Thread: prime tyson vs prime lewis

Originally Posted by BIG H

Originally Posted by Lyle

Evander Holyfield
Oliver McCall
Gerry Coetzie
Michael Dokes
Greg Page
Tim Witherspoon

Anyone is better than who he fought

O.K Since we were talking about 1986-89 which is when Tyson dominated and when he fought all those people you claim were bogus, here's what I make of your list

Evander Holyfield - In 1986 Holyfiled weighed 190 pounds, didn't step up for Heavyweight title fight till 91

Oliver McCall - Only turned pro in 85 and didn't even reach NABF level till 92 - has also lost to Bruno & Tucker WHO TYSON BEAT

Gerry Coetzie - Retired in 86 after been blown away in one round by the same Frank Bruno that you classed as being one of Tyson's lowly opponents

Michael Dokes - was fighting stiffs between 86 and 89 and was stopped by holyfield in 89

Greg Page - went 6-4 between 86-89 and lost to Joe Bugner in the process - hardly begging to fight for title. He has also lost to Seldon, Douglas, Tubbs & Ruddock - ALL OF WHOM TYSON BEAT

Tim Witherspoon - knocked out in a round by Bonecrusher (WHO TYSON BEAT) in 86 and hardly fought for next 3 years - although I do agree this would've been a test for Tyson

Why bother arguing with him Big H, he's said the same fucking things about Tyson for probably YEARS, and obviously isn't interested in actually changing his opinion no matter what anyone says.. IF he has seen enough footage of a prime Tyson, and a prime Marciano, and he thinks Rocky was FAR AND AWAY the better fighter, well, then let him have his illusions at least he'll stop posting the same thing over and over if you don't reply.

Holyfield was just waiting for the oppertunity OBVIOUSLY he could step it up...anyways HOW was he going to do worse than Michael Spinks from 85-89?

McCall turned pro in 85 Tyson turned pro in 85 SHMUCK

Coetzie was still a NAME in 86

Dokes was better than ANYONE Tyson fought from 85-89...Yeah HOLYFIELD beat him...like he's a bum or something

Page was still a NAME from 86-89

Witherspoon still a good veteran during those years

I mean Tyson was taken the distance by James Tillis!!!

Mitch Green did a good job vs him

Tony Tucker did a good job vs him

Would those other guys be better than Mike Jameson, Steve Zouski, or Trevor Berbick


YES, they would have put up a fight

Originally Posted by p4pking

Why bother arguing with him Big H, he's said the same fucking things about Tyson for probably YEARS, and obviously isn't interested in actually changing his opinion no matter what anyone says..  IF he has seen enough footage of a prime Tyson, and a prime Marciano, and he thinks Rocky was FAR AND AWAY the better fighter, well, then let him have his illusions at least he'll stop posting the same thing over and over if you don't reply.

I never said Tyson was bad, I just said Rocky was better, he challenged himself Tyson didn't, Rocky came from the clutches of defeat to KO someone for the win Tyson didn't, Rocky got off his ass to win, Tyson didn't, Rocky never lost, Tyson did.

For my top 10 and top 15 I don't think Tyson could beat ANY of them...it aint just Rocky

1. Louis
2. Marciano
3. Ali
4. Foreman
5. Frazier
6. Holmes
7. Johnson
8. Dempsey
9. Liston
10. Walcott
11. Charles
12. Lewis
13. Bowe
14. Holyfield
15. Tyson
16. Norton
17. Patterson
18. Braddock
19. Tunney (beat Dempsey twice but retired after 1 more defense)
20. Baer

I agree that Tyson's cleaning out of a division was against only slightly better than average opposition and that beating of Spinks and a 38 yr old Holmes are really not the greatest of achievements. But Marciano's resume is only slightly better in the name department. I do give Rock credit for spectacular heart and determination, but I can't rank the guy that high simply b/c I don't think he could beat almost any of the top HW's that came after him. There are at least seven fighters on your list below Rock that I would give big odds over him. I know head to head isn't the only criteria in ranking fighters but it has to play into it somewhat.

Originally Posted by Lyle

Holyfield was just waiting for the oppertunity OBVIOUSLY he could step it up...anyways HOW was he going to do worse than Michael Spinks from 85-89?

McCall turned pro in 85 Tyson turned pro in 85 SHMUCK

Coetzie was still a NAME in 86

Dokes was better than ANYONE Tyson fought from 85-89...Yeah HOLYFIELD beat him...like he's a bum or something

Page was still a NAME from 86-89

Witherspoon still a good veteran during those years

I mean Tyson was taken the distance by James Tillis!!!

