Why would you ask that? Because he lost to Bermane Stiverne.
Either Stiverne, Arreola or Tyson culd have lined every single one of them and knocked them out.
Please show me a 6'4" 240lb guy as tough and can fight like Chris from before 1980? Yeah right!
Chris was WINNING that fight before he got tagged flush by a counter right hand from one of the hardest punchers in history. I'd say that's a pretty good effort if you ask me.
Oh and by the way, hi![]()
"Enough with the games mate! Your messing with the Grand Master!"
Lennox Lewis
Hardly, I made fun of you for rating Arreola so highly well before he proved me rightWhat on earth make Stiverne and Arreola comparable to Tyson in your eyes though, aside from the fact that they happen to have come after him. Why do I have to list a 6'4 240 lb guy who could beat Arreola instead of the dozens and dozens of men slightly smaller than that who would have beaten him? You don't think Tyson would have absolutely steamrolled him? If so, why is size such a benchmark to you?
I think Tyson would have great chances vs Chris Arreola or Stiverne.
But
Tyson never once beat anybody as big +good as Arreola
Or as good+heavy as Stiverne
So to answer your question, I DO rank Tyson ahead of these guys, but whether he would win against them in fact is an open question.
One thing is for sure, Tyson was stretched to the limit by guys whom either of these guys would have banged straight out. So no, Tyson could not steam roll either of them.
I still rate Arreola just a notch below Stiverne now, they are rather evenly matched.
Considering Tyson vs these guys is a valid question because he WAS special.
No pre80's HW was special, the better ones won against bums and cruisers mainly! With little exception.
Pre80's HW's could barely even box as we would describe it today.
"Enough with the games mate! Your messing with the Grand Master!"
Lennox Lewis
You should probably just leave again.
Yes well I often wonder what guys like Arreola or Stiverne fr that mattter, think about being compared to such ludicrous opponents as they have been subjected to. Guys that boxed 50 or more years earlier which were about 5 weight classes below them and often failed to score knockouts against even WORSE opponents over a full 15 or even 20 rounds!
Guys like Jimmy Young etc can lost multiple fights against guys who would ever even box today, Yet someone like Arreola loses against guys as strong as never existed before and suddenly he can't box?
Something is wrong with this picture.
Fortunately Mike Tyson knew exactly where it was at..
I'll dig up the quote from Mike soon...
There is a very easy way to judge a fighters competition. It's a no brainer method.
Everybody knows it..
"Every era, is by and large, better (stronger, faster (p4p) and more skilled) than the one preceded it. Because athletes and sportsmen get better and better from generation to generation."
THIS^^^ Is simply how it works, and is supported by every fact, every statistic one could viably concoct. And it certainly LOOKS that way to me.
Mike Tyson vs Chris Arreola = valid debate
For example..
Wladimir Klitschko vs Jess Willard = definitely does NOT!
"Enough with the games mate! Your messing with the Grand Master!"
Lennox Lewis
Max should be banned for his stupid posts.
Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.
I don't sleight you for thinking that athletes by and large improve over time, not at all. I feel boxing is a lot different than most sports in that it isn't overwhelmingly about athleticism though. Michael Grant might be one of the biggest strongest modern athletes who ever set foot in the ring. He would have killed Lennox Lewis in a 100m dash, vertical leap, was probably stronger and faster in just about every way. He got the shit kicked out of him because he didn't know how to fight half as well and didn't have nearly the intangibles. I don't think Arreola exactly thrives in these departments either, and in fact hes not even that physically impressive. It really seems as though you champion him strictly because he is current, which is odd. If you think he would have actually stood any kind of chance against Mike Tyson I don't put any stock in the way anything looks to you The guy was in big trouble against Travis Walker, he lost to a light heavyweight Tomas Adamek, but I suppose those guys would have been undisputed HW champions as well if they came before 1985? Do you still think Arreola would have beaten LArry Holmes?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks