Usyk vs Mike Tyson

[Badr Hari]

Ok Usyk cousin, i just dont rate that guy high ,not anyway remotely to Tyson at any metrics. For me he is a bum, the way he moves, very stiff, telegraphic and ugly punches, but anyway Joshua is even worse.

Look many people here agree that the old timers were more skilled than the modern boxers are today. But it's just not fair to call the champions of our era bums. Because we should compare them to what is available TODAY. They can only fight what's put in front of them. Can't rise Archie Moore or Bob Foster from the dead. We got what we got. If you consider Usyk a bum than you probably consider Beterbiev a bum too.

 

[b-hop]

Look many people here agree that the old timers were more skilled than the modern boxers are today. But it's just not fair to call the champions of our era bums. Because we should compare them to what is available TODAY. They can only fight what's put in front of them. Can't rise Archie Moore or Bob Foster from the dead. We got what we got. If you consider Usyk a bum than you probably consider Beterbiev a bum too.

Altough i agree with you,of course is not Usyk problem the lack of good heavyweight fighters,even though himself is far from being an example, i just feel the problem is the division.
The ww, lightweight and middleweights divisions are still quite decent, even though nothing compared to their peak in the 80s and 90s.
And i do consider Beterbiev a bum aswell.

 

[Badr Hari]

Altough i agree with you,of course is not Usyk problem the lack of good heavyweight fighters,even though himself is far from being an example, i just feel the problem is the division.
The ww, lightweight and middleweights divisions are still quite decent, even though nothing compared to their peak in the 80s and 90s.
And i do consider Beterbiev a bum aswell.

But at least at the top weight classes there are more cases of the best fighting the best. The list of unified world champions from 175 to 270+ is narrowed to two people, Usyk and Beterbiev. From 168 down to 135 in the span of only 33 pounds there are currently 14 world champions with very little chances of facing each other in the near future and reducing that number. Because you can always escape a few pounds higher or lower to another weight class and win another world title instead of facing your biggest threat in your own class, not to mention the weight cutting bullying that goes on. And like you said even there, the skill level is not even close compared to the previous great eras, so if we're criticizing, we should use the same standard for all.

 

[KillerIsBack V2]

Mike Tyson takes him out in about 85 seconds into the 1st round.

That’s a long ass ref count

 

[SeanWRT]

Usyk has a decison win over AJ who is as good as Vladmir of 41 year old. I think Iron Mike is capable of doing that, much more easily if Corrie Sanders fight is any indication.

Style wise - the fact that Holyfield and Lewis beat Tyson is just because they're better fighters at the time of the fights. Tall/long-reach and technicality have nothing to do with it. Holyfield is more of an inside fighter than anyone else in his division. There is nothing about reach advantage he is using against Tyson to KO him. Lewis was fighting a very washed up version of Tyson to the point the style doesn't even matter. Lewis would destroy Tyson outside, inside and middle range.

Usyk is some 220 lbs about the same as prime Tyson (1986-1988). As elusive as Tyson was at the time, I don't even think Usyk has advantage technical wise. Definitely Tyson destroys him in early rounds.

 

[Kowboy On Sherdog]

 

[BoxingMMA]

Considering what the first guy with actual skills, a plan and balls did to Tyson the first time they met (and second) and considering Usyk also has balls, a plan and is a better technical boxer than Holyfield was. I would lean towards Oleksander winning a UD. Mike always has the power to change the course of the fight though.

 

[Roids]

Considering what the first guy with actual skills, a plan and balls did to Tyson the first time they met (and second)

If you think Holyfield was the first person with those qualities Mike fought, you are legit brain dead.

 

[BoxingMMA]

If you think Holyfield was the first person with those qualities Mike fought, you are legit brain dead.

Ok little Mac

 

[svmVR2097]

Mike Tyson takes him out in about 85 seconds into the 1st round.

Tyson crumbles the second the fight doesn't go his way

 

[MoreKane]

Tyson lost to Buster Douglas. Usyk would smoke him

 

[GeneTunney7]

At last someone able to distance himself from the hype around Tyson. Thank you a lot! Tyson was a fantastic boxer but the way he is hyped up and overrated nowadays really is maddening.

