Ali vs Tyson
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-11-2012, 12:18 PM
RE: Ali vs Tyson
[Image: rocky-iv-sled.jpg]

+


[Image: images.jpg]

+

[Image: rocky4-sawinglogs.jpg?w=540]

+

[Image: 6a00d83451bf9f69e20128773d8f9f970c-800wi.jpg]


+

[Image: rocky1.jpg]

+

[Image: rocky-iv.jpg?1289443479]
=
[Image: rockyiv.jpg?w=450]

=

[Image: rocky4-propaganda.jpg]

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
14-11-2012, 12:22 PM
RE: Ali vs Tyson
Well maybe someday in the far far future when they invent time travel.. they can go back.. bag Tyson and Ali in each their time periods .. then give them 3 months to train for the biggest future boxing match event ever...
We'll just have to accept that we'll only get to speculate and wonder in our life time. We'll all die with that one question... Who wouldv'e won?

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -- Voltaire
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 12:36 PM
RE: Ali vs Tyson
I'm going with Ali.

As a former Kenpo instructor, I learned the hard way, and then taught the smart way, that training and technique will always beat raw power and rage. I've seen it over and over and over. Sure, never at the kind of level that Tyson or Ali fought, I wasn't in those kinds of big leagues. But I've definitely seen masterful technique completely decimate raw power at the amateur level over and over. Far more often than the raw power guy wins.

Anyone can get in a lucky shot. Tyson could one-shot Ali at any time if they could time-machine-fight in their primes.

But Ali would know that, and that butterfly wouldn't float in front of those punches. Ali would also know what Buster Douglas proved, and what Ivander Hollyfield proved twice, that if Tyson comes out of the gate swinging for the fences, then he burns himself out after just a few rounds - all you have to do is survive the perfect Tyson storm for 3-4 rounds tops, then Tyson becomes your punching bag. That's when the butterfly stops floating and the bee starts stinging. And if Tyson tries to sit back and box and NOT overpower his opponents, he never had anywhere near the level of boxing finesse that Ali had - Tyson would have no chance fighting it Ali's way; he would be better of doing what he does best and hope he could catch the butterfly napping in the early rounds.

We'll never know for sure, but my estimation as someone who's been in combat rings and trained other people (sure, all at amateur levels) is that great skill almost always defeats great power.

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Aseptic Skeptic's post
14-11-2012, 12:56 PM
RE: Ali vs Tyson
(14-11-2012 12:36 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  I'm going with Ali.

As a former Kenpo instructor, I learned the hard way, and then taught the smart way, that training and technique will always beat raw power and rage. I've seen it over and over and over. Sure, never at the kind of level that Tyson or Ali fought, I wasn't in those kinds of big leagues. But I've definitely seen masterful technique completely decimate raw power at the amateur level over and over. Far more often than the raw power guy wins.

Anyone can get in a lucky shot. Tyson could one-shot Ali at any time if they could time-machine-fight in their primes.

But Ali would know that, and that butterfly wouldn't float in front of those punches. Ali would also know what Buster Douglas proved, and what Ivander Hollyfield proved twice, that if Tyson comes out of the gate swinging for the fences, then he burns himself out after just a few rounds - all you have to do is survive the perfect Tyson storm for 3-4 rounds tops, then Tyson becomes your punching bag. That's when the butterfly stops floating and the bee starts stinging. And if Tyson tries to sit back and box and NOT overpower his opponents, he never had anywhere near the level of boxing finesse that Ali had - Tyson would have no chance fighting it Ali's way; he would be better of doing what he does best and hope he could catch the butterfly napping in the early rounds.

We'll never know for sure, but my estimation as someone who's been in combat rings and trained other people (sure, all at amateur levels) is that great skill almost always defeats great power.
You're acting like Tyson is was a slow, hulking, untrained monster. He wasn't. He was skilled, lighting quick, and very technical.

In fact, he had a fighting style that was unheard of in boxing. Most boxers fight to one side - this makes them harder to hit, but it also makes it easier to get away from them. Also, you could judge where the punches were coming from based on whether or not he was a righty or southpaw.