Mitch Green did a good job vs him

Tony Tucker did a good job vs him

Would those other guys be better than Mike Jameson, Steve Zouski, or Trevor Berbick


YES, they would have put up a fight

Yes mccall turned pro in 85 and had two fights, infact Tyson had more fights in his first 12 months than McCall had in his first 5 years, and McCall didn't fight anybody with a winning record until 1989 - a fight that he lost.

Page & Coetzee were names, well so was Michael Knight and Devon Miles, but names mean sh1t when you have been getting beaten by every fukka you fight and getting KOed in a round by Bruno

And Dokes was better then Ruddock wasn't he (so what if the fight was in 1990)

Green lost 9 of the 10 rounds against Tyson and Tucker won 3 or 4 at best. Tucker by the way was 35-0 and didn't lose for another 6 years after the Tyson fight, so he was quite handy

and Tyson had been a pro a year when he fought 8 year veteran Tillis, who had floored the likes of Greg Page, so no disgrace going the distance.

Stick to politics Lyle old son, coz your boxing knowledge sucks

coetzie would of lost in round against tyson the fat version of witherspoon would lost badly but if were talking about witherspoon that looked great against holmes then thats different tyson would had hes hands full with that version of witherspoon and to be honest i never thought mccall was that good anyway he had great chin but this is same mccall that just won against 45 year old larry holmes and i thought holmes got decision to be honest.

Originally Posted by BIG H

Originally Posted by Lyle

Holyfield was just waiting for the oppertunity OBVIOUSLY he could step it up...anyways HOW was he going to do worse than Michael Spinks from 85-89?

McCall turned pro in 85 Tyson turned pro in 85 SHMUCK

Coetzie was still a NAME in 86

Dokes was better than ANYONE Tyson fought from 85-89...Yeah HOLYFIELD beat him...like he's a bum or something

Page was still a NAME from 86-89

Witherspoon still a good veteran during those years

I mean Tyson was taken the distance by James Tillis!!!

Mitch Green did a good job vs him

Tony Tucker did a good job vs him

Would those other guys be better than Mike Jameson, Steve Zouski, or Trevor Berbick


YES, they would have put up a fight

Yes mccall turned pro in 85 and had two fights, infact Tyson had more fights in his first 12 months than McCall had in his first 5 years, and McCall didn't fight anybody with a winning record until 1989 - a fight that he lost.

Page & Coetzee were names, well so was Michael Knight and Devon Miles, but names mean sh1t when you have been getting beaten by every fukka you fight and getting KOed in a round by Bruno

And Dokes was better then Ruddock wasn't he (so what if the fight was in 1990)

Green lost 9 of the 10 rounds against Tyson and Tucker won 3 or 4 at best. Tucker by the way was 35-0 and didn't lose for another 6 years after the Tyson fight, so he was quite handy

and Tyson had been a pro a year when he fought 8 year veteran Tillis, who had floored the likes of Greg Page, so no disgrace going the distance.

Stick to politics Lyle old son, coz your boxing knowledge sucks

A little cheeky but very agreeable arguments. Im a huge Tyson fan but dont get into these threads too much these days because they just go on and on and I just hear the same things from the usual suspects. If some people are so stuck into an opinion then it just becomes a chore trying to argue something you are equally adamant about.

again for some quality pro Tyson sentiments, Big H, long may this thread run!!

Originally Posted by BIG H

Originally Posted by Lyle

Evander Holyfield
Oliver McCall
Gerry Coetzie
Michael Dokes
Greg Page
Tim Witherspoon

Anyone is better than who he fought

O.K Since we were talking about 1986-89 which is when Tyson dominated and when he fought all those people you claim were bogus, here's what I make of your list

Evander Holyfield - In 1986 Holyfiled weighed 190 pounds, didn't step up for Heavyweight title fight till 91

Oliver McCall - Only turned pro in 85 and didn't even reach NABF level till 92 - has also lost to Bruno & Tucker WHO TYSON BEAT

Gerry Coetzie - Retired in 86 after been blown away in one round by the same Frank Bruno that you classed as being one of Tyson's lowly opponents

Michael Dokes - was fighting stiffs between 86 and 89 and was stopped by holyfield in 89

Greg Page - went 6-4 between 86-89 and lost to Joe Bugner in the process - hardly begging to fight for title. He has also lost to Seldon, Douglas, Tubbs & Ruddock - ALL OF WHOM TYSON BEAT

Tim Witherspoon - knocked out in a round by Bonecrusher (WHO TYSON BEAT) in 86 and hardly fought for next 3 years - although I do agree this would've been a test for Tyson

Tyson beat Douglas?!?!?...was that in the rematch?

