Mike Tyson is TBE

[p4pking]

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.

You have reminded me what a stupid poster you are. Even Arreleo's mum would slap you for saying such a stupid thing.

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!

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?