Tyson fought straight forward. It made him easier to hit, but really, really hard to get away from. Likewise, you couldn't tell where and when the punches were coming because he didn't fight with a dominant hand.

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 01:01 PM
RE: Ali vs Tyson
Ali: 56 Wins (37 knockouts, 19 decisions), 5 Losses (4 decisions, 1 TKO), 0 Draws
Had a professional career lasting 21 years.
Tyson: 50 Wins (44 knockouts, 5 decisions, 1 disqualification), 6 Losses, 0 Draws, 2 No Contests
Had a professional career lasting 20 years.

Their overall body of work is so similar in numbers that I'm not sure you even have to make the argument of who was better "in their prime." Simply going with who had the better career gives Ali a slight edge. Cassius Clay wins by Decision!

"All that is necessary for the triumph of Calvinism is that good Atheists do nothing." ~Eric Oh My
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 01:04 PM
RE: Ali vs Tyson
(14-11-2012 01:01 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  Ali: 56 Wins (37 knockouts, 19 decisions), 5 Losses (4 decisions, 1 TKO), 0 Draws
Had a professional career lasting 21 years.
Tyson: 50 Wins (44 knockouts, 5 decisions, 1 disqualification), 6 Losses, 0 Draws, 2 No Contests
Had a professional career lasting 20 years.

Their overall body of work is so similar in numbers that I'm not sure you even have to make the argument of who was better "in their prime." Simply going with who had the better career gives Ali a slight edge. Cassius Clay wins by Decision!
But, then you have to look at their life afterwards.

Ali is brain dead.

Tyson is a train wreck.

Who won?

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 01:12 PM
RE: Ali vs Tyson
(14-11-2012 12:56 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(14-11-2012 12:36 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  I'm going with Ali.

As a former Kenpo instructor, I learned the hard way, and then taught the smart way, that training and technique will always beat raw power and rage. I've seen it over and over and over. Sure, never at the kind of level that Tyson or Ali fought, I wasn't in those kinds of big leagues. But I've definitely seen masterful technique completely decimate raw power at the amateur level over and over. Far more often than the raw power guy wins.

Anyone can get in a lucky shot. Tyson could one-shot Ali at any time if they could time-machine-fight in their primes.

But Ali would know that, and that butterfly wouldn't float in front of those punches. Ali would also know what Buster Douglas proved, and what Ivander Hollyfield proved twice, that if Tyson comes out of the gate swinging for the fences, then he burns himself out after just a few rounds - all you have to do is survive the perfect Tyson storm for 3-4 rounds tops, then Tyson becomes your punching bag. That's when the butterfly stops floating and the bee starts stinging. And if Tyson tries to sit back and box and NOT overpower his opponents, he never had anywhere near the level of boxing finesse that Ali had - Tyson would have no chance fighting it Ali's way; he would be better of doing what he does best and hope he could catch the butterfly napping in the early rounds.

We'll never know for sure, but my estimation as someone who's been in combat rings and trained other people (sure, all at amateur levels) is that great skill almost always defeats great power.
You're acting like Tyson is was a slow, hulking, untrained monster. He wasn't. He was skilled, lighting quick, and very technical.

In fact, he had a fighting style that was unheard of in boxing. Most boxers fight to one side - this makes them harder to hit, but it also makes it easier to get away from them. Also, you could judge where the punches were coming from based on whether or not he was a righty or southpaw.

Tyson fought straight forward. It made him easier to hit, but really, really hard to get away from. Likewise, you couldn't tell where and when the punches were coming because he didn't fight with a dominant hand.
Nah, I didn't mean to imply that Tyson didn't have the skills. But in my estimation, his skills were mediocre. What really set him apart was his short, squat frame that kept him low to the ground and gave him tremendous punching leverage, combined with his amazing musculature which together gave him more punching power than possibly any other heavyweight. Drago isn't real, and Dolph Lundgren didn't punch that hard, even when he was the Karate champion of Europe, or whatever his actual title was.

