I think the point with Lewis v Tyson. is that their primes were at very different stages in their caerrers.

Lewis is actully older than Tyson though peaks way later, when Tyson is barely 20 hes bobbing weaving and being an absolute monster, while lewis is off playing amauter games and hunting olympic medels. It is only far later that Lewis obtains these killer jabs and thunderbolt uppercuts that made him virtually unbeatable from the mid 90's onwards.

There was probably a point where their talents crossed over and you would have had an even match up but it was never to happen. Your right Lewis fought a faded tyson, but he was still considered a threat and was capable of taking out any number of contenders, in many ways i think lewis probably accerlated tyson's decline by that brutal pummerling he gave the man.

Prime for Prime is a real tough one, for although they shared the same time, it is the older man who has the later prime. personally i think ive got to with tyson, for lewis's ringcraft he showed he was suspectable to be ko'd by one good shot, and tyson's movement in the late 80's was something else, so i would side with tyson but Lewis's huge frame and reach would have given him a chance to nulify tyson. Its a fight that we were never going to be able to see and what we got, though an even match was much needed for linege and also to end the debate over who was the best at that time.