Mike Tyson versus Muhammad Ali?
L. Ron Blubber
Mike Tyson in his prime (when he was the youngest heavyweight
champion)
VS
Muhammad Ali in his prime ( during those great Ali - Frazier bouts)
I think Iron Mike would knock him out in 30 seconds but my older
buddies at work think I'm crazy.
Nils Mayflower
Tyson is very limited as a boxer, and was at his prime. He just never got
backed up by anybody with quality -- until Buster Douglas, who got the right
recipe through coincidence. What did he do since then?
The Tyson legend was shattered. Boxers no longer quaked in their boots at
the mere sight of him. Instead they fought, and won.
Ali took out K.O.-monsters like Frazier and Foreman, and would do the same
to Tyson.
Just my opinion.
-N-
L. Ron Blubber <diet...@aol.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
3c82a618...@nntp.ftc-i.net...
Real Deal
victories. He is relatively short at 5'11 and squat, with an over
publicized bull neck and beady eyes. He entered the ring bare-backed with
and wore old fashioned black boots and shorts, always impassive and
unafraid, utterly emotionless. Who can forget his infamous utterances about
his punches carrying 'bad intention' and then that thing about hitting hard
on the nose to push a bone into the brain. All of these things help build
that crazy image that reduced his opponents to wide-eyed frightened little
puppies.
Ali's mouth would have unsettled him for one thing and unlike most of
Tyson's early opponents, Ali would have 'fought' him.
"Nils Mayflower" <N_May...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a5u9j6$aaofb$1...@ID-60093.news.dfncis.de...
Keith Patrick
would think (even though it is somewhat pointless to speculate since we can
never really know) Tyson could have won in his prime. He was a pressure
fighter with Foreman-like power but with incredible speed that liked to
murder both the body and head. The thing about Foreman vs. Ali was that Ali
was able to hold his arms up and withstand Foreman's hooks. Tyson was
different in that regards, since once someone did that, he would start
launching uppercuts, which was greatly aided by him being so short that he
could come in low, launching himself up to the head. The big question for
me is whether or not Ali would have been able to hold him off enough to box
him from a distance, staying out of the ropes/corner.
"Nils Mayflower" <N_May...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a5u9j6$aaofb$1...@ID-60093.news.dfncis.de...
0z0ne
i.net:
> Who would win this match ?
>
Ali would've jabbed the shit out of him. By the 5th round Tyson would be
utterly frustrated and doing that thorazine shuffle around the ring that he
seems to fall into when he can't adapt to the other fighter's style. Ali TKO
in 8. I think a better fight would've been prime Tyson vs. prime Frazier. I'd
go with Frazier, but wouldn't wanna lay too much cash down on that bet.
Symmetry
>From: 0z0ne anti_...@hotmail.com
>Date: 3/3/02 5:47 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <Xns91C6BF45...@216.166.71.239>
>> Who would win this match ?
>>
>
>Ali would've jabbed the shit out of him.
Nope. Tyson's 'peekaboo' defense was too strong, and Tyson was too fast -- he
wouldn't have gotten caught with many jabs.
>Ali TKO
>in 8.
Doubtful. Ali could not handle Tyson's speed. Tyson would go to work like he
did against Brian Nielsen in the 1st round. Ali would not be able to weather
the storm.
s
s
s
s
s
sss
s
s
s
s
s
ss
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
sneeke
"Keith Patrick" <richard_ke...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Lkyg8.45952$6j2.2...@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> "Instead they fought, and won." Only Douglas and Holyfied did that. I
> would think (even though it is somewhat pointless to speculate since we
can
> never really know) Tyson could have won in his prime.
I totally agree, really he was not there for the Douglas fight mentally,
although Douglas was a talented boxer... Holyfield's style will always give
Tyson problems, because he such a quick counterpuncher and Mike is strictly
seek and destroy.
Ali in his prime would be very hard to beat by anyone, but he would take out
Holyfield alot easier than Tyson IMO
sneeke
fought like Cus taught him too
Brian Davis
About how many times was this question asked in the NG?
Brian Davis
Riverdale, IL
PETE ROSE BELONGS IN THE HALL OF FAME!
reneu sing
youre right and your buddies at work are wrong. everyone will say
tyson was tailor-made for ali but its quite the opposite. ali was
tailor-made for tyson. tyson would murder ali any day of the week in
both their primes.
Ray
I'm not sure Tyson could beat a young Ali, but certainly would have a
good shot against the older version, the one that layed against the
ropes against Foreman. He was stationary enough at that point, and
would have had problems with Tyson's speed and head movement.
While I've always thought Tyson would match well against Ali, I think
he was more "made to order" for Foreman. He may have been too quick
for Foreman, but Foreman was so cool in his prime, dropping punches in
on shorter opponents.
On 04 Mar 2002 02:15:51 GMT, symm...@aol.compare.com (Symmetry)
wrote:
Loki
wrote:
Your friends at work are right. To add insult to injury, the Ali who
fought Fraizer was not prime Ali, but the second coming. The Ali who
beat Cleveland Williams would have beaten Tyson from bell to bell, and
ended the fight at will.
Loki
Stanley Hammond
Believe your older buddies, pal. Mike Tyson was like Sonny Liston with
much less to offer in terms of boxing skills, punching power,
muscle/bulk, and even mental toughness. (If Mike Tyson was to fight
Sonny Liston, I'd pick the Big Ugly Bear to completely intimidate the
Brooklyn Cannibal even before they squared off in the ring.) Sonny
Liston was even a smarter, trickier fighter than Mike Tyson! (For
example, he could briefly stop slugging and resort to combinations to
lure an opponent into his deadly left hook -- far too advanced for
Mike Tyson.) The beating Ali gave Liston, and later, Foreman... Ali
would have an even easier time with Mike Tyson! Look for a mid-to-late
round TKO, provided Mike Tyson doesn't get frustrated and foul out
earlier.
Barry Deskins
"L. Ron Blubber" <diet...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:3c82a618...@nntp.ftc-i.net...
Lone Lobster
Difficult to say becuase Tyson's 'prime' was one of the shortest in boxing
history. Anyway, he would fall to pieces against anyone who fought back,
especially if they were any good.
wlewis
Ali's number. Joe Frazier was in essence the fighter who
would have had Ali's number. The Greatness of Ali would not let
that happen. Ali would not let Tyson beat him. A young Tyson would
have been tough to beat. How about a Draw?.
"Stanley Hammond" <lars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1e4325d.02030...@posting.google.com...
Don and Heidi
Tyson was at his prime for Douglas, and he lost, was knocked out, destroyed,
never again was the same. He has not looked like more than a marginal top ten
fighter in any fight since then. None. Do you imagine Ali would do less to
the crazy little rapist/pedophile? It was Douglas that made him look bad,
not some lack of concentration. What would have changed if he had his
"concentration"? Nothing. Buster dominated him, had a real jab, real defense,
Tyson couldn't handle either. He was overrated then and his present status
as a contender is based on that and Holyfield beating Douglas which gave people
the mistaken impression the Douglas fight was just some bad luck. As it turned
out, Holyfield was a lot better than the regard he was held in before their
fight. Watch the Douglas-Tyson mismatch a few times with a different
perspective
for once, one in which you assume Tyson to be slower and punch lighter and
you'll
see the real Tyson *and* you'll realize he was ruined by Douglas. All Tyson's
bad
intention went for nought when he faced a real boxer bigger than lightheavy.