Tyson had some skill. But put him in an average heavyweight body and his career never makes front page news - he didn't have the skills to pull that off. But with his body, his power, and his bull-in-a-china-shop style of fighting, he blew everyone out of the ring. Until he didn't. The real technicians were always the ones who out-skilled him, though he still out-powered most of those.

Since Ali was a masterful technician, I stand by there being no way Tyson's comparatively meager skills could hold a candle to him, so if he would weather that storm until Tyson punched himself out, it would become the Mohammed Ali Training Camp from about round 5-12, unless he knocked him out sooner than that (which he probably couldn't do unless Tyson got so exhausted he couldn't even defend himself).

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Aseptic Skeptic's post
14-11-2012, 01:20 PM
RE: Ali vs Tyson
(14-11-2012 01:12 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  
(14-11-2012 12:56 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  You're acting like Tyson is was a slow, hulking, untrained monster. He wasn't. He was skilled, lighting quick, and very technical.

In fact, he had a fighting style that was unheard of in boxing. Most boxers fight to one side - this makes them harder to hit, but it also makes it easier to get away from them. Also, you could judge where the punches were coming from based on whether or not he was a righty or southpaw.

Tyson fought straight forward. It made him easier to hit, but really, really hard to get away from. Likewise, you couldn't tell where and when the punches were coming because he didn't fight with a dominant hand.
Nah, I didn't mean to imply that Tyson didn't have the skills. But in my estimation, his skills were mediocre. What really set him apart was his short, squat frame that kept him low to the ground and gave him tremendous punching leverage, combined with his amazing musculature which together gave him more punching power than possibly any other heavyweight. Drago isn't real, and Dolph Lundgren didn't punch that hard, even when he was the Karate champion of Europe, or whatever his actual title was.

Tyson had some skill. But put him in an average heavyweight body and his career never makes front page news - he didn't have the skills to pull that off. But with his body, his power, and his bull-in-a-china-shop style of fighting, he blew everyone out of the ring. Until he didn't. The real technicians were always the ones who out-skilled him, though he still out-powered most of those.

Since Ali was a masterful technician, I stand by there being no way Tyson's comparatively meager skills could hold a candle to him, so if he would weather that storm until Tyson punched himself out, it would become the Mohammed Ali Training Camp from about round 5-12, unless he knocked him out sooner than that (which he probably couldn't do unless Tyson got so exhausted he couldn't even defend himself).
You bring up a very valid point.

Hmmm

I mean, look what happened when he fought Holyfield.

You know... I may have to change my answer.

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 01:20 PM
RE: Ali vs Tyson
(14-11-2012 01:04 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(14-11-2012 01:01 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  Ali: 56 Wins (37 knockouts, 19 decisions), 5 Losses (4 decisions, 1 TKO), 0 Draws
Had a professional career lasting 21 years.
Tyson: 50 Wins (44 knockouts, 5 decisions, 1 disqualification), 6 Losses, 0 Draws, 2 No Contests
Had a professional career lasting 20 years.

Their overall body of work is so similar in numbers that I'm not sure you even have to make the argument of who was better "in their prime." Simply going with who had the better career gives Ali a slight edge. Cassius Clay wins by Decision!
But, then you have to look at their life afterwards.

Ali is brain dead.

Tyson is a train wreck.

Who won?
George Foreman.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of Calvinism is that good Atheists do nothing." ~Eric Oh My
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 01:23 PM
RE: Ali vs Tyson
(14-11-2012 01:04 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(14-11-2012 01:01 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  Ali: 56 Wins (37 knockouts, 19 decisions), 5 Losses (4 decisions, 1 TKO), 0 Draws
Had a professional career lasting 21 years.
Tyson: 50 Wins (44 knockouts, 5 decisions, 1 disqualification), 6 Losses, 0 Draws, 2 No Contests
Had a professional career lasting 20 years.

Their overall body of work is so similar in numbers that I'm not sure you even have to make the argument of who was better "in their prime." Simply going with who had the better career gives Ali a slight edge. Cassius Clay wins by Decision!
But, then you have to look at their life afterwards.

Ali is brain dead.

Tyson is a train wreck.

Who won?


Rocky.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: