Post- Prison- Tyson vs. 77- Ali

[Luigi1985]

Who wins and why? Let´s say the Tyson from the 2nd Bruno- fight (96) against the Ali from the Evangelista- fight (77)...

[Fedor Em]

Ali wins a decision, Tyson had 3-5 good rounds in him at this point. I believe this is around when Ali beat a near peak Shavers, so he is not getting stopped by this version of Tyson. I see Tyson taking 3-4 rounds in the first half and Ali winning the 2nd half of the fight.

[Blacc Jesus]

Ali by decision.

[ChrisPontius]

Tyson. Why do people pretend that Tyson was shot after prison? Watch his fight with Bruno, he looked as good and sharp as he ever did.

Obviously he did lose a LOT in mentality and a bit in conditioning, but it took Holyfield (who had the best night of his life, in my opinion) to beat him.

The '77 Ali almost lost a decision to the very limited Shavers, for Christ's sake. And he lost to 6-0 future journeyman Leon Spinks in his very next fight.
His other fights against top opposition (Young, Norton) are fights in which he got decisions that he according to most people did not deserve. Tyson's fast hands would find their mark too often. Holyfield still had sharp, hard punches when he fought Tyson. Ali could not throw the punches that he used to be able to.

Now if it's a '74 or '75 Ali, he'd probably win. But in '77 he had lost a tremendous amount of his abilities and he lacked the fundamentals to for instance block a left hook.

[Holmes' Jab]

Tyson. Why do people pretend that Tyson was shot after prison? Watch his fight with Bruno, he looked as good and sharp as he ever did.

Obviously he did lose a LOT in mentality and a bit in conditioning, but it took Holyfield (who had the best night of his life, in my opinion) to beat him.

The '77 Ali almost lost a decision to the very limited Shavers, for Christ's sake. And he lost to 6-0 future journeyman Leon Spinks in his very next fight.
His other fights against top opposition (Young, Norton) are fights in which he got decisions that he according to most people did not deserve. Tyson's fast hands would find their mark too often. Holyfield still had sharp, hard punches when he fought Tyson. Ali could not throw the punches that he used to be able to.

Now if it's a '74 or '75 Ali, he'd probably win. But in '77 he had lost a tremendous amount of his abilities and he lacked the fundamentals to for instance block a left hook.

Spot on. I agree. :yep

[NickHudson]

Chris,

It is my very great pleasure to say that I agree whole-heartedly with your post!

After 6 months on ESB I was wondering whether I would ever get a chance to say that...

Tyson. Why do people pretend that Tyson was shot after prison? Watch his fight with Bruno, he looked as good and sharp as he ever did.

Obviously he did lose a LOT in mentality and a bit in conditioning, but it took Holyfield (who had the best night of his life, in my opinion) to beat him.

The '77 Ali almost lost a decision to the very limited Shavers, for Christ's sake. And he lost to 6-0 future journeyman Leon Spinks in his very next fight.
His other fights against top opposition (Young, Norton) are fights in which he got decisions that he according to most people did not deserve. Tyson's fast hands would find their mark too often. Holyfield still had sharp, hard punches when he fought Tyson. Ali could not throw the punches that he used to be able to.

Now if it's a '74 or '75 Ali, he'd probably win. But in '77 he had lost a tremendous amount of his abilities and he lacked the fundamentals to for instance block a left hook.

[Dempsey1238]

Ali was pretty much finish by 1977. I go with Tyson in this fight.

[mightyd40]

96 tyson wasnt to bad.....i go with tyson, i think he would rack up some early rounds on ali and even if ali came back it would be to late.

[C. M. Clay II]

I would say Tyson wins a clsoe decision over 15 rounds. Ali was shot by '77.

[Asterion]

Ali UD Tyson.

[ironchamp]

Tyson by KO.

Ali was further gone than Mike was. Tyson was definatley watered down but not to the extent that he'd lose to a fighter like 77 Ali.

[Robbi]

Tyson. Why do people pretend that Tyson was shot after prison? Watch his fight with Bruno, he looked as good and sharp as he ever did.

Obviously he did lose a LOT in mentality and a bit in conditioning, but it took Holyfield (who had the best night of his life, in my opinion) to beat him.