Ali,
a prime Holmes or even Jimmy Young all would have had an *easy* time against
Tyson.
It's not really a question worth considering. Think of Tyson as a mini Earnie
Shavers
and you'll have an accurate assessment of his abilities.
0z0ne
news:3C83D979...@epix.net:
> Tyson was at his prime for Douglas, and he lost, was knocked out,
> destroyed, never again was the same.
I don't agree with that.. I think Tyson had slipped quite a bit the past
couple of years prior to facing Douglas. I think after the deaths of
D'Amato/Jacobs and Don King's intro it was all down hill. Buster fought the
perfect fight that night, but a few years earlier Mike was far more involved
in training and was a much sharper, dynamic fighter. By the time Douglas came
around his(Tyson's) passion for the sport was in rapid decline.
Superstar
> fought Fraizer was not prime Ali, but the second coming. The Ali who
> beat Cleveland Williams would have beaten Tyson from bell to bell, and
> ended the fight at will.
>
>
> Loki
Agreed.
Liston was bigger and more skilled than Tyson, and Ali/Clay beat the crap
out of him for six rounds. Tyson would quit in half that time, or suffer a
humiliating stoppage in the mid to late rounds.
Absolute no contest.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.317 / Virus Database: 176 - Release Date: 21/01/02
L. Ron Blubber
No, Sir I wasn't trolling. I posted what was a legitimate discussion
among men aged 21 to 50 who work at a steel mill. The older gentleman
said I felt Mike Tyson would win a match between the two because I
wasn't around to see the less publicized fights of Ali. (I'm 28) Well,
I was around to see the first professional fights of Tyson, and he was
the most ferocious fighter (not boxer) I've seen in my lifrtime. But
by the responses I've read I could be wrong.
gary nichols
"Barry Deskins" <euph...@stargate.net> wrote in message
news:u8697lp...@corp.supernews.com...
> I agree with your co-workers.
So do I. Ali ko's Mike when he gets tired of playing with him like a bear
cub does it's peter. Ali would have Tyson's head even more fucked up then it
usually is, before they ever get near the ring. Ali by ko, in round 5. For
christ's sake, Ali fought a real ko machine in Foreman, and handled him
easily, I don't understand why anyone would think Ali would have an ounce of
trouble dispatching Iron Mike to never-never land.
Gary
Lance Spaulding
Mohammad Ali was once stated in an interview that he thought
Tyson would have beaten him. Of course, the Tyson-haters
will just say he was being kind...
Lance
'Dashing' Nick La Rosa
I wonder if the Tyson "lovers" truly believe that Tony Tucker and
Bonecrusher Smith and Ruddock were so much better than Ali and
considering that Tyson did so well against them that Ali would not have
been able to beat him? Were these boxers not in Tyson's 'prime'? If not,
then Tyson had the shortest damn 'prime' of any boxer that ever lived.
When was his prime exactly?
Foreman would have squashed Tyson like a bug and yet Ali found a way to
beat him when Ali was nowhere near his best. Liston would have made
Tyson wet his pants before he put him out of his misery and yet Ali made
him look ordinary.
As far as what Ali said about Tyson beating him, I saw an interview
where Ali simply pointed a finger to his own head. Signifying either the
interviewer was crazy for asking such a question or that Tyson would
have been outsmarted. Either way, he *wasn't* saying that Tyson would
have beaten him.
All of the things Ali did in his career point to him finding the right
formula to overcome Tyson. Tyson has never done anything that says 'I am
great'. Sure he was ferocious, and sure he could knock men out very
easily and explosively - but in which fight did he look like he was
going to lose and yet still won? Which opponent did he fight that was
considered indestructible and unbeatable before he boxed them? Tyson has
a huge punch but no ticker.
Ali would beat him every time.
Nick
===--->> Exit, stage right even!
BTW. Ali-Frazier was not 'prime' Ali. 'Prime' Ali was lost during his
'Vietnam Exile', but everything the world saw before that and yes even
after that, indicates he would have spanked Tyson's behind.
Alan Wilson
"L. Ron Blubber" <diet...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:3c82a618...@nntp.ftc-i.net...
Tyson would have knocked him out! Too quick and too strong...
--
Alan Wilson II (awil...@mediaone.net)
Get your Muhammad Ali Bobbleheads -
http://home.attbi.com/~awilson01/forsale/gallery.htm
Superstar
???????? Oh my God!! What an ass!!!! You just said Tyson was quicker than
the quickest heavyweight of all time?? Go back to the playschool newsgroup,
ass!!!
BoxMuham
>
>I think Iron Mike would knock him out in 30 seconds but my older
>buddies at work think I'm crazy.
>
Hands down, Tyson has the stupidest fans in boxing. Do people like this
really exist?!
BoxMuhammad
BoxMuham
>
Ali knocked out some of the greatest sluggers of all time, Foreman,
Liston, Frazier.
How many times was Ali KO'd?
A very easy night for Ali. You kiddin'?! His skills were miles beyond
those of Tyson.
Bobsprit
really exist?!>>>
Tyson fans are not BOXING fans. They like fights, which is all Tyson can do.
Ali was a boxer of great skill, who would have beaten Tyson before the fight
began. As always, Tyson would have had a punchers chance, more so later in
ali's career. In his prime or in the George Foreman days, Ali would probably
beat Tyson easily.
There is no certainly of course. The greatest fighter can lose on any given day
and it's easy to look BACK after the shock subsides and see why.
Robert B
NY
Robert Phillips
Lance Spaulding wrote:
> Mohammad Ali was once stated in an interview that he thought
> Tyson would have beaten him. Of course, the Tyson-haters
> will just say he was being kind...
> Lance
...Or more to the point, they might say that it doesn't really matter
what either guy says in an interview.
Pie
5016
I'm honestly trying to understand that last statement. You think that
Tyson would go to work like he did against Nielsen, and Ali would fold
even though Nielsen didn't? So basically, you think that Ali, known as
having possibly the best heavyweight chin ever, would fold faster than
the Danish Pastry?
Robert Phillips
Alan Wilson wrote:
> "L. Ron Blubber" <diet...@aol.com> wrote in message
> > I think Iron Mike would knock him out in 30 seconds but my older
> > buddies at work think I'm crazy.
> Tyson would have knocked him out! Too quick and too strong...
In another post, in the "Forman vs Tyson?" (sic) thread, you say
"Tyson is simply the BEST!
The man has only lost 3 times in his career and only to two men..and you
all
claim he would have lost...
Tyson is the best fighter I have ever seen outside of Ali. Muhammad Ali
was
simply the best."
And affixed to both posts there is an advertisement for *Ali*
bobbleheads.
Could you possibly be more contradictory?
Pie
Robert Phillips
Nils Mayflower wrote:
> Tyson is very limited as a boxer, and was at his prime. He just never got
> backed up by anybody with quality -- until Buster Douglas, who got the right
> recipe through coincidence. What did he do since then?
