Ali's technique at the time was so good that folks speculated about whether
he could take a punch like that, because it hadn't happened before.
Anyway, he could.

 

[Ankerwycke]

I recall Shavers landing a solid one on Ali's jaw
like I've never seen anybody else do.
Perfect form, accuracy, and power; imagine Babe Ruth hitting a Tee-ball.
Ali's technique at the time was so good that folks speculated about whether
he could take a punch like that, because it hadn't happened before.
Anyway, he could.

Ali (Clay) took a shot of Henry Cooper in the 60s that could have been career changing. Fortunately he had Angelo Dundee in the corner.

Does anyone remember when Ali fought Antonio Inoki the Japanese wrestler in the 70s? That was a farce on par with what Tyson v Paul is likely to be.

 

[DrStrange]

Ali (Clay) took a shot of Henry Cooper in the 60s that could have been career changing. Fortunately he had Angelo Dundee in the corner.

Does anyone remember when Ali fought Antonio Inoki the Japanese wrestler in the 70s? That was a farce on par with what Tyson v Paul is likely to be.

My recollection of Antonio Inoki,
was that he was not required to stand up during the fight,
which made things strange.

 

[The Knize]

Ali's technique at the time was so good that folks speculated about whether
he could take a punch like that, because it hadn't happened before.
Anyway, he could.

Ali has been said by many to have an iron jaw. Perhaps that did not serve him well given his later neurological problems!

What you may be implying, which I think is distinction not always made, is was Ali really able to take a punch that would have knocked other fighters out, or was his technique so good that even when a strong punch landed solidly, Ali was consistently able through reflexes and technique to take away some/much of the power of that punch, so that it was not so devastating. As I understand it, in boxing, it is the punch that the receiver does not see coming, that he is not prepared for that causes the damage. If one's head is moving in the direction of the incoming punch. that punch's power is going to be multiplied, and if you do not see it coming or otherwise anticipate that punch, you are not going to be able to slip it to the side or move backwards away from it, or otherwise make sure all of its power does not slosh your brain around inside your skull. Ali, from what I have read, was very adept at pulling his head back and away from punches, which is a rather remarkable use of energy, precision, and coordination, whereas most fighters, Tyson and, say, Frazier included, rely/relied more on side-to-side movement and bobbing, which if anyone has ever tried to do it, is exhausted and kind of disorienting, at least to me.

I think Tyson and, say, Ali at least when he was young, managed to finish many fights completely unmarked. Whereas, a fighter like Frazier was willing to take a punch to give a punch. I am trying to remember. I am not sure that Norton did not have a reputation for having a weak chin.

 

[Ankerwycke]

My recollection of Antonio Inoki,
was that he was not required to stand up during the fight,
which made things strange.

I remember that Inoki spent most of the fight on his back on the floor trying to kick Ali, and Ali kept telling Inoki to stand up.
But apparently there were clauses in the contract that limited Inoki to what he could actually do.
Although the fight was a total farce Ferdie Pacheco said that Ali suffered quite a bit of damage to his legs and was never quite the same again.

 

[The Knize]

I meant to say that I remember the Inoki fight and it was silly.

 

[Doc4]

Ali's technique at the time was so good that folks speculated about whether
he could take a punch like that, because it hadn't happened before.
Anyway, he could.

Ali has been said by many to have an iron jaw. Perhaps that did not serve him well given his later neurological problems!

IMHO Ali was fortunate to combine excellent defensive technique to avoid getting hit (or to avoid getting hit hard) with the ability to take a hard hit well if needed.

IMHO he spent a lot more time avoiding getting hit, and so that's what people thought of him, so he didn't put his "iron chin" on display enough to get *that* reputation.

And of course, not getting hit is a healthier lifestyle than getting hit. And he still ended up with Parkinson's ... but the proper question isn't to compare him to other boxers who didn't get that ... it's to compare him to how he would have fared as a slugger-boxer, or as someone who never boxed.

Does anyone remember when Ali fought Antonio Inoki the Japanese wrestler in the 70s? That was a farce on par with what Tyson v Paul is likely to be.

 

[The Knize]

IMHO Ali was fortunate to combine excellent defensive technique to avoid getting hit (or to avoid getting hit hard) with the ability to take a hard hit well if needed.

I agree. And I agree that I do not think anyone knew how well he could take a punch until later in his career. I could be wrong about that, though. He fought some folks early who could really punch.

And no doubt, to avoid getting hit hard, is what it is all about. Every boxer, including, say, Mayweather is going to get hit. Not getting hit unexpectedly so that one can mitigate the blow, much less getting hit moving into the punch, is the difference between winning and losing. It is not so much avoiding getting hit completely, it is avoiding getting hit "flush." At least that is the way I see it.