The '77 Ali almost lost a decision to the very limited Shavers, for Christ's sake. And he lost to 6-0 future journeyman Leon Spinks in his very next fight.
His other fights against top opposition (Young, Norton) are fights in which he got decisions that he according to most people did not deserve. Tyson's fast hands would find their mark too often. Holyfield still had sharp, hard punches when he fought Tyson. Ali could not throw the punches that he used to be able to.

Now if it's a '74 or '75 Ali, he'd probably win. But in '77 he had lost a tremendous amount of his abilities and he lacked the fundamentals to for instance block a left hook.

After Tyson came out of prison, the Bruno destruction was his finest moment. He performed very well, and looked as close to the prime Tyson as possible considering he lost three years in jail. His timing was rather rusty against McNeely (95) and Mathias (95). He never looked shot throughout 1996, but he was not quite the same fighter as he was during the late 80's.

Balancing out all his performances which occured in 1996, Bruno, Seldon, and Holyfield, Im not mightly impressed. Especially taking into consideration who highly valued Bruno and Seldom were. Holyfield did perfom beyond expectations, thus exposing Tyson while doing so.

Ali had been through many tough fights up until 1977, so he'd not exactly be fazed with a rough tussle with Tyson. Clearly worn, but very experienced.

Ali via very close decision.

[prime]

Why put Ali through these scenarios? He would show up in better shape than he did for Shavers and win a decision.

[Cojimar 1945]

Holyfield had lost twice to the very limited Riddick Bowe who was thrashed twice by Andrew Golota who lost to Michael Grant. Criticizing Ali for having trouble with Shavers is fine but Holyfield's losses to Bowe also call into his question his ability.

[Robbi]

but Holyfield's losses to Bowe also call into his question his ability.

It also calls Tyson's defeat to Holyfield into question even more. Looking back in hindsight though, Holyfield over the years has been an up and down fighter, inconsistent.

[Quick Cash]

By the fifteenth, Tyson would have an insurmountable lead on the scorecards likely due to knockdown/s. Ali would be hard-pressed to pull this one out.

[Duodenum]

Ali by 15 round UD. Tyson was frustrated by Bonecrusher Smith's smothering clinches, and nobody was better at wearing down a shorter opponent with clinches than Muhammad. Neither was anybody better at optimizing a reach and height advantage than Ali.

If a peaking Shavers couldn't buckle Ali, then Tyson wouldn't come anywhere near flooring him. Muhammad was the ultimate 15 round ironman. He'd be muffling Tyson like the long-armed wrestling squid he was through the first couple minutes of each round, then steal enough of them with his patented closing minute flurries to secure a fairly pedantic, albeit controversial decision.

Leon Spinks didn't exactly swamp Ali on the scorecards in their first match, but dropped a competitive split decision in which Muhammad came on strong late, against a peaking young athlete who was taller, comparable in speed, and with a longer reach than Tyson.

Shavers was one of the fastest starting heavyweights in boxing history, yet Muhammad forced him to try coming from behind, and sewed up the decision by the final round.

Earlier in his career, Ali demonstrated twice what he could do against a Cus D'Amato schooled boxer with Tyson's speed and stature. That experience would hold him in good stead here.

Muhammad's toughness would neutralize Tyson's offensive potency when he did land, while Ali no longer possessed the firepower necessary to trouble Tyson. This one would go the full 15, with no knockdowns.

Against an opponent of Tyson's caliber, the Ali of the Shavers fight would be too well-prepared, too durable, too experienced, too big, and with too much heart to succumb to Tyson's attack. Again, keep in mind that Tyson was not schooled by legendary Eddie Futch, or wise old Sam Solomon, but Cus D'Amato, not in a style favorable for contending with Muhammad. Like Smith, Ali would cause Tyson to wear down and lose his composure with wrestling tactics. Once he made Tyson blow his cool, then unlike Smith, Ali would capitalize.

[JohnThomas1]

If a peaking Shavers couldn't buckle Ali, then Tyson wouldn't come anywhere near flooring him.

Enjoyed your post but this one bit stands out. Tho Shavers hit as hard or a little harder than Tyson (Tyson approached his power i am sure) Earnie's speed, stamina and actual skill is pathetic compared to Tyson, even post prison. Shavers did indeed buckle Ali but didn't floor him. Tyson would be much much more dangerous. Earnie really isn't all that and i think is a bit of a cult figure in many ways. His fierce look and unsurpassed power makes many remember him as that bit better than he really was. When the full picture is painted it's quite ordinary vs reputation.