The Holmes fight always gets brought up because Holmes did well later on but Holmes took that fight short notice out of retirement and even according to Tyson himself "didnt have time to prepare". King brought him in as a sacrifical lamb to build up Tyson. Spinks was a good win and Ruddock but like you wrote every time he stepped up competition he got beat. I also like his Golota win. Tyson was still in his prime in the 90s only the opposition was a lot better.

I think the defining fight in how to asess is Buster Douglas. There you can identify all the fanboys. King planted all myths after the loss about Tyson not being prepared, only partying, taking Buster light...etc and King even tried to get Douglas DQd but the reality was that Tyson fought just like before and like later vs. Holyfield etc. He looked great at the beginning but the difference now was an opponent who also had skills and would not back down. The result always was the same.

Regarding Usyk Tyson certainly could catch Usyk in the early rounds with his speed and timing. The longer the fight goes the more he looses that fight as he could never deal with this kind of adversity.
If Usyk manages to read him and avoid Tysons offense Mike would have gotten frustrated even earlier.
I see that fight as 50/50.

Thankyou, my man, and I think this is the only rational take. Tyson evolved into some urban legend type hero, but the reality is the hype never matched the skills. He is definitely one of the best of his generation, but I put him a notch below the best. He was at the right place at the right time, just like Conor McGregor and Ronda Rousey were, and with that hype then begets unrealistic assessments of their skills.

And Larry Holmes did well enough later on, but he was still way over the hill from his former glory. No way a prime Holmes loses to Spinks. Even Butterbean gave him a heck of a fight. it's funny that people say Tyson was past peak when he was like 23, but Holmes was in his prime into his late 30's and 40's? This is the Tyson fan boy double standard.

Nostalgia dies hard in boxing, and there were people when Mike was coming up that said Rocky Marciano would have whupped him and that Jack Dempsey would have mauled rocky Marciano - this sense of 'they were better back in my day' dies hard, but it is not backed up by the evidence. Science and I agree with GSP, in that the sport is always changing and evolving and the best fighters ever are in tomorrow. Just look at how easily Royce Gracie destroyed everyone in the early UFC, then how Hughes destroyed him, and then how Hughes was destroyed by GSP, etc.....this is simply the way of all sports, and as time goes on and technology increases, diet and training increases, people have access to all the fights of past to learn from, the talent pool increases with this and the world population expands. Heck, I was even watching a special on the Gladiators last night, and their average height was 5'5! The most fierce gladiators would have been absolute flyweight manlets by today's standards.

 

[Doctor Grudge]

Thankyou, my man, and I think this is the only rational take. Tyson evolved into some urban legend type hero, but the reality is the hype never matched the skills. He is definitely one of the best of his generation, but I put him a notch below the best. He was at the right place at the right time, just like Conor McGregor and Ronda Rousey were, and with that hype then begets unrealistic assessments of their skills.

And Larry Holmes did well enough later on, but he was still way over the hill from his former glory. No way a prime Holmes loses to Spinks. Even Butterbean gave him a heck of a fight. it's funny that people say Tyson was past peak when he was like 23, but Holmes was in his prime into his late 30's and 40's? This is the Tyson fan boy double standard.

Nostalgia dies hard in boxing, and there were people when Mike was coming up that said Rocky Marciano would have whupped him and that Jack Dempsey would have mauled rocky Marciano - this sense of 'they were better back in my day' dies hard, but it is not backed up by the evidence. Science and I agree with GSP, in that the sport is always changing and evolving and the best fighters ever are in tomorrow. Just look at how easily Royce Gracie destroyed everyone in the early UFC, then how Hughes destroyed him, and then how Hughes was destroyed by GSP, etc.....this is simply the way of all sports, and as time goes on and technology increases, diet and training increases, people have access to all the fights of past to learn from, the talent pool increases with this and the world population expands. Heck, I was even watching a special on the Gladiators last night, and their average height was 5'5! The most fierce gladiators would have been absolute flyweight manlets by today's standards.

Not really a great example because Hughes beat GSP also, and Royce Gracie is actually smaller than Matt Hughes (Royce doesn't cut weight). Not to mention Royce Gracie beating everyone in the UFC doesn't mean much because the UFC wasn't a real MMA promotion at the time - a lot of people in the world would have beaten up Royce Gracie (Japan was way ahead of the game) in a fight at the time including his own family.