> The Tyson legend was shattered. Boxers no longer quaked in their boots at
> the mere sight of him. Instead they fought, and won.
Clearly you're talking about post-Douglas, *after* the Tyson legend was
shattered. I agree that boxers (plural) no longer quaked in their boots (as
much). But "they" fought, and won? Only one guy did both - no plural there.
That's not to deny the essence of your post or to defend Tyson in any way. But
for all the weaknesses and degradation we see in Tyson's abilities, he's still
only lost to one fighter (albeit twice) since Douglas in Tokyo; only one guy has
been able to profit from those weaknesses and that degradation.
Pie
Gene Schwartz
> From: Lance Spaulding <la...@lance-98.boi.hp.com>
> Newsgroups: rec.sport.boxing
> Date: 4 Mar 2002 10:13:18 -0700
> Subject: Re: Mike Tyson versus Muhammad Ali?
>
That's curious...in Hauser's book, Ali is quoted as saying "He's
predictable. the way he moves his head. He has fast hands, bt he's slow on
his feet and my hands were faster than his. The way to beat Tyson is with a
fast jab, a hard right hand, and if he hits you, yo have to be able to take
a punch."
SDonat2313
What a fight this would be. However, the speed, chin, and footwork of Ali would
prove to much.
I like Ali on points over Mike Tyson = (117-111).
Scar TKO
Bobsprit
Tyson could knock Ali down, but not out. On the other hand, Ali could wear down
Tyson and take him out or force a stoppage.
Robert B
NY
Alan Wilson
news:3c845...@news.iprimus.com.au...
> > Tyson would have knocked him out! Too quick and too strong...
>
> ???????? Oh my God!! What an ass!!!! You just said Tyson was quicker than
> the quickest heavyweight of all time?? Go back to the playschool
newsgroup,
> ass!!!
>
>
Tyson has quick head movement and a very quick left hook. Ask Carl "The
Truth" Williams if you don't believe me.
Al Wilson
Alan Wilson
"BoxMuham" <boxm...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020305010239...@mb-fu.aol.com...
Peek-a-boo Tyson would have give Ali all he could handle. This is why Ali
had so much trouble with Kenny Norton...the DEFENSE was too much for Ali.
Tyson is a very good defensive fighter...well atleast 10 years ago he was.
Al Wilson
Alan Wilson
"Robert Phillips" <rp...@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3C84E73B...@cfl.rr.com...
I truly believe Ali was the BEST heavyweight of all time...but in a fight
against Tyson...Tyson would knock him out...
A paradox? Yes...Tyson is Mr. Knockout...Ali is a Fighter.
Al Wilson
Ali Bobbles
- http://home.attbi.com/~awilson01/forsale/gallery.htm
SkippyPB
us:
One of the things that attracted me to Ali besides his Olympic victory
and draft stance and outstanding boxing skills was his trash talking.
His poems and predictions and characterizations of his opponents were
just too funny. They may have been somewhat cruel in Joe Frazier's
case, but they were designed to get inside his opponents head and mess
them up. They were also entertaining. Can you just imagine the
things Ali could have said about Mike Tyson given Mike's nickname,
stature, intelligence and speech? Take the things he said about
Liston and multiply it by 5 and you might come close. Tyson would
have been so filled with rage by the time Ali got done with him, he
would have become wild and out of control in the ring..just what Ali
would want.
Regards,
////
(o o)
-oOO--(_)--OOo-
When you don't know what to do,
walk fast and look worried.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Remove nospam to email me.
Steve
SkippyPB
enlightened us:
I'd have to say that Tyson's last fight where he was in his prime
mentally and physically was the Carl Williams fight in '89 when he won
on a 1 round KO. But a lot happened to Mike in the next seven months
before he fought a very in shape and motivated Buster Douglas. Mike
was having continued, severe problems with Robin Givens and her
mother. Don King was twisting his mind even more. It all took its
toll and Mike has really not been the same since.
Gene Schwartz
>
> Peek-a-boo Tyson would have give Ali all he could handle. This is why Ali
> had so much trouble with Kenny Norton...the DEFENSE was too much for Ali.
The Ali who fought Norton wasn't nearly the fighter that the Ali of the
1960's was. The pre-break Ali against Tyson would have been a mismatch.
After his comeback, Ali would still have defeated Tyson, but primarily, I
think, because he was so much stronger mentally. Tyson wouldn't have
intimidated Ali, and certainly wouldn't have knocked him out in the early
rounds, and eventually would have just fallen apart.
Superstar
post that Tyson was too quick for Ali, are you f**king insane?? Most
middleweights haven't been as fast as Ali. I also saw some moron post that
Ali would fold quicker than Brian Neilsen.
To all the halfwits out there that are deluding themselves with this crap
get the f**k off this newsgroup you f**king idiots.
Superstar
> Truth" Williams if you don't believe me.
>
> Al Wilson
I don't dispute that in his prime Tyson was quick, but you specifically said
"too quick" for Muhammad Ali.
It seems to me that you are an idiot who watches boxing highlights on ESPN,
thinks he knows the sport, logs on to a newsgroup and goes "YEAH, TYSON IS
THE GREATEST, I DON'T KNOW JACK ALL ABOUT THE SPORT, BUT TYSON IS THE
GREATEST".
Only a complete dick would label any heavyweight quicker than Ali, and by
saying as such, you might as well have a big bright neon sign on your head
that says, "COMPLETE ASS WHO KNOWS F**K ALL."
Superstar
>
> Al Wilson
Foreman had a far better KO% when he fought a less than prime Ali, and that
included the destruction of Joe Frazier. Foreman was also a hell of a lot
bigger than Tyson, and clearly more mentally stable. Ali defeated two of the
baddest heavyweights in history a combined three times without defeat.
You really are a complete ass, it took until 1980 for Ali to be stopped
inside the distance, and even then he had to quit on his stool. Idiots like
you amaze me sometimes, what, do you think Tyson would run up to Ali and
rain down massive blows on the highly overrated champ until he fell to his
inevitable defeat. Foreman thought that too. Liston thought it as well, and
neither of those two even fought a prime Ali.
The only truly great fighters Tyson has fought have been an old Holmes, and
an aging Holyfield. No offence to the Real Deal, but he is not in the same
league as Ali, and he beat the shit out of the indestructible Tyson.
And what do you offer up as proof to Tyson defeating Ali? Tyson was quicker
than the quickest heavyweight of all time, you say. Ali couldn't handle
Tyson's power? F**k off you idiot, you disgust me so much I'm almost
physically sick.
Mr. Cody
somebody, and then automatically be able to tell who would win between
Tyson and Ali.
I understand that Ali fought better opposition his entire career,
but is that Tyson's fault?
Styles Make Fights
Cody
Alan Wilson
> > Tyson has quick head movement and a very quick left hook. Ask Carl "The
> > Truth" Williams if you don't believe me.
> >
> > Al Wilson
>
> I don't dispute that in his prime Tyson was quick, but you specifically
said
> "too quick" for Muhammad Ali.
