Quote Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote Originally Posted by Bilbo
I voted for Johnson to beat Tyson.

Ice mate you are still showing yourself incapable of seeing beyond the time factor.

If you could somehow teleport both a prime Tyson and a prime Johnson from their respective era's without taking away from or adding anything to their fighting styles, diet and nutrition, understanding of a modern perspective, trainers etc then I agree Tyson would win.

BUT that is not how the real world works. The way you look at this is skewed. It's like saying that if Patrick Moore and Gaileo had an astronomy competition to see who could unfathom the depths of space better that Moore would definitely win because he had a much better telescope.

But of course if Galieo lived today he would be using the same state of the art technology as Moore and so we could conclude his visionary genuis would mean he would be a better astronomer than Moore today.

It's EXACTLY the same with Johnson. If Johnson fought in the same era as Tyson he would be exposed to the same training and nutrition and would understand the MODERN fighting styles etc.

The reason Johnson was so good was because like Gallieo he was a visionary who was ahead of his time. There is no reason whatsoever to think that had he fought in Tyson's era he wouldn't have been equally as visionary and would have developed a style that would have frustrated and nullified Tyson in the same way he nullified James Jeffries.

You gotta get this old fighting style thing out of your head mate, it wasn't old at the time, he was a good 30 or 40 years ahead of his time.

I knew you would be in this topic mate because i know you like Johnson.

Anyways mate what im saying is if they both fought prime for prime Johnson would of lost yes Johnson could have improved if he would of been newer era but just say Johnson would have fought with his style in early 1900s vs Tysons style it would of been a bit of a massacre imo im not saying Johnson couldn't have improved if he wouldn't have been in newer era but we are talking both in there prime with Johnson's style and with Tyson's style thats what i was basing this match up on anyway.
I agree that if you took Johnson from 1906 and stuck him in 1986 against Tyson without allowing him to see any of the developments that had taken place in boxing in the previous 80 years then yes Tyson would almost certainly win but how unfair is that?

Thats like saying who is the cleverest Leanardo Da Vinci or a an average 16 year old GCSE student?

If Da Vinci was suddenly transported out of the late 1400's and stuck in a clasroom to do an A Level Biology or Physics course he would come bottom of the class most likely as he just wouldn't know any of the scientific developments that would have taken place since his times 600 years ago.

Yet we all know that Da Vinci is considered by unanimous consent to have been one of the most intelligent and gifted people to have ever lived and would certainly wipe the floor with all of those kids in terms of intelligence.

Surely you can see what I am saying?