 

[GeneTunney7]

Not really a great example because Hughes beat GSP also, and Royce Gracie is actually smaller than Matt Hughes (Royce doesn't cut weight). Not to mention Royce Gracie beating everyone in the UFC doesn't mean much because the UFC wasn't a real MMA promotion at the time - a lot of people in the world would have beaten up Royce Gracie (Japan was way ahead of the game) in a fight at the time including his own family.

Hughes beat a young GSP but then GSP evolved and beat him. All sports evolve. For example, the most famous athlete of the early 20th century was a horse called Dan Patch after he broke the 2 minute mile trotting. People thought no one would ever do that again, yet now a days low level horses run faster than that every weekend. The same thing when the 4 minute mile record was broken by Roger Bannister or the 10 second 100 meter record - now a days, high school kids break those time barriers on the reg.

Not sure I would say Royce was not beating anyone either, as he did beat Ken who was a powerhouse in Pancrase. The truth is the sport was small, taboo, and underdeveloped back then and as time went by the talent pool increased and athletes just got better. Take nearly any well developed fighter from back then, and your modern fringe top 30 guy would maul on them. Who was the Ngannou or Jon Jones back then? There were none, just as there were no Tyson Fury type fighters back in the day. Primo Carnera was a giant back then but could not move or box to save his life, and compared to Tyson Fury he would be small, but Tyson moves like a middleweight.

All sports evolve, and it is no knock to point out the obvious.

 

[Roids]

Thankyou, my man, and I think this is the only rational take. Tyson evolved into some urban legend type hero, but the reality is the hype never matched the skills. He is definitely one of the best of his generation, but I put him a notch below the best. He was at the right place at the right time, just like Conor McGregor and Ronda Rousey were, and with that hype then begets unrealistic assessments of their skills.

And Larry Holmes did well enough later on, but he was still way over the hill from his former glory. No way a prime Holmes loses to Spinks. Even Butterbean gave him a heck of a fight. it's funny that people say Tyson was past peak when he was like 23, but Holmes was in his prime into his late 30's and 40's? This is the Tyson fan boy double standard.

Nostalgia dies hard in boxing, and there were people when Mike was coming up that said Rocky Marciano would have whupped him and that Jack Dempsey would have mauled rocky Marciano - this sense of 'they were better back in my day' dies hard, but it is not backed up by the evidence. Science and I agree with GSP, in that the sport is always changing and evolving and the best fighters ever are in tomorrow. Just look at how easily Royce Gracie destroyed everyone in the early UFC, then how Hughes destroyed him, and then how Hughes was destroyed by GSP, etc.....this is simply the way of all sports, and as time goes on and technology increases, diet and training increases, people have access to all the fights of past to learn from, the talent pool increases with this and the world population expands. Heck, I was even watching a special on the Gladiators last night, and their average height was 5'5! The most fierce gladiators would have been absolute flyweight manlets by today's standards.

Your arguments are terrible. You are comparing MMA which has been around only 25 years vs Boxing which has been around for literally thousands of years, so of course MMA evolution is greater. Just one look at the HW division today should be enough to disprove your theory with limited fighters like AJ and Wilder being top 3 in the division with the latter who literally can't even box. By your logic, most modern HW's are far more involved in boxing than Ali was. lul. Comical on its face. In reality Boxings evolution peaked decades ago and is in current decline, at least in the heavier divisions.

Your arguments make no sense either. Tyson had a great record over 15 years, and you are comparing him to the likes of Conor and Rousey , friggin lol.

 

[Doctor Grudge]

Hughes beat a young GSP but then GSP evolved and beat him. All sports evolve. For example, the most famous athlete of the early 20th century was a horse called Dan Patch after he broke the 2 minute mile trotting. People thought no one would ever do that again, yet now a days low level horses run faster than that every weekend. The same thing when the 4 minute mile record was broken by Roger Bannister or the 10 second 100 meter record - now a days, high school kids break those time barriers on the reg.

Not sure I would say Royce was not beating anyone either, as he did beat Ken who was a powerhouse in Pancrase. The truth is the sport was small, taboo, and underdeveloped back then and as time went by the talent pool increased and athletes just got better. Take nearly any well developed fighter from back then, and your modern fringe top 30 guy would maul on them. Who was the Ngannou or Jon Jones back then? There were none, just as there were no Tyson Fury type fighters back in the day. Primo Carnera was a giant back then but could not move or box to save his life, and compared to Tyson Fury he would be small, but Tyson moves like a middleweight.