[ChrisPontius]

Ali by 15 round UD. Tyson was frustrated by Bonecrusher Smith's smothering clinches, and nobody was better at wearing down a shorter opponent with clinches than Muhammad. Neither was anybody better at optimizing a reach and height advantage than Ali.

What's the point? Bonecrusher held on all night embarresing the sport, to lose a lopsided decision. And Smith could still throw a punch, contrary to Ali at that point. So how is Ali gonna get the decision?


If a peaking Shavers couldn't buckle Ali, then Tyson wouldn't come anywhere near flooring him.

Shavers did buckle Ali, several times from memory in fact. Shavers and Tyson aren't even close in terms of punching ability; Tyson could take you out with a quick left hook, a 1-2, an uppercut, a three punch combination or his favorite right to the body followed by a right uppercut. All Shavers could do was throw a tremendous, telegraphed overhand right. They're not even close.


Leon Spinks didn't exactly swamp Ali on the scorecards in their first match, but dropped a competitive split decision in which Muhammad came on strong late, against a peaking young athlete who was taller, comparable in speed, and with a longer reach than Tyson.
A peaking young athlete, who was in fact no more than a journeyman in the professional game who was also undersized. And he won a decision.



Earlier in his career, Ali demonstrated twice what he could do against a Cus D'Amato schooled boxer with Tyson's speed and stature. That experience would hold him in good stead here.


Against an opponent of Tyson's caliber, the Ali of the Shavers fight would be too well-prepared, too durable, too experienced, too big, and with too much heart to succumb to Tyson's attack. Again, keep in mind that Tyson was not schooled by legendary Eddie Futch, or wise old Sam Solomon, but Cus D'Amato, not in a style favorable for contending with Muhammad. Like Smith, Ali would cause Tyson to wear down and lose his composure with wrestling tactics. Once he made Tyson blow his cool, then unlike Smith, Ali would capitalize.
Yeah, but we're not talking about a prime Ali here. I agree that Ali has the style to take Tyson (hit, hold, etc) but in '77 it was get hit, hold, clown, hope for an unjust decision.

And how can he capitalize? By your own admission, Ali's offensive arsenal was long since pretty much gone. He lost the reflexes and time to make him miss and make him pay. Even get hit and make him pay wouldn't work anymore.

[Duodenum]

What's the point? Bonecrusher held on all night embarresing the sport, to lose a lopsided decision. And Smith could still throw a punch, contrary to Ali at that point. So how is Ali gonna get the decision?Smith could throw a punch, but didn't throw many. Ali would have been more active. It was only against Holmes that he was truly a punching bag.Shavers did buckle Ali, several times from memory in fact.Semantically, I define "buckling" as the sort of knee sagging near knockdown Frazier clocked Ali with in round 11 of the FOTC. (Joe's most damaging punch during that affair, rather than the round 15 knockdown hook.)Shavers and Tyson aren't even close in terms of punching ability; Tyson could take you out with a quick left hook, a 1-2, an uppercut, a three punch combination or his favorite right to the body followed by a right uppercut. All Shavers could do was throw a tremendous, telegraphed overhand right. They're not even close.Like Louis, Tyson did indeed have a superior delivery system to Shavers, so he was a far more effective puncher in that respect. However, in terms of punch for punch power, even Tyson might not dispute that there was no way he could ever begin to approach Earnie. (Some day, perhaps in Canastota, fans could try holding the heavy bag for each of them while they whaled away at it, to feel for themselves just how much harder Earnie can hit. It's just the sort of interactive opportunity experience the IBHOF could generate considerable fan interest with.) The Shavers left hook has been badly overlooked. That was the punch which initially stunned Ken Norton when Earnie blew him out. Shavers jabbed his way to a ten round decision in his first bout with tough skilled tall boxer Henry Clark, closing Henry's eye with that jab. Overlooked by the excitement of his final round against Roy Williams is the fact that Earnie dominated through the earlier rounds, especially with his right to Tiger's body, smart strategy against such a tall and powerful opponent.A peaking young athlete, who was in fact no more than a journeyman in the professional game who was also undersized. And he won a decision.It was an amazing and flawlessly executed 15 round performance, in which Sam Solomon had Spinks exploit the rope-a-dope by aiming for Ali's biceps, and slicing through Muhammad's peek-a-boo guard with uppercuts. Even then, it nearly wasn't enough. But Leon did something Tyson never had the opportunity to. He established 15 round credentials. The argument can also be made that Leon had a much bigger heart at that stage than Tyson could ever have boasted of.Yeah, but we're not talking about a prime Ali here. I agree that Ali has the style to take Tyson (hit, hold, etc) but in '77 it was get hit, hold, clown, hope for an unjust decision.