>
> It seems to me that you are an idiot who watches boxing highlights on
ESPN,
> thinks he knows the sport, logs on to a newsgroup and goes "YEAH, TYSON IS
> THE GREATEST, I DON'T KNOW JACK ALL ABOUT THE SPORT, BUT TYSON IS THE
> GREATEST".
>
> Only a complete dick would label any heavyweight quicker than Ali, and by
> saying as such, you might as well have a big bright neon sign on your head
> that says, "COMPLETE ASS WHO KNOWS F**K ALL."
>
>
I could say the same about you....Tyson is the youngest Heavyweight Champ in
history and you claim he would not have beaten Ali because of ????
Tyson was and is awesome.
Al Wilson
Alan Wilson
"Superstar" <slsou...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:3c854559$1...@news.iprimus.com.au...
Tyson in shape can and always have beaten all his opponents...hell he had
his best round agaisnt Holeyfield before he "Snapped" in the second fight.
Tyson against Ali? Ha! Ali, didn't have the power to keep up with Tyson in
the ring.
Al Wilson
BoxMuham
>but is that Tyson's fault?
>
>Styles Make Fights
Which is why Mike Tyson would have almost no chance against heavyweights
like Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Holmes, et. al. Even fighters at Holyfield's level
would have a field day with Tyson before knocking him out.
BoxMuhammad
BoxMuham
>> Mohammad Ali was once stated in an interview that he thought
>> Tyson would have beaten him. Of course, the Tyson-haters
>> will just say he was being kind...
Pure BS. The closest Ali came to this kind of quote was when Ali and
Tyson were both sitting together on Arsenio Hall's show, and Ars asked Ali if
he'd be able to whip up on Tyson.
Ali was gracious, but he didn't say he thought Tyson would have beaten
him. Ali barely talked that night, anyway.
By the way, Lance, it's not "Mohammad." And you should study the sweet
science a little more before you come out saying you think Tyson would KO Ali
in 30 seconds. It doesn't take watching very much boxing to know how silly
that sounds. Two totally different classes of heavyweight. Tyson would have
almost no chance against Muhammad Ali. Another humiliating KO loss for "Iron
Mike."
BoxMuhammad
Alan Conceicao
>history and you claim he would not have beaten Ali because of ????
>
People would claim that Tyson would lose because he's a class below Ali, much
like an Ernie Shavers (do you even know who that is?). Quite frankly, they're
right.
I think I might as well include anything with "Tyson" in the subject in my
killfile.
-
Alan
Superstar
in
> history and you claim he would not have beaten Ali because of ????
1. Ali fought far greater opposition
2. Ali stopped both Liston and Foreman, who were both heavier hitters than
Tyson, and certainly far more skilled boxers.
3. Ali was far quicker than Tyson, despite your idiotic Tyson was too
quick....
4. Ali was not stopped until 1980, and even then he quit on his stool,
fighting a peak Larry Holmes
5. Frazier moved his whole upper body quicker than Tyson used his head, and
Ali defeated him.
6. Tyson was knocked out by a Buster Douglas, by no means a true champion.
7. Holyfield, the only truly great fighter Tyson fought (except for old
Holmes), knocked Tyson out by frustrating him with jabs. Ali would throw
three to Holyfields one, and was a hell of a lot quicker than Holyfield.
Listen up you dick, Ali v. Tyson is one of the only mythical fights that we
do have as close to proof as is possible. Ali was not daunted by heavy
hitters, and in fact flourished when fighting them.
Tyson was completely out boxed by an old Holyfield, Ali would have killed
him.
Ali would have danced around Tyson and rained blow after blow on him, until
he either got himself disqualified or KTFO.
Go pull your dick a little harder next time, ass.
Superstar
> his best round agaisnt Holeyfield before he "Snapped" in the second fight.
No, he threw everything he had at Holyfield and failed badly. Look at the
punch stats you idiot, Holyfield landed more blows and more power shots than
Tyson. So, Tyson pissed his pants and decided to get disqualified.
> Tyson against Ali? Ha! Ali, didn't have the power to keep up with Tyson
in
> the ring.
Whats power got to do with keeping up you idiot?? Tyson would be lucky to
land a flush punch on Ali all night. If Foreman can deliver the hardest
blows in boxing to Ali and not put him down, Tyson wouldn't have a f**king
chance. Holyfield himself that even at an advanced age, Foreman was hitting
him harder than anything Tyson threw.
> Al Wilson
>
By the way, your above statement may have been your most stupid yet.
Eggs Pancakes Syrup Toast Coffee
>From: boxm...@aol.com (BoxMuham)
>Date: Tue, Mar 5, 2002 22:08 EST
>Message-id: <20020305220826...@mb-cj.aol.com>
>
>> I understand that Ali fought better opposition his entire career,
>>but is that Tyson's fault?
>>
>>Styles Make Fights
>
> Which is why Mike Tyson would have almost no chance against
>heavyweights
>like Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Holmes
Holmes?
________________________
THUS SAYETH WithBACON
Alan Wilson
"Alan Conceicao" <deadand...@aol.comarduk> wrote in message
news:20020305233628...@mb-mj.aol.com...
Ofcourse I know who Shavers is...What is wrong with you? I know boxing.
You sound like one of those 'I hate Tyson' croonies. There is such a bad
wrap against Tyson that most boxing fans have let themselves be brainwashed
by the media.
LOOK AT THE MAN'S RECORD! Tyson is one of the all-time bests...
Al Wilson
Alan Wilson
"Superstar" <slsou...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:3c859...@news.iprimus.com.au...
An Old Holyfield...He was not old...
You are entitled to your opinion...although you would be wrong...
But I truly believe that the Tyson that beat Spinks would have killed
Holyfield and Tyson in his heyday...
I really don't think Tyson has lost much from his Pre-Prison days myself.
He sure looked good against a tough Golota...and he still knocked out the
White Buffalo with one punch.
Tyson will destroy Lewis and then what will you say?
Al Wilson
Loki
Syrup Toast Coffee) wrote:
>><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Mike Tyson versus Muhammad Ali?
>>From: boxm...@aol.com (BoxMuham)
>>Date: Tue, Mar 5, 2002 22:08 EST
>>Message-id: <20020305220826...@mb-cj.aol.com>
>>
>>> I understand that Ali fought better opposition his entire career,
>>>but is that Tyson's fault?
>>>
>>>Styles Make Fights
>>
>> Which is why Mike Tyson would have almost no chance against
>>heavyweights
>>like Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Holmes
>
>Holmes?
Larry Holmes. The Easton assassin. One of the three greatest
heavyweights to ever live. I am surprised that you haven't heard of
him.
Loki
Alan Wilson
> > Tyson in shape can and always have beaten all his opponents...hell he
had
> > his best round agaisnt Holeyfield before he "Snapped" in the second
fight.
>
> No, he threw everything he had at Holyfield and failed badly. Look at the
> punch stats you idiot, Holyfield landed more blows and more power shots
than
> Tyson. So, Tyson pissed his pants and decided to get disqualified.
>
> > Tyson against Ali? Ha! Ali, didn't have the power to keep up with
Tyson
> in
> > the ring.