All sports evolve, and it is no knock to point out the obvious.

But you're talking about the absolute beginnings of the sport. MMA is essentially a different sport from what Royce Gracie participated in. Pancrase was a different sport. Their records are just grandfathered in because there wasn't a hardline when MMA became MMA.

Ken Shamrock beat the crap out of Royce Gracie, it was just declared a draw because there were no judges because the UFC was bootleg back then. If you're talking about UFC 1, he did not even know Royce Gracie was a grappler and did not train for it. Regardless, saying Royce Gracie beat everyone around and then citing UFC 1 makes no sense, because UFC 1 was just an invite of several random martial artists - not some encompassing league of the World's Finest. Royce Gracie being the king of the barn was a marketing gimmick, it wasn't even remotely true.

If you're saying Hughes only beat GSP because GSP was young, then you could easily counter that and say GSP beat Hughes because he was old. Also, GSP being a better fighter than Hughes doesn't mean that he's only a better fighter because he came after. If Matt Hughes was born at the same time as GSP he would still not be a better fighter most likely.


You cite Primo Carnera (who was beaten many times), yet in the modern era you have Wilder who can't box to save his life either. Even worse was Nikolai Valuev. You could also argue that Ngannou has "no skill" as well, and he merely beats guys on physicality. Heavyweights seeing success due to their size is nothing new, and nothing that has stopped happening.


I'm not saying that sports do not evolve, but your examples are really not well thought out. You're comparing frontier days to modern days, instead of comparing an established era vs another established era. You would be surprised to see that even linear sports like athletics is still relatively close to each other - and you are seemingly ignoring that promoters change rules of their sports in order to give other athletes better stats (this happens in team sports as well).


Michael Jordan was an 80s basketball player, though some less knowledgeable fans seem to think was only a 90s player - do you think everyone in the NBA has "evolved" past Jordan? Or even the best players today? And he's a player that grew up with out the 3 point line for perspective in how old he is. Basketball is far more commercial and has more athletes, more sports science, more scouting, higher level of training than MMA (and some of those things than Boxing as well) yet it seems rather unconvincing that Jordan or even older players like Chamberlain and Abdul-Jabar would still not be among the best players if not the best in today's NBA. So why wouldn't that go true for boxing or MMA?

Boxing has been around forever, and the core mechanics of boxing have not changed much. Saying Usyk would beat Tyson because Usyk fought in a more modern era is just lazy, quite frankly.


Most all time greats lose to younger people because they're past their prime, not because someone "evolved" past them.

 

[Kendodsworth]

I like Usyk, he's a great technical boxer but unfortunately going up against one of the most vicious and one of greatest HW in the sports history wouldn't end well. I reckon tyson would eat one of his eyeballs...and on that, the only way Usyk probably would win is via disqualification - frustrating Tyson to cannibalism.

Usyk is good in a not so great era/generation of HW, I think he'd be beaten by many in the 80s/90s early 00s if I'm honest.

 

[Macaque]

Mind you, the Larry Holmes that he wiped the floor with would go on to take both Holyfield and Ray Mercer the full 12 rounds in competitive losses.

Prime Larry Holmes is the greatest HW in history, in my eyes.

 

[MarkusFlorez99]

This is the worst possible match up imaginable for Usyk besides Joe Frazier

Usyk struggled with Breidis in spots when he applied pressure and he had Usyk shelling up on the ropes when he did. Usyk also had a bit of trouble with that plodder Chisora until Chisora started gassing and couldn't maintain that same aggression from early on. Mike Tyson would be relentless and he'd be coming with incredible head movement that would make it even more awkward for Usyk to tag him. He would be on Usyk all night with the footspeed to match him and he could force Usyk to lead off and counter off that. Besides that Mike Tysons raw speed is unlike anything Usyk has ever encountered and Tyson worked the body which is a particular attack Usyk doesn't like. Last but not least Tyson starts up incredibly fast, Usyk does not and needs a few rounds to get into his rhythm.

Douglas, Holyfield, and Lewis kept shutting down Tyson by clinching constantly, pushing him away and not allowing him to get into range. Usyk doesn't fight like this at all.

Based on everything I've seen from Usyk almost nothing could convince me that he would beat Mike Tyson unless he just destroys both Joshua and Fury inside the first and clears out the division easily.

 

[r-harper-1]

Tyson beats his body and takes usyk out in 6