Tyson Vs. Ali - Page 7

Blarg · #61 06-12-2005, 03:04 AM

Ali by a landslide.

Tyson rarely had to fight more than a couple rounds during the glory days of his career -- sometimes not more than a couple of minutes. He didn't have to take many punches or exhibit much endurance. He had tremendous crushing power, and decent speed, but he never had to be a complete boxer. He was so good at what he could do that he simply got in and smashed stuff, real quick.

Ali was legendary for his footwork. As he proved throughout a career, he could take a punch very well, too. With good enough footwork, it's very hard for anyone to land a blow at all, much less a truly punishing one, and Ali's footwork was very, very good. He could use it to help stay away from blows and help them land more lightly.

Conditioning matters a lot, but it's too easy to think that today's training techniques are the beginning and end of things and make all today's champions easy victors. The guys in the old days used to fight more and longer rounds, too. They were far from in less than excellent shape.

Also implied when comparing older athletes with today's athletes is that for some reason Ali, say, wouldn't have access to today's training techniques if he magically moved forward in time, or that Tyson wouldn't lack today's advanced training if he got zapped back to the past. I guess we can set up imaginary matches any way we want to, but that strikes me as a little strange to me.

Blarg · #62 06-12-2005, 03:06 AM

[ QUOTE ]
A more interesting question (to me anyway)...

Tyson v Lewis in their prime.

Who wins?

[/ QUOTE ]

Emmanuel, or Jerry?

Blarg · #63 06-12-2005, 03:09 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Training techniques were so much better when tyson was in his prime that i bet tyson would win

[/ QUOTE ]

That is pretty much the basis for my choice. Tyson trained like an absolute freaking animal and is probably way quicker and obviously stronger.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ali was VERY fast. VERY. Not just with his hands, but with his whole body movement, too. He was even fast enough to get away with a cardinal sin in boxing, leaning his body back to avoid punches instead of slipping them to the side. He also was able to insult some great boxers by throwing right leads, which is really putting the shame on them.

One thing Ali was not, was slow.

-Skeme- · #64 06-12-2005, 03:10 AM

This post is so old.

Blarg · #65 06-12-2005, 03:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Without reading the thread at all
ALI- and its not close. Ali fought Frazier and Foreman- Tyson lost to Buster douglas... not to mention that Ali lost many of his prime years to his fight over the draft.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup. He lost some of the high polish on his attributes during that time, including a key one to boxers and one that regularly comes as a process and sign of aging -- his footspeed. He lost mobility and started slugging it out more, and was able to be hit more. Ali was kind of a legend in two phases -- before and after his time-out over the draft. Those were his prime years, and he wasn't the same after.

Vince Young · #66 06-12-2005, 03:22 AM

That's easy...

Ali by KO.

Blarg · #67 06-12-2005, 03:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
If you've never seen When We Were Kings, then you need to. Goerge Foreman was the Tyson of his day (and a much better boxer). He was mowing down opponents on his way to the title fight with Ali. Ali did not overwhelm Foreman but fought a smart fight (rope-a-dope) and knocked Foreman out. Nothing less would happen to Tyson. Tyson has gone down to the better boxer every time. A case could be made for Tyson being the most overrated athlete in history. Ali deserves every sports accolade he has gotten. See the movie, you won't regret it. "Ali, Boom-Bah Yea!"

Russ

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. People don't realize how fearsome Foreman really was. He completely humiliated the people who beat Ali in almost no time at all. Plenty of people did not think Ali was going to win that fight. Foreman was a bear -- fearless, aggressive, an incredibly strong puncher with hands like cinderblocks, and by all accounts not a very nice fellow. A real scary monster of a man, like Tyson, who didn't just beat his opponents, but destroyed them. And, like Tyson, didn't usually have to draw on his endurance to do it.

Ali beat him. And not by a little, either mentally or physically. Ali may in a way have ironically done him the biggest favor of his life by doing it, but Ali destroyed him.

I don't think Tyson would have much of a chance. Liston and Foreman were pretty damn scary guys too, and Ali humiliated them both.

Blarg · #68 06-12-2005, 03:31 AM

[ QUOTE ]
This post is so old.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, it is. Didn't look at the date, first time I saw it.

-Skeme- · #69 06-12-2005, 03:32 AM

Yeah, I made it.

bernie · #70 06-12-2005, 04:48 AM

Ali. But he'd take a beating. Ali never faced an opponent like Tyson in his peek-a-boo prime. Never fought against that style nor someone who perfected that style the way Tyson did. Ali wouldn't be able to just jab him. Holmes tried that. Even though Holmes was old, his jab was still world class. Tyson walked right through it. Tyson was also extremely agile during his prime. Ali would have his hands full.

No, Ali would win. But not as easily as some may think. He may have had to rope-a-dope him the way he did Foreman and take him into the later rounds. Early in the fight, it could be a toss-up. Especially if the ring is small.

b