>
> Whats power got to do with keeping up you idiot?? Tyson would be lucky to
> land a flush punch on Ali all night. If Foreman can deliver the hardest
> blows in boxing to Ali and not put him down, Tyson wouldn't have a f**king
> chance. Holyfield himself that even at an advanced age, Foreman was
hitting
> him harder than anything Tyson threw.
> > Al Wilson
> >
> By the way, your above statement may have been your most stupid yet.
>
Foreman was a "Mummy"! Tyson had hand and head speed, remember idiot!
Al Wilson
Alan Conceicao
>
Then you'd know Shavers hit as hard as Tyson did, if not harder. Look at the
record. Did Shavers put a POST Foreman Ali down and out? No..he lost by
decision.
>You sound like one of those 'I hate Tyson' croonies. There is such a bad
>wrap against Tyson that most boxing fans have let themselves be brainwashed
>by the media.
Hah. We say the same about you. Realize that Ali was about 10,000,000 levels
above Joe Frazier Jr. and you might garner some respect.
>LOOK AT THE MAN'S RECORD! Tyson is one of the all-time bests...
>
His best wins are against ancient Holmes and a blown up Light Heavyweight.
Perhaps his best win was against Razor Ruddock...HOW IMPRESSIVE. Compare that
to the mile long list of guys Ali took out.
The only Ali that never won (or got) a return bout after losing was "Nearly in
the wheelchair" Ali. And even then, he took Trevor Berbick 12. And damn near
won a couple of rounds. Like was previously said; the Ali that beat Cleveland
Williams (and landed 70% of his punches) would have annhilated Tyson.
-
Alan
Alan Wilson
"Alan Conceicao" <deadand...@aol.comarduk> wrote in message
> >Ofcourse I know who Shavers is...What is wrong with you? I know boxing.
> >
>
> Then you'd know Shavers hit as hard as Tyson did, if not harder. Look at
the
> record. Did Shavers put a POST Foreman Ali down and out? No..he lost by
> decision.
>
> >You sound like one of those 'I hate Tyson' croonies. There is such a bad
> >wrap against Tyson that most boxing fans have let themselves be
brainwashed
> >by the media.
>
> Hah. We say the same about you. Realize that Ali was about 10,000,000
levels
> above Joe Frazier Jr. and you might garner some respect.
>
> >LOOK AT THE MAN'S RECORD! Tyson is one of the all-time bests...
> >
>
> His best wins are against ancient Holmes and a blown up Light Heavyweight.
> Perhaps his best win was against Razor Ruddock...HOW IMPRESSIVE. Compare
that
> to the mile long list of guys Ali took out.
>
You seem to be blaming Tyson for his competition in his era. He beat
everyone around him, until he fought Buster and Holyfield. But you still
cannot take away from what he accomplished. He cleaned up the Alphabet soup
of the heavyweight division and brought us ONE champion again. Something
that has not happened much since he lost it 10 years ago.
Al Wilson
zzone
> On 04 Mar 2002 02:45:44 GMT, cobal...@aol.com (Brian Davis) wrote:
>
> >Is that what you call a Troll.
> >
> >About how many times was this question asked in the NG?
> >
> >Brian Davis
> >Riverdale, IL
> >
> >PETE ROSE BELONGS IN THE HALL OF FAME!
>
> No, Sir I wasn't trolling. I posted what was a legitimate discussion
> among men aged 21 to 50 who work at a steel mill. The older gentleman
> said I felt Mike Tyson would win a match between the two because I
> wasn't around to see the less publicized fights of Ali. (I'm 28) Well,
> I was around to see the first professional fights of Tyson, and he was
> the most ferocious fighter (not boxer) I've seen in my lifrtime. But
> by the responses I've read I could be wrong.
Besides the fact that it is absolute pointless to discuss any "would have.."
stories, you where not all that wrong. The prime Tyson was much faster,
much stronger and had much more "killer instinct" then Ali ever had.
Not to mention that the great Ali ( he really was and still is )fought an
awful lot of nobodies, but it simply not done to say that. People like
to dream about the old times when everything was so much better.
You can ask all those people that call you stupid or troll what Ali
himself had to say about Tyson, you will be surprised.
Ed
Gene Schwartz
> From: zzone <zed...@zonnet.nl>
> Newsgroups: rec.sport.boxing
> Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 18:24:44 +0100
> Subject: Re: Mike Tyson versus Muhammad Ali?
> Besides the fact that it is absolute pointless to discuss any "would have.."
> stories, you where not all that wrong. The prime Tyson was much faster,
> much stronger and had much more "killer instinct" then Ali ever had.
> Not to mention that the great Ali ( he really was and still is )fought an
> awful lot of nobodies, but it simply not done to say that. People like
> to dream about the old times when everything was so much better.
> You can ask all those people that call you stupid or troll what Ali
> himself had to say about Tyson, you will be surprised.
>
> Ed
>
>
The fact that you would claim that Tyson was faster than Ali shows that you
don't have a clue! No knowledgeable boxing fan would claim that. Certainly
he hit harder, and he was more aggressive - those things weren't Ali's
style.
The fact that you would claim that Liston, Foreman, Frazier, and Norton were
nobodies also shows quite clearly that you are apparently so biased as to
have lost all judgement. If you want to insist that Tyson would have won, go
ahead, but at least TRY to make a plausible argument.
BTW, in the Hauser book, Ali is quoted quite clearly about his opinion of
Tyson, and he is quite confident that he (Ali) would emerge the victor.
Not everyone who knows how great Ali was is simply believes that 'the old
times' were so much better. I think that there are a lot of great fighters
today. Hell, I think that the old Tyson was pretty fearsome. But, stylewise
he had no shot against Ali, and mentally he wasn't nearly as strong. Ali
would have gotten into his head very quickly. It would have been no contest.
Superstar
>
> Al Wilson
Tyson was going to destroy Holyfield as well, and then hundreds of you
idiots dissapeared from newsgroups. I'd like to see you post here after
Lewis v. Tyson.
And as for Tyson fighting the best possible opposition during his "prime"
how about....
Riddick Bowe (would've made Tyson piss in his pants)
Lennox Lewis ( big mistake, Lewis is better now than he ever was)
Evander Holyfield (the real deal still toweled him up at old age)
Superstar
"Alan Wilson" <awil...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:8wph8.5478$V9.11...@typhoon1.we.ipsvc.net...
seperate occasions, and still wasn't stopped. Young Foreman could only go
eight rounds with old Ali, a young and prime Ali would obliterate Tyson.
Fuhgedaboudit.
because of those massive haymakers he throws. But him beating
(in?)argueably the greatest heavyweight of all time? I'm 31 so I
haven't seen much of Ali's fights but I recall when I was a kid in the
70's Ali's name was still spoken of. From the clips I saw of him he
was very very fast, I wouldn't say he'd totally dominate Tyson but I
still think he'd win if he were careful.
I saw a tape that had clips of Tyson's fights. I recall some guy he
fought landed a clean uppercut on Tyson and staggered him back. The
problem was the guy stayed defensive and didn't follow up. Of course
he lost because of it. Ali does have that killer instinct though.
I say Ali wins by TKO.
SkippyPB <swie...@neo.rr.com> wrote in message news:<4B7E8B302842CDC7.B5B3605E...@lp.airnews.net>...