Regarding Mike's opposition he fought what was out there and from 86-88 there was not a great deal of talent...but what he faced he dominated as a great fighter should...My reasons for not considering Mike and ATG are basically:

1) Excuses; there are ton's of excuses why Mike was considered beyond his peak at 22 years old. A bad marriage, misguided management, blah, blah blah...Welcome to bigtime boxing, these are just excuses. Marciano, Louis, Ali, Dempsey, Johnson, etc.. all had some sort of management/ personal issues that never became an excuse...

2) Inability to adapt;Mike fought one way and one way only, he never could adapt...He was perhaps the best at the Cus D'Amato style EVER no denying that...but being a one way fighter always leads to disaster once your style is neutralized...Did he peak at 21 years old or did Buster Douglas show the world how to beat Mike Long before Mike the rule to beat a Cus D'Amato fighter was to walk him backwards...This became painfully obvious when Mike lost to a well worn Holyfield...D'Amato fighters don't throw punches going backwards, look at old fights of Patterson to see the other D'Amato prodigy...


3)Losses: while many will argue that Tyson was beyond his prime for the douglas fight (three fights removed from Spinks)...Tyson Lost to a "B-C" level fighter, he was outboxed, outhustled, out-hearted by a guy that was going through more inner turmoil than he, but Buster sucked it up...No ATG ever lost to a bum like Douglas and any that did lose to a lesser opponent avenged those loses...that's an ATG

4)Longevity; Thos who argue Tyson is an ATG say that his prime was from 86-88, which I won't deny...so from his 19-22 year of age he was the best, that is far to short a legacy to be considered an ATG...that means he peaked as a boxer before his physical strength peaked(medically around 25), certainly his maturity and before he got to face his generations best opposition...

IMO...Mike was a Fighter that had great potential and at times fought great...but certainly can't be considered an ATG

Originally Posted by miles

Originally Posted by BIG H

Originally Posted by Lyle

Holyfield was just waiting for the oppertunity OBVIOUSLY he could step it up...anyways HOW was he going to do worse than Michael Spinks from 85-89?

McCall turned pro in 85 Tyson turned pro in 85 SHMUCK

Coetzie was still a NAME in 86

Dokes was better than ANYONE Tyson fought from 85-89...Yeah HOLYFIELD beat him...like he's a bum or something

Page was still a NAME from 86-89

Witherspoon still a good veteran during those years

I mean Tyson was taken the distance by James Tillis!!!

Mitch Green did a good job vs him

Tony Tucker did a good job vs him

Would those other guys be better than Mike Jameson, Steve Zouski, or Trevor Berbick


YES, they would have put up a fight

Yes mccall turned pro in 85 and had two fights, infact Tyson had more fights in his first 12 months than McCall had in his first 5 years, and McCall didn't fight anybody with a winning record until 1989 - a fight that he lost.

Page & Coetzee were names, well so was Michael Knight and Devon Miles, but names mean sh1t when you have been getting beaten by every fukka you fight and getting KOed in a round by Bruno

And Dokes was better then Ruddock wasn't he (so what if the fight was in 1990)

Green lost 9 of the 10 rounds against Tyson and Tucker won 3 or 4 at best. Tucker by the way was 35-0 and didn't lose for another 6 years after the Tyson fight, so he was quite handy

and Tyson had been a pro a year when he fought 8 year veteran Tillis, who had floored the likes of Greg Page, so no disgrace going the distance.

Stick to politics Lyle old son, coz your boxing knowledge sucks

A little cheeky but very agreeable arguments. Im a huge Tyson fan but dont get into these threads too much these days because they just go on and on and I just hear the same things from the usual suspects. If some people are so stuck into an opinion then it just becomes a chore trying to argue something you are equally adamant about.

again for some quality pro Tyson sentiments, Big H, long may this thread run!!

CC back

Originally Posted by BIG H

Yes mccall turned pro in 85 and had two fights, infact Tyson had more fights in his first 12 months than McCall had in his first 5 years, and McCall didn't fight anybody with a winning record until 1989 - a fight that he lost.

Page & Coetzee were names, well so was Michael Knight and Devon Miles, but names mean sh1t when you have been getting beaten by every fukka you fight and getting KOed in a round by Bruno

And Dokes was better then Ruddock wasn't he (so what if the fight was in 1990)

Green lost 9 of the 10 rounds against Tyson and Tucker won 3 or 4 at best. Tucker by the way was 35-0 and didn't lose for another 6 years after the Tyson fight, so he was quite handy

and Tyson had been a pro a year when he fought 8 year veteran Tillis, who had floored the likes of Greg Page, so no disgrace going the distance.