And how can he capitalize? By your own admission, Ali's offensive arsenal was long since pretty much gone. He lost the reflexes and time to make him miss and make him pay. Even get hit and make him pay wouldn't work anymore.Indeed, Muhammad's offensive capabilties had for the most part deserted him. Still, he had Earnie in serious trouble at the end of round 15. Smoke and mirrors would be a great deal of Ali's approach by this point in his career, and Tyson's difficulties with reaching and hurting an opponent who may have been the toughest heavyweight in boxing history could very well be sufficient to sway the scoring in Muhammad's favor.

[punchy]

Ali's ring smarts are just too much for a post prison Tyson this would be a boring fight with Ali smothering Tyson's attacks and Tyson not having the stamina to put any real pressure on, good thread though.

[Duodenum]

Earnie really isn't all that and i think is a bit of a cult figure in many ways. His fierce look and unsurpassed power makes many remember him as that bit better than he really was. When the full picture is painted it's quite ordinary vs reputation.Well, Earnie's reputation for punching power stems largely from feedback provided by opponents who remember being hit by him. (Immediately after his match with Shavers, Jerry Quarry said that Earnie never hit him, but Shavers said Jerry simply did not feel and walked right through what was a tremendous shot. Jimmy Ellis claimed not to be impressed by Earnie's power, but I don't think Ellis ever knew what hit him.)

As for Earnie's "fierce" look, to me, with that shaven head of his, I thought that Shavers looked like Curley Neal of the Harlem Globetrotters. I felt that a tremendous amount of Earnie's charm lay in the fact that such a powerful puncher was also such a lovable character. Liston, Foreman and Tyson could come across as menacing pugs. But lovable Earnie, with his close relationship to Frank DeLuca, and dedication to his family with seven daughters, could somehow remain the underdog everybody rooted for to succeed. For all his punching power, he was never "the baddest man on the planet," never the primal and instinctual savage, never the uncivilized and menacing bully in the public imagination. He was the hard worker who never stopped trying, always aiming to better provide for his family, always vulnerably flawed, and clearly human.

If I was a patron at an establishment where he was the bouncer, and I had no idea who he was, I would treat him with consideration through respect for his obvious civility, not out of fear for incurring his wrath.

[JohnThomas1]

Well, Earnie's reputation for punching power stems largely from feedback provided by opponents who remember being hit by him. (Immediately after his match with Shavers, Jerry Quarry said that Earnie never hit him, but Shavers said Jerry simply did not feel and walked right through what was a tremendous shot. Jimmy Ellis claimed not to be impressed by Earnie's power, but I don't think Ellis ever knew what hit him.)


Many of Tysons opponents, especially early ones, have similar assessments.

As for Earnie's "fierce" look, to me, with that shaven head of his, I thought that Shavers looked like Curley Neal of the Harlem Globetrotters.

"Tex" Cobb could not stop raving about how mean Shavers looked, especially upon close inspection. "Two pickhandles across the shoulders" i believe his words were close to. The man is bald, bult like a brick shithouse and damn large. Picture the guy without knowledge of his fine quality.

I felt that a tremendous amount of Earnie's charm lay in the fact that such a powerful puncher was also such a lovable character. Liston, Foreman and Tyson could come across as menacing pugs. But lovable Earnie, with his close relationship to Frank DeLuca, and dedication to his family with seven daughters, could somehow remain the underdog everybody rooted for to succeed. For all his punching power, he was never "the baddest man on the planet," never the primal and instinctual savage, never the uncivilized and menacing bully in the public imagination. He was the hard worker who never stopped trying, always aiming to better provide for his family, always vulnerably flawed, and clearly human.

I adore Earnie, i really do, but i'm not going to let it get in the way of finer judgement.