BoxMuham
> I know boxing.
> "Tyson would KO Ali in 30 seconds."
No you don't.
BoxMuham
> He beat
>everyone around him, until he fought Buster and Holyfield.
Still only 23, Tyson had the sh*t beaten out of him by Douglas, and later
Holyfield. He was lost and confused fighting those kind of men. Douglas was
something else that night, looking much like the Bowe who first beat Holyfield.
Douglas probably would have beaten a prime Holyfield that night, too.
Tyson looked awkward and very limited against fighters nowhere near the
class of Ali, Louis, Holmes, Foreman, Frazier, Marciano, et. al.
When he stepped up his level of competition, circa '87, his "1st/2nd/3rd
round KO" % went way down. Contrast that with someone like Foreman, who
stepped up and still took great heavyweights like Frazier and Norton out
immediately, like they were ragdolls.
Tyson's bouts with Tillis, Green, Ribalta, Smith, and Tucker, not to
mention Douglas, Ruddock, and Holyfield, provide ample evidence of how Tyson
would fair with heavyweights much greater than those men. Tyson's glaring
weaknesses were too large. Poor infighting. The total inability to adapt to
his opponents' style would get him massacred by great heavyweights. Tyson was
effective only when coming forward. He couldn't do a thing going backwards.
He could be pushed around himself and manhandled, as Holyfield did to him.
He'd be beaten back and up and down by great sluggers like Foreman, Frazier,
Dempsey, Liston. Tillis was probably the best "boxer" Tyson faced, outside of
Douglas and Holyfield (who didn't really "box" that night, just beat him up and
knocked him out). Great boxers like Ali and prime Holmes would make a fool of
Tyson in the ring before the KO.
You look at Tyson's opponents and say they were frightened. For the most
part, yes. Many were frightened to fight, and that was a big part of Tyson's
success.
You think men like Ali, Foreman, Frazier, etc. would be frightened of a
heavyweight like Tyson?! Those ring introductions would have Tyson quaking in
him boots more fearfully than he was before the Holyfield rematch.
Of course, Douglas took Tyson to school before knocking him the f*ck out.
Right before and right after the Douglas fight, Tyson still beat up on the
class of heavyweights he could always beat up (Williams, Tillman, Stewart...),
but against fighters of greater ability, Tyson would be lost in the ring.
You may remember, for five years an older Foreman called for Tyson in
what would have been Tyson's richest ever bout. Tyson would never fight
Foreman. Unlike prime Holyfield, who was able to beat old George in a tough
defense of his title.
You say things like, "Tyson would KO Ali in 30 seconds." That's why
people leapt on you so quickly. You show incredible ignorance with a statement
like that. Clearly you don't know much about Tyson's ring career. Clearly you
don't know a thing about Ali's.
As I said earlier, there's a long list of heavyweights ranked between
those two.
BoxMuhammad
BoxMuham
>Holyfield
Michael Spinks was not a very good heavyweight at all. Surely you know
that.
BoxMuham
>the ring.
>
>Al Wilson
I agree, you must be trolling. No one can be this damn stupid.
BoxMuham
>>heavyweights
>>like Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Holmes
>
>Holmes?
Obviously we're measuring heavyweights in their primes. Not a 39-year
old, out-of-the-ring for two years version of Holmes.
Now... Can you imagine a 39-year old version of Tyson?? ;-)
Alan Wilson
"BoxMuham" <boxm...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020306220254...@mb-ce.aol.com...
I guess his two wins against Holmes and his undefeated record meant
nothing...
Don't let your biases blind your judgement.
Al Wilson
Lance Spaulding
I never said I believed anything. What makes you think I said Tyson would
KO Ali at all (let alone in 30 seconds)?
I just pointed out that in an interview Mohammad said he thought
Tyson would win. This was a late-night talk show in the late 80s/early 90s.
And, personally, I could care less about the "sweet science" of boxing.
Lance
> BoxMuhammad
Alan Conceicao
So then why are you here?
-
Alan
Alan Conceicao
>I guess his two wins against Holmes and his undefeated record meant
>nothing...
>
A) Holmes was past his prime. WAY past his prime. Everyone knows that. Its like
claiming Tyson's win over Holmes means something.
B) You've never saw either fight, did you? I got a tape of it...I think Holmes
won BOTH fights.
-
Alan
Alan Wilson
"Alan Conceicao" <deadand...@aol.comarduk> wrote in message
news:20020306230853...@mb-fm.aol.com...
I never saw either fight??? What the? I saw almost all of Holmes fights,
sir.
Holmes was undefeated until he lost to Spinks...and you claim he was over
the hill??? Good sense that makes!
And YES Tyson was very impressive in his win over Holmes. I will never
forget that right cross across the temple that left Holmes dazed throughout
that round.
Al Wilson
Al Wilson
BoxMuham
>I guess his two wins against Holmes and his undefeated record meant
>nothing...
Again Al Wilson, you'll find almost no one on the planet who'll agree
with you that Michael Spinks was a very good heavyweight.
Now, Spinks was a *great* light heavyweight, of course. But he was no
better a heavyweight than the great Bob Foster.
As far as "beating" Holmes, who had been heavyweight champ for seven and
a half long years (second only to Louis' TWELVE YEAR reign... Ever hear of Joe
Louis, Al Wilson?), Holmes "losses" to Spinks were highly controversial. He
definitely "won" the rematch. He also would likely have taken the cards in the
first bout if not for his ill-timed remark about The Rock.
That's Rocky Marciano, by the way, not your WWF poster boy.
BoxMuhammad
BoxMuham
>And YES Tyson was very impressive in his win over Holmes.
When Tyson comes back to the ring at age 39, not having fought in two
years, and gets KO'd easily by the current champ, I'm sure you'll be here to
tell us how impressive that win was.
As Tyson said in the ring after the Holmes fight, "If Larry Holmes had
been in his prime, I wouldn't have stood a chance."
Truer words ain't been spoken.
Tyson's win over Holmes is about as impressive as Leon Spinks beating
Ali in '78.
BoxMuhammad
Real Deal
have.."
> stories
Nice to see you giving time to pointless causes...
> you where not all that wrong. The prime Tyson was much faster,
> much stronger and had much more "killer instinct" then Ali ever had.
> Not to mention that the great Ali ( he really was and still is )fought an
> awful lot of nobodies
You haven't looked at the cannon fodder, the "wont-fight-back" stiffs that
literally stood still for Tyson to build his reputation. A pile of
spectacular knockout against many many has-beens who did not dare try to
fight their fights. Which of those nobody's is your somebody? Tell us
please.
> but it simply not done to say that. People like
> to dream about the old times when everything was so much better.
> You can ask all those people that call you stupid or troll what Ali
> himself had to say about Tyson, you will be surprised.
I'm sure that if Ali, now an ageing man with a degenerative disease, said
anything complimentary about Tyson, then it would be because he was being
just that... complimentary!
> Ed
Real Deal
> everyone around him, until he fought Buster and Holyfield.
I wouldn't blame Tyson for the level of his competition. It is simply
nothing but the truth to say that his spectacular knockouts against
competition that didn't really fight is where the excitement came from. He
achieved all that he could until the competition started to fight back.