Stick to politics Lyle old son, coz your boxing knowledge sucks

What do we ask of heavyweights 1) How's his chin? 2) Punching power? 3) Stamina? 4) Boxing ability 4) Defense? 5) Have they proven themselves vs a NAME opponent? (took Tyson until his 20th fight to fight a NAME guy in Quick Tillis a guy Witherspoon KO'd in 1, Page KO'd in 8, Thomas KO'd in 8 all PRE Tyson and Mike went the distance with him WOW that punching power)

Michael Dokes by the way lasted longer with a younger Evander Holyfield than Tyson did with an Older one who had just finished 3 brawls with Riddick Bowe!!!

OOOOH so now we're stretching it to 1990 are we But that's "POST PRIME" Tyson!!!!

In that case here are some MORE names he COULD have fought in 1990

GEORGE FOREMAN...oh but Mikey was too scared of Big George

RAY MERCER
Pierre Coetzer
Tommy Morrison

BigH you are as stupid as you are ugly

I don't intend on winning this debate because after all Tyson fans have always been good at MAKING EXCUSES

Originally Posted by Lyle

Originally Posted by BIG H

Yes mccall turned pro in 85 and had two fights, infact Tyson had more fights in his first 12 months than McCall had in his first 5 years, and McCall didn't fight anybody with a winning record until 1989 - a fight that he lost.

Page & Coetzee were names, well so was Michael Knight and Devon Miles, but names mean sh1t when you have been getting beaten by every fukka you fight and getting KOed in a round by Bruno

And Dokes was better then Ruddock wasn't he (so what if the fight was in 1990)

Green lost 9 of the 10 rounds against Tyson and Tucker won 3 or 4 at best. Tucker by the way was 35-0 and didn't lose for another 6 years after the Tyson fight, so he was quite handy

and Tyson had been a pro a year when he fought 8 year veteran Tillis, who had floored the likes of Greg Page, so no disgrace going the distance.

Stick to politics Lyle old son, coz your boxing knowledge sucks

BigH you are as stupid as you are ugly

Hahaha - now that made me laugh

Originally Posted by Lyle

I don't intend on winning this debate because after all Tyson fans have always been good at MAKING EXCUSES

Ia int a fan, I hate the bloke, just think that everybody pays to much notice to how shite he became, because anybody that watched his early fights will know that he completely changed in every possible way from Douglas onwards

Originally Posted by Lyle

Originally Posted by BIG H

Yes mccall turned pro in 85 and had two fights, infact Tyson had more fights in his first 12 months than McCall had in his first 5 years, and McCall didn't fight anybody with a winning record until 1989 - a fight that he lost.

Page & Coetzee were names, well so was Michael Knight and Devon Miles, but names mean sh1t when you have been getting beaten by every fukka you fight and getting KOed in a round by Bruno

And Dokes was better then Ruddock wasn't he (so what if the fight was in 1990)

Green lost 9 of the 10 rounds against Tyson and Tucker won 3 or 4 at best. Tucker by the way was 35-0 and didn't lose for another 6 years after the Tyson fight, so he was quite handy

and Tyson had been a pro a year when he fought 8 year veteran Tillis, who had floored the likes of Greg Page, so no disgrace going the distance.

Stick to politics Lyle old son, coz your boxing knowledge sucks

What do we ask of heavyweights 1) How's his chin? 2) Punching power? 3) Stamina? 4) Boxing ability 4) Defense? 5) Have they proven themselves vs a NAME opponent? (took Tyson until his 20th fight to fight a NAME guy in Quick Tillis a guy Witherspoon KO'd in 1, Page KO'd in 8, Thomas KO'd in 8 all PRE Tyson and Mike went the distance with him WOW that punching power)

Michael Dokes by the way lasted longer with a younger Evander Holyfield than Tyson did with an Older one who had just finished 3 brawls with Riddick Bowe!!!

OOOOH so now we're stretching it to 1990 are we But that's "POST PRIME" Tyson!!!!

In that case here are some MORE names he COULD have fought in 1990

GEORGE FOREMAN...oh but Mikey was too scared of Big George

RAY MERCER
Pierre Coetzer
Tommy Morrison

BigH you are as stupid as you are ugly

im not tyson fan at all but tyson would of destroyed tommy and coetzer mercer would of been tough though

lemme see who tyson could of fought
greg page
tim witherspoon
ray mercer
riddick bowe
i cant think at moment mind has gone blank