Even there, some boxers, say Frazier, are willing to take a lot more hits of one kind or another in order to hit the other boxer than Ali's style required. I do think Ali tended, at least when younger, to throw punches from relatively far away.

 

[Columbo]

I tend to think of Tyson as someone who could have been one of the truly greats, but when he lost Cus D'Amato …

This. Having watched a lot of boxing over the years, Tyson in his prime, under D’Amato’s tutelage, was among the top 5 heavyweights of the 20th Century. He was never the same after D’Amato’s passing, as his ring discipline faded. Most great boxers have sad and sloppy ends to their careers. But Tyson’s I believe came quicker due to his loss of D’Amato.

But in their respective primes, Tyson hit harder than Frazier, Forman or Shavers. Tyson could end a fight in one hit. One mistake, and it was over. I don’t know if Tyson had Frazier’s heart (or endurance to take a pounding). Ali was quicker, moved faster, and was more precise. If Ali didn’t make any mistakes, he would probably beat Tyson on points most times.

And Joe Louis would likely beat them both, most of the time. But I am relying on some old films in making that prediction!

I hate seeing great boxers, now old, fighting in novelty events like this.

 

[The Knize]

Great to read your views on this after your actually watching film of old fights. Props!

There seems to be a whole lot of discussion on line of which heavy weight boxer had the strongest punch. Shavers comes up a lot as does the statement "Virtually all who faced him, including Larry Holmes, Ron Lyle, Jimmy Young, Ken Norton and Muhammad Ali, stated without hesitation that Shavers was the hardest puncher they had ever encountered."

Foreman comes up a lot in the top five or so, too. Tyson in top five less often, but still fairly often. Frazier rarely. Louis frequently. Liston sometimes. Ali, never. I do not think anyone things Ali's punch was GOAT level strong. His skills lay in being able to hit his opponent frequently and accurately.

I really have no idea. Tyson in his prime was terrifying. I thought of him more as a punches in bunches guy than a one punch kind of guy, but I would say he did get it done with one punch often enough.

 

[Ankerwycke]

This. Having watched a lot of boxing over the years, Tyson in his prime, under D’Amato’s tutelage, was among the top 5 heavyweights of the 20th Century. He was never the same after D’Amato’s passing, as his ring discipline faded. Most great boxers have sad and sloppy ends to their careers. But Tyson’s I believe came quicker due to his loss of D’Amato.

But in their respective primes, Tyson hit harder than Frazier, Forman or Shavers. Tyson could end a fight in one hit. One mistake, and it was over. I don’t know if Tyson had Frazier’s heart (or endurance to take a pounding). Ali was quicker, moved faster, and was more precise. If Ali didn’t make any mistakes, he would probably beat Tyson on points most times.

And Joe Louis would likely beat them both, most of the time. But I am relying on some old films in making that prediction!

I hate seeing great boxers, now old, fighting in novelty events like this.

Billy Conn gave Joe Louis 20+lbs and all the trouble he could handle. I can’t imagine Conn doing this to Ali, Tyson, or Foreman.

 

[Columbo]

Billy Conn gave Joe Louis 20+lbs and all the trouble he could handle. I can’t imagine Conn doing this to Ali, Tyson, or Foreman.

?

Louis KOed him in the 13th in that one. Conn made one big mistake, and that’s all it took with Louis.

Joe Louis was technically the most perfect heavyweight boxer I’ve ever watched. The most balanced of them all, and no one could orchestrate combinations better. No one. Far more precise than Ali, and with much greater authority.

 

[Ankerwycke]

?

Louis KOed him in the 13th in that one. Conn made one big mistake, and that’s all it took with Louis.

Joe Louis was technically the most perfect heavyweight boxer I’ve ever watched. The most balanced of them all, and no one could orchestrate combinations better. No one. Far more precise than Ali, and with much greater authority.

What the video showed was the way Conn handled Louis up until the 13th!
Conn was a Light Heavyweight weighing around 175 lbs, conceding around 25 lbs, and he was ahead on points going into the 13th round.
I don’t believe Conn would have lasted three rounds with Tyson or Foreman.

 

[Columbo]

What the video showed was the way Conn handled Louis up until the 13th!
Conn was a Light Heavyweight weighing around 175 lbs, conceding around 25 lbs, and he was ahead on points going into the 13th round.

What you’re trying to say is Conn would have won the fight if Louis hadn’t knocked him out.

But Louis knocked him out. Louis beat him. And he beat Conn worse in ‘46. Knocked him out in both fights. The ‘46 bout was comparatively mediocre, but the result was the same.

The ‘41 bout was a very good match, and better than the highlight youtube video you posted. Worth watching in its entirety if you can.

I don’t believe Conn would have lasted three rounds with Tyson or Foreman.

And why do you think that?