> But you still
> cannot take away from what he accomplished. He cleaned up the Alphabet
soup
> of the heavyweight division and brought us ONE champion again. Something
> that has not happened much since he lost it 10 years ago.
Tyson actually unified the championship in less than a year. That has
mostly to do with being given the opportunity, which is all to do with
boxing politics.
john
Alan Wilson
news:nuFh8.357423$eS3.27...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Bullshit. Most of the heavyweights are afraid to fight each other...ala
Riddick Bowe, and Lennox Lewis.
Al Wilson
Alan Wilson
"BoxMuham" <boxm...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020307003637...@mb-fh.aol.com...
WWF?? What kinda crap is that?? You must be 11 years old.
Anyway, back to real sports...you act as if the judges are biased. You must
be one of those paranoid consipiracy buffs.
Spinks was a great fighter, heavyweight or light heavy...it doesn't matter.
He kicked Holmes' Ass, twice!
Al Wilson
zzone
wrote:
> > Besides the fact that it is absolute pointless to discuss any "would
> have.."
> > stories
>
> Nice to see you giving time to pointless causes...
I am aware of that.
>
> > you where not all that wrong. The prime Tyson was much faster,
> > much stronger and had much more "killer instinct" then Ali ever had.
> > Not to mention that the great Ali ( he really was and still is )fought an
> > awful lot of nobodies
>
> You haven't looked at the cannon fodder, the "wont-fight-back" stiffs that
> literally stood still for Tyson to build his reputation. A pile of
> spectacular knockout against many many has-beens who did not dare try to
> fight their fights. Which of those nobody's is your somebody? Tell us
> please.
I was talking about Ali.
>
> > but it simply not done to say that. People like
> > to dream about the old times when everything was so much better.
> > You can ask all those people that call you stupid or troll what Ali
> > himself had to say about Tyson, you will be surprised.
>
> I'm sure that if Ali, now an ageing man with a degenerative disease, said
> anything complimentary about Tyson, then it would be because he was being
> just that... complimentary!
Ali is still not stupid or anything and IMO he is a boxing expert so I take his
words serious.
>
> > Ed
>
>
>
zzone
>
>
> > From: zzone <zed...@zonnet.nl>
> > Newsgroups: rec.sport.boxing
> > Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 18:24:44 +0100
> > Subject: Re: Mike Tyson versus Muhammad Ali?
>
> don't have a clue! No knowledgeable boxing fan would claim that.
Well I just did, didn't I?
> Certainly
> he hit harder, and he was more aggressive - those things weren't Ali's
> style.
>
> The fact that you would claim that Liston, Foreman, Frazier, and Norton were
> nobodies also shows quite clearly that you are apparently so biased as to
> have lost all judgement.
I NEVER said anywhere that Liston Foreman Frazier or Norton where nobody's!!!
( What is it nobodies or nobody's )
Did you ever here of Coopmans, Lubbers or even Cooper? ( who floored Ali )
> If you want to insist that Tyson would have won, go
> ahead, but at least TRY to make a plausible argument.
I don't even wanna go into that would have stories.
>
> BTW, in the Hauser book, Ali is quoted quite clearly about his opinion of
> Tyson, and he is quite confident that he (Ali) would emerge the victor.
I heard him say he was not to sure about that, he showed great respect for
Tysons boxing skills he was clearly enjoying talking about Tyson.
( British TV with Ali Foreman and Frazier, and yes he said that he would have
beaten Tyson, with a big smile ).
>
> Not everyone who knows how great Ali was is simply believes that 'the old
> times' were so much better.
I was a little cynical here.
> I think that there are a lot of great fighters
> today. Hell, I think that the old Tyson was pretty fearsome. But, stylewise
> he had no shot against Ali, and mentally he wasn't nearly as strong. Ali
> would have gotten into his head very quickly. It would have been no contest.
Could be, Ali could be knocked out in each of the first five rounds too!
Ed
Alan Conceicao
>be one of those paranoid consipiracy buffs.
>
"you act as if the judges are biased"
............................
We got ourselves a genius here kids.
>Spinks was a great fighter, heavyweight or light heavy...it doesn't matter.
>He kicked Holmes' Ass, twice!
>
You're one of about 6 people that believe that then. Did you see
Lewis/Holyfield 1 in Holyfield's favor, by any chance?
-
Alan
Gene Schwartz
> From: zzone <zed...@zonnet.nl>
> Newsgroups: rec.sport.boxing
> Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 13:14:40 +0100
> Subject: Re: Mike Tyson versus Muhammad Ali?
>
> In message <B8ABCD03.8E2F%impl...@pacbell.net>, Gene Schwartz wrote:
>>
>>
>>> From: zzone <zed...@zonnet.nl>
>>> Newsgroups: rec.sport.boxing
>>> Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 18:24:44 +0100
>>> Subject: Re: Mike Tyson versus Muhammad Ali?
>>
>> The fact that you would claim that Tyson was faster than Ali shows that you
>> don't have a clue! No knowledgeable boxing fan would claim that.
>
> Well I just did, didn't I?
>
Well, apparently then you are not a knowledgeable boxing fan.
>> Certainly
>> he hit harder, and he was more aggressive - those things weren't Ali's
>> style.
>>
>> The fact that you would claim that Liston, Foreman, Frazier, and Norton were
>> nobodies also shows quite clearly that you are apparently so biased as to
>> have lost all judgement.
>
> I NEVER said anywhere that Liston Foreman Frazier or Norton where nobody's!!!
> ( What is it nobodies or nobody's )
> Did you ever here of Coopmans, Lubbers or even Cooper? ( who floored Ali )
>
I was replying to a post in which the poster claimed that Ali fought 'a lot
of nobodies'. This is only relevant to the relevant abilities of Tyson and
Ali if Ali fought ONLY nobodies, which I thought that you were implying.
Given that Ali fought more great heavyweights than Tyson has, you don't
really make much of a point.
The story behind Cooper's flooring of Ali is well known. But what's your
point again? That he didn't take a punch well? If you want to claim that,
then once again you show yourself to be an unknowledgeable boxing fan.
>> If you want to insist that Tyson would have won, go
>> ahead, but at least TRY to make a plausible argument.
>
> I don't even wanna go into that would have stories.
>>
>> BTW, in the Hauser book, Ali is quoted quite clearly about his opinion of
>> Tyson, and he is quite confident that he (Ali) would emerge the victor.
>
> I heard him say he was not to sure about that, he showed great respect for
> Tysons boxing skills he was clearly enjoying talking about Tyson.
> ( British TV with Ali Foreman and Frazier, and yes he said that he would have
> beaten Tyson, with a big smile ).
>
Ali believes that he was the greatest heavyweight of all time. But, whether
he said on TV that he would have beaten is quite irrelevant. Probably all of
Tyson's and Ali's opponents have stated publicly before the fight that they
would win. We don't consider these public statements in the evaluation of
their abilities, as you know. So why stress this point?
>>
>> Not everyone who knows how great Ali was is simply believes that 'the old
>> times' were so much better.
>
> I was a little cynical here.
But clearly you believed that people who were favoring Ali were not being
objective.