If I was a patron at an establishment where he was the bouncer, and I had no idea who he was, I would treat him with consideration through respect for his obvious civility, not out of fear for incurring his wrath.

If he was 28 and walking around in a singlet they'd be shovelling behind you, and me for that matter. The man looks seriously mean, and only the fact that we know his pure class and demeanor clouds this.

[ChrisPontius]

Smith could throw a punch, but didn't throw many. Ali would have been more active.

Which would leave him much more open to getting hit and counter punched. The only reason Smith went the distance is because he held so much. If he added punching activity in it, he probably would not have lasted, which he himself knew too, so he held on all the time to make a borefest like most of Ali's second career fights.


Semantically, I define "buckling" as the sort of knee sagging near knockdown Frazier clocked Ali with in round 11 of the FOTC. (Joe's most damaging punch during that affair, rather than the round 15 knockdown hook.)
Point is that Ali was hurt, stunned or whatever you want to call it, several time by the slow punching and predictable Shavers. Tyson will do far, far worse damage because he gets through more and knows what a combination is. If Shavers can get through now and then, then you can be sure Tyson will find openings over and over.



Like Louis, Tyson did indeed have a superior delivery system to Shavers, so he was a far more effective puncher in that respect. However, in terms of punch for punch power, even Tyson might not dispute that there was no way he could ever begin to approach Earnie.

"No way that he could ever begin to approach Ernie" is pure bullshit. You make it sound asif there's hard punchers, Foreman, Tyson, Marciano, and then there's Shavers. It's not. All were extemely hard punchers, at the end of the scale. But the difference between a Tyson and a Shavers isn't all that much. Watch Tyson destroy Tubbs with a single left hook, knock Berbick down three times with a single left hook, knock Botha out with a single short right hand, knock Williams out with a single left hook (who argubly defeated Holmes), knock Henry Tillman out with a single right hand.
What can Shavers say? "Well, i knocked Holmes DOWN and knocked out 500 tomato cans as well as a few monuments who once were contenders".



The Shavers left hook has been badly overlooked. That was the punch which initially stunned Ken Norton when Earnie blew him out. Shavers jabbed his way to a ten round decision in his first bout with tough skilled tall boxer Henry Clark, closing Henry's eye with that jab.

You make it sound like Herny Clark was the next big thing, while he in fact was a journeyman, and as what is Shavers' tradition in his victories, he was at the end of a long career when they fought.


Overlooked by the excitement of his final round against Roy Williams is the fact that Earnie dominated through the earlier rounds, especially with his right to Tiger's body, smart strategy against such a tall and powerful opponent.

Williams, another fighter who never amounted to much, although he did lose to Richard Dunn who for some reason got a title shot.


It was an amazing and flawlessly executed 15 round performance, in which Sam Solomon had Spinks exploit the rope-a-dope by aiming for Ali's biceps, and slicing through Muhammad's peek-a-boo guard with uppercuts. Even then, it nearly wasn't enough. But Leon did something Tyson never had the opportunity to. He established 15 round credentials. The argument can also be made that Leon had a much bigger heart at that stage than Tyson could ever have boasted of.
Which is the only thing that Spinks has over Tyson. Then again, Pep also had more heart than Tyson, but i wouldn't want him to replace Tyson here.


Indeed, Muhammad's offensive capabilties had for the most part deserted him. Still, he had Earnie in serious trouble at the end of round 15.
Which is more another sign of Shavers' glass chin and weak stamina than Ali's power.


Smoke and mirrors would be a great deal of Ali's approach by this point in his career, and Tyson's difficulties with reaching and hurting an opponent who may have been the toughest heavyweight in boxing history could very well be sufficient to sway the scoring in Muhammad's favor.
Well, look at it this way. Shavers, who has horrible punching ability and wouldn't be anywhere without his power, could land good enough on Ali to nearly take a decision. Tyson is lightyears ahead of Shavers in terms of handspeed, punching variety, predictability...... actually anything, except for power. He'd easily find his mark.

And it's not like Shavers was the only one. Norton and Young both defeated Ali on fair scorecards, when he was a year younger. While Norton and Young are fine fighters, they're no Tyson's in terms of handspeed, power and getting their punches in.

[mr. magoo]

Norton and Young both defeated Ali on fair scorecards, when he was a year younger. While Norton and Young are fine fighters, they're no Tyson's in terms of handspeed, power and getting their punches in.


