Corbett whupped John L Sullivan, who practically was a tougher version of Tyson. Corbett also fought Peter Jackson for 61 rounds while Tyson never went more than 