>
>> I think that there are a lot of great fighters
>> today. Hell, I think that the old Tyson was pretty fearsome. But, stylewise
>> he had no shot against Ali, and mentally he wasn't nearly as strong. Ali
>> would have gotten into his head very quickly. It would have been no contest.
>
> Could be, Ali could be knocked out in each of the first five rounds too!
>
> Ed
Well, sure, and a giant meteorite could have pulverized the boxing arena. Of
course, no speculation about who would win these fights gives us, beyond a
doubt, who would win. However, it's usually an interesting idle endeavor
when people actually use their brains a little. You could claim, and no one
could disprove it, that Carl 'the Truth' Williams would have knocked out Ali
in the first round. But all evidence indicates otherwise. The great
preponderance of the evidence (speed, mental ability, psyche-factor,
opposition, style) indicates that the late 1960's Ali would have beaten
Tyson quite handily. There's nothing to indicate that Ali would have been
knocked out early, and everything to contraindicate it.
Danny
girlfriend"
I guess we really know now who he was talking about. Alan Wilson
Patrick Kehoe
I can hear you chain being pulled BM a bit here... this Wilson guy's not in
your league when discussing these matters...
P
BoxMuham <boxm...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020306212838...@mb-ce.aol.com...
Alan Wilson
"Alan Conceicao" <deadand...@aol.comarduk> wrote in message
Holyfield - Lewis 1 was won by Lewis and I thought Holyfield won the second
fight.
Al Wilson
zzone
>
>
> > From: zzone <zed...@zonnet.nl>
> > Newsgroups: rec.sport.boxing
> > Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 13:14:40 +0100
> > Subject: Re: Mike Tyson versus Muhammad Ali?
> >
> > In message <B8ABCD03.8E2F%impl...@pacbell.net>, Gene Schwartz wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> From: zzone <zed...@zonnet.nl>
> >>> Newsgroups: rec.sport.boxing
> >>> Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 18:24:44 +0100
> >>> Subject: Re: Mike Tyson versus Muhammad Ali?
> Well, apparently then you are not a knowledgeable boxing fan.
Not only that, I am an expert.
>
> >> Certainly
> >> he hit harder, and he was more aggressive - those things weren't Ali's
> >> style.
> >>
> >> The fact that you would claim that Liston, Foreman, Frazier, and Norton
> were
> >> nobodies also shows quite clearly that you are apparently so biased as to
> >> have lost all judgement.
> >
> > I NEVER said anywhere that Liston Foreman Frazier or Norton where
> nobody's!!!
> > ( What is it nobodies or nobody's )
> > Did you ever here of Coopmans, Lubbers or even Cooper? ( who floored Ali )
> >
>
> I was replying to a post in which the poster claimed that Ali fought 'a lot
> of nobodies'. This is only relevant to the relevant abilities of Tyson and
> Ali if Ali fought ONLY nobodies, which I thought that you were implying.
> Given that Ali fought more great heavyweights than Tyson has, you don't
> really make much of a point.
There are a lot of people here saying Tyson never fought a great heavyweight
at all and which great heavyweights did Ali fought? Liston? a little old and
slow don't you think, Frazier? sure what do you make of his defence, head
forward to absorb all punches? If you want you can talk down a lot of Ali's
opponents as a lot of people like to do on Tysons opponents.
( I do not wanna take anything away from George )
>
> Well, sure, and a giant meteorite could have pulverized the boxing arena. Of
> course, no speculation about who would win these fights gives us, beyond a
> doubt, who would win. However, it's usually an interesting idle endeavor
> when people actually use their brains a little. You could claim, and no one
> could disprove it, that Carl 'the Truth' Williams would have knocked out Ali
> in the first round.
HOLD ON HERE, this is exactly my point, stop all these -would have- BS talk.
There is non an never will be evidence for any of these biased opinions.
Insulting people for having another opinion doesn't make your opinion right.
People saying a fighter like Tyson doesn't have a change against someone
like Ali, don't know shit about boxing, imho :-)
Ed
gary nichols
"Patrick Kehoe" <pke...@sprint.ca> wrote in message
news:FaPh8.1398$3V1....@newscontent-01.sprint.ca...
> BM,
> I can hear you chain being pulled BM a bit here... this Wilson guy's not
in
> your league when discussing these matters...
LOL! This reminds me of Holmes/Frazier, and boxm is Holmes, and that must be
Arthur Mercante jr in there, allowing this one sided beating to continue on
and on. For God's sake, somebody in Al Wilson's corner throw in the freaking
towel already!
Gary
Real Deal
> Riddick Bowe, and Lennox Lewis.
Of course there is that too. But mostly politics, TV station, promoters,
the ABC boys... they all want their slice of the pie, and often at any cost.
Alan Wilson
news:u8fqgcm...@news.supernews.com...
Throw in the towel??? When I'm winning on every point made???
Al Wilson
Real Deal
two
> seperate occasions, and still wasn't stopped. Young Foreman could only go
> eight rounds with old Ali, a young and prime Ali would obliterate Tyson.
Damn! That is a very very good point. Game over I reckon.
BoxMuham
>
>Al Wilson
>
You go, girl...
BoxM
Superstar
> Ali is still not stupid or anything and IMO he is a boxing expert so I
take his
> words serious.
> >
> > > Ed
So you take him seriously when he says he wrestled with an alligator??
Fact is that Ali said a lot of things to promote fights and boxing in
general, but still maintains that he is the Greatest heavyweight of all
time. Judging by your posts, your uneducated opinions don't count for
anything.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.317 / Virus Database: 176 - Release Date: 21/01/02
Superstar
> Riddick Bowe, and Lennox Lewis.
>
> Al Wilson
You see, Riddick Bowe did have something to be afraid of. Lewis is a great
fighter. Tyson did not fight or defeat one great heavyweight up until his
prison stint, and using the excuse that none were around is bullshit,
beacuse Lewis, Holyfield and Bowe were well and truly in the game.
Superstar
Wait!! This reminds me of Ali - Patterson,! Quick Wilson, tell him he's
right, for God's sake take a merciful ending!!
Superstar
second
> fight.
>
> Al Wilson
Man, you probably saw Holyfield-Tyson I in Tyson's favour.......
Alan Wilson
"Superstar" <slsou...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:3c883...@news.iprimus.com.au...
> > Holyfield - Lewis 1 was won by Lewis and I thought Holyfield won the
> second
> > fight.
> >
> > Al Wilson
>
> Man, you probably saw Holyfield-Tyson I in Tyson's favour.......
>
>
I know Holyfield was one punch away from being knocked out...but he hung in
there well until he wore out Tyson.
Al Wilson
Robert Phillips
Alan Wilson wrote:
> Holmes was undefeated until he lost to Spinks...and you claim he was over
> the hill??? Good sense that makes!
You don't think that's possible (about ANY fighter)? A guy can't be undefeated
AND over the hill? It doesn't occur to you that the Spinks losses themselves
(debatable that they were) are the actual evidence that he was over the hill?
You think he went from absolute prime (immediately prior to Spinks I) to over
the hill in the span of one fight, the first Spinks fight?
Good sense that all makes!
Pie