I agree with much of your assesment in picking a post prison Tyson over a 77' Ali, however I'm not sure that I'd use the Norton and Young fights as a basis for the conclusion. You have to remember that Ken Norton had already fought Ali on two previous occasions, plus sparred with Joe Frazier who knew Ali pretty well to. Point being, Norton and his camp were very familiar with Ali and the tactics needed to beat him. Tyson might not have some of these advantages at his disposal. You also have to consider that Jimmy Young was a pure boxer and who's style was nothing like Tyson's. In fact, Young defeated Foreman who some people would have picked to beat Tyson, confirming my point about styles being an issue.

That being said, I would concur with the notion of a 1996 Tyson beating a 1977 Ali, but the Norton and Young fights don't help us to draw much of a comparison when viewed from the right angles.

[ChrisPontius]

I know, Young is probably as much the opposite of Tyson you'll find: not agressive, no big punch, rather unexciting.

But my point was that Ali's record during that period against ranked fighters (Young, Norton, Shavers, Spinks) isn't pretty.

[mr. magoo]

=ChrisPontius]I know, Young is probably as much the opposite of Tyson you'll find: not agressive, no big punch, rather unexciting.



Actually if you've ever seen Young fight, he was a very impressive boxer who mastered a lot of essential fundamentals, but I'll agree that he was very dissimilar to Tyson.



But my point was that Ali's record during that period against ranked fighters (Young, Norton, Shavers, Spinks) isn't pretty.



Agreed. That's why I think he should have retired after the " thrilla in manilla".

[Duodenum]

Which would leave him much more open to getting hit and counter punched. The only reason Smith went the distance is because he held so much. If he added punching activity in it, he probably would not have lasted, which he himself knew too, so he held on all the time to make a borefest like most of Ali's second career fights.The only reason Tyson went the distance and won, is because Smith punched so little, and the match was only scheduled for 12 rounds. The way Smith rocked Tyson at the very end of round 12 proved that in a longer bout it would have been Smith/Bruno all over again. (Having stated that, I also feel that referee Harry Gibbs should have disqualified Smith for not trying against Bruno, and that Smith should also have been disqualified for not trying against Tyson, and had his purse forfeited both times. But Smith made it clear at the end that Tyson could not have withstood a sustained barrage from Bonecrusher any more than Bruno did.)"No way that he could ever begin to approach Ernie" is pure bullshit. You make it sound asif there's hard punchers, Foreman, Tyson, Marciano, and then there's Shavers. It's not. All were extemely hard punchers, at the end of the scale. But the difference between a Tyson and a Shavers isn't all that much. Watch Tyson destroy Tubbs with a single left hook, knock Berbick down three times with a single left hook, knock Botha out with a single short right hand, knock Williams out with a single left hook (who argubly defeated Holmes), knock Henry Tillman out with a single right hand.
What can Shavers say? "Well, i knocked Holmes DOWN and knocked out 500 tomato cans as well as a few monuments who once were contenders"."Foreman hit about the same as Lyle. Shavers was the hardest puncher I ever met. He hit harder than Lyle and Foreman combined." - Leroy Caldwell (who also went ten rounds with Cleveland Williams).Williams, another fighter who never amounted to much, although he did lose to Richard Dunn who for some reason got a title shot.The last boxer to defeat Tiger Williams was Earnie Shavers. The only boxer to ever take Roy Williams out was also Earnie Shavers.

I only make reference to Henry Clark, because Shavers demonstrated that he was sufficiently skilled enough to outbox a big and tough journeyman. (Earnie also proved in their Yankee Stadium rematch that he could bomb out Clark quickly as well.

[Cojimar 1945]

Tyson was considered a big puncher in his era but it doesen't seem inconcievable that some fighters might hit harder than him by a significant amount. Tubbs was knocked out in one round by Lionel Butler and Carl Williams was kayoed by Mike Weaver. Tyson knocking out these guys is nice but others could do similar.

[Cojimar 1945]

Clark may have been a journeyman but Tyson was knocked out by a journeyman so they can't be that bad.

[JohnThomas1]

Tyson was considered a big puncher in his era but it doesen't seem inconcievable that some fighters might hit harder than him by a significant amount. Tubbs was knocked out in one round by Lionel Butler and Carl Williams was kayoed by Mike Weaver. Tyson knocking out these guys is nice but others could do similar.

