lol, one of these. I always enjoy philosophy, especially in time wasters such as sports and I have a few minutes before dinner is done. This has been debated on here in the past anyways, I haven't watched boxing for many years.
I once felt Ali had to be the greatest, but a friend of mine convinced me of one question to consider, "could Ali absorb so many shots and rope-a-dope to the later rounds as he did the boxers of the 70s?" The answer to that question for anyone provides the answer to your scenario.
I personally doubt Ali could handle the punishment. Really who could?
He lost to the toughest boxer IMO in Joe Frazier, he stole one of those fights in the Thrilla in Manilla as far as I am concerned so I chalk it to two lose and the physical cost for both was steep.
Tyson hits harder but most importantly, quicker and far more unorthodox. His peek-a-boo style is extremely difficult to handle when coupled with speed, power and elusive trunk movement. If it were an open field, maybe, in a ring, it's the perfect storm of danger. His height was an advantage.
Yes, Ali beat heavy hitter Foreman in Zaire, but Foreman to this day suggests he was groggy due to someone putting something in his water. Who knows, but a young Foreman was as frightening a specimen as any who put on gloves. In the shady world of boxing, in a 3rd World Country, I tend to believe Foreman that the fix was in. Just as it was when Tyson lost in Japan and he STILL almost won that was how hard he hit, even groggy.
So, throw in those two suspect matches as the best comparisons and throw in Mike vs Ali in their prime and I conclude Tyson wins.
Unlike boxers before him, Tyson had one direction. Ali would be hit...alot. Like others before him he would try and use his range, but, it simply can't work when trapped in a ring. Ali would have to survive three rounds doing this before the needle starts to shift in his favor. In Tysons prime, I can't see it happening. He wasn't a gradual fighter, he chased his opponent, he wanted to K.O quickly.
The first guy to really beat him was Holyfield. The reason was that Tyson was past his prime, and, Holyfield could outbox him, he wasn't taking shots and trying to be cute. In Tysons prime, Holyfield loses but at that point in his post prison career, Holyfield just needed to stand in and outbox him with courage. Holyfield could do it then, he couldn't do it years earlier.
Much of Tyson is myth building and reputation. Psychological certainly. Who knows how many took a fall early in his career to build up the mystique so that boxing bettors could make millions? However, stylistically and otherwise, he was just the perfect dominant boxer with the right coach, disposition and life experiences to be near unbeatable in the ring in his prime.
In a 10 match simulation I could see Tyson winning at least 8 of them.