Tyson was considered a huge puncher in his era. I find it difficult to fathom anyone hitting harder than him "by a significant amount. You mention Butler and Williams but what about the myriads of fighters Tyson sparked that had proven durability?

[Cojimar 1945]

Athletes seem to be getting better and better as time passes. Tyson might look impressive compared to fighters from earlier eras but as more time passes I suspect we may see more heavyweights that surpass him in physical ability.

Without actually measuring the force of punches it is hard to know who hits hardest.

[cuchulain]

I have Ali at #1 spot alltime, both achievement-wise and head-to-head.

From 1964-1967, I thinke he was peak and nearly unbeatable. He lost a lot from 67 -70, and was merely great when he came back (1970-1975). Still good enough to take a series with Frazier and to recapture the title from Foreman.

After Manilla, he was more ordinary, nowhere near what he had been. The 1977 Ali loses to a prime Holmes, Foreman, Frazier, Louis, Marciano, Lewis, Tyson and maybe others.

Did Tyson bring enough to the ring after prison to handle that version of Ali?

IMO, probably.

[anut]

ali would beat tyson.............tyson looked horrid after prison...shit he got outboxed for 2 rds against buster mathis jr...........ali would win:smoke:smoke:smoke

[ironchamp]

ali would beat tyson.............tyson looked horrid after prison...shit he got outboxed for 2 rds against buster mathis jr...........ali would win:smoke:smoke:smoke

He got outboxed for 2 rounds before brutally stopping Mathis.


Its called Ring Rust.

[Langford]

I would go with Tyson UD.

[radianttwilight]

Is this even a debate?

Tyson wasn't THAT bad post-prison. He still beat everyone he fought except for Holyfield and Lewis, both ATGs (we won't count the Williams/McBride fights, Ali had that too with Berbick). He was a shell of his former self, sure, but he was still dangerous as hell and kept putting contenders to sleep.

On the other hand, 1977 Ali was shot. Totally shot. We might as well compare McBride Tyson to this Ali - there's no comparison, he was utterly done by 1977.

[Dempsey1238]

I dont see why people are picking Ali over Tyson in this regard?? Whats next?? Is the Ali that fought Holmes going to beat Rocky Marciano and Jack Dempsey on the same night. Tyson yes pass his best, STILL had a lot of talent, his bout with the Real Deal was a classic. Yes he lost, but it was pretty fun.

Ali was at the end of the round in 77, and wont be long until he loses to a 6-0-1 fighter.

[Griip]

Tyson by KO, it's a fact if you ask me. Source? Thrilla in Manilla. Imagine what Tyson would do that night. Better upper body and head movement than Frazier and alot faster punches.

[hobgoblin]

Tyson by KO, it's a fact if you ask me. Source? Thrilla in Manilla. Imagine what Tyson would do that night. Better upper body and head movement than Frazier and alot faster punches.

no man, i'm a big tyson fan but even that ali would have beaten tyson. look at what ali did to frazier in that fight! look how much punishment he absorbed and how many punches he dished out. tyson isn't a bully but he won't have a strategical answer to that kind of output from ali. ali will absorb tyson's best shots and come right back. '77 ali was shot to shit so i'll pick tyson in a scenario that has no bearing on greatness or prime for prime.

for the most part, frazier was also a better fighter than tyson even if he was less talented and not as versatile. frazier would have ko'd buster douglas - guaranteed! he'd have beaten holyfield and be a game undergod against the big, monster punching lewis.

[Jbuz]

Tyson, possibly by stoppage.

[Griip]

no man, i'm a big tyson fan but even that ali would have beaten tyson. look at what ali did to frazier in that fight! look how much punishment he absorbed and how many punches he dished out. tyson isn't a bully but he won't have a strategical answer to that kind of output from ali. ali will absorb tyson's best shots and come right back. '77 ali was shot to shit so i'll pick tyson in a scenario that has no bearing on greatness or prime for prime.

for the most part, frazier was also a better fighter than tyson even if he was less talented and not as versatile. frazier would have ko'd buster douglas - guaranteed! he'd have beaten holyfield and be a game undergod against the big, monster punching lewis.

no man, I'm a huge Ali fan but Tyson would beat Ali any day

[arther1045]

By the fifteenth, Tyson would have an insurmountable lead on the scorecards likely due to knockdown/s. Ali would be hard-pressed to pull this one out.


I never understand why people say these things when pitting Ali against Tyson. fact is Ali even at that age and he would have trained hard for this one had one of the best chins ever in boxing. While Tyson never finshied a fight when taking any really punishment in his entire career ehich eh would against a well trained Ali even at that stage of his career. Yet everytime these two are matched up someone comes up with the Ali would have trouble staying on his feet opinion. Don't get it when its so obviously the other way around.

[JIm Broughton]

Ali in '77 was a shot fighter. At that point in his career his skills were severely diminished and he was beginning to exhibit signs of parkinsons or pugilistica dementia or both. If shavers had pressed the issue more and was'nt in awe of Ali he would have stopped him. Tyson would have too many weapons at his disposal for that version of Ali and would have stopped him midway through the fight. Ali's clinching and holding would prolong things for a little while but Tyson would eventually nail him with a 3 or 4 punch combo and end it. Ali at that point in his career had no power left and therefore would have no way to get Tyson's respect. I see this as similar to the Holmes-Tyson affair with a similar ending as well. It's no surprise that after the Shaver's fight, Teddy Brenner who was matchmaker in New York for Madison Square Garden at the time said after the fight that he would no longer promote another Ali fight in MSG for Ali's sake, that's how bad he looked. Tyson would have done a number on that version of Ali.

[hobgoblin]

I never understand why people say these things when pitting Ali against Tyson. fact is Ali even at that age and he would have trained hard for this one had one of the best chins ever in boxing. While Tyson never finshied a fight when taking any really punishment in his entire career ehich eh would against a well trained Ali even at that stage of his career. Yet everytime these two are matched up someone comes up with the Ali would have trouble staying on his feet opinion. Don't get it when its so obviously the other way around.

not with 1977 version. that version was shot imo. agreed, ali had a great chin and a fighter's heart so tyson would have his work cut out for him. ali couldn't dish out like he used too. not enough to put down tyson. if you don't consider chin + mental strength, but chin alone, ali and tyson were close. tyson's chin never failed him. and you don't think he took punishment against ruddock? ruddock was not 1% the fighter ali was but he was a deadly puncher who landed his best shots on tyson, shots that would have felled lesser men in brutal fashion but tyson made them look ok.

[nysef816]

in 77, Ali = Chris Byrd with a better jab.

therefore, Chris Byrd with a better jab vs. tyson anytime pre-2000, i'm going with Tyson.

[hobgoblin]

wow, there are a lot of extremists for both sides...! i consider myself moderate.

don't insult the great Muhammad Ali by comparing him to Chris Byrd!

The 1977 version could actually pull an upset (little chance) whereas Chris Byrd would have ZERO chance. 1977 version would unlikely get KO'd as it is near impossible to do but Chris Byrd would get destroyed!

[Jbuz]

I can't believe this. Post-prison Tyson was NOT shot. He was still an excellent fighter. Ali in 1977 was NOT. I love Ali, he is my favourite fighter, but in 1977 he just looked awful. He managed to beat Shavers, but Shavers was no Tyson - even a post-prison Tyson.

His reflexes were gone, his speed was nearly gone, all he had left was a chin and heart, and the ability to clinch. Tyson would stop Ali, though I don't think it would be KO. It would be Dundee throwing in the towel.

Prime for prime - Ali takes him.

[hobgoblin]

I can't believe this. Post-prison Tyson was NOT shot. He was still an excellent fighter. Ali in 1977 was NOT. I love Ali, he is my favourite fighter, but in 1977 he just looked awful. He managed to beat Shavers, but Shavers was no Tyson - even a post-prison Tyson.

His reflexes were gone, his speed was nearly gone, all he had left was a chin and heart, and the ability to clinch. Tyson would stop Ali, though I don't think it would be KO. It would be Dundee throwing in the towel.

Prime for prime - Ali takes him.

agree completely

[Chaney]

I would say Tyson wins a clsoe decision over 15 rounds. Ali was shot by '77.This post should say it all.

C.M. always gives Ali the benefit of the doubt. If even he doesn't pick his hero in a match up, Ali has no chance!

Ali should have retired at the very latest after Frazier III. After this, any really good worldclass heavyweight beats him.

Prime for prime I'd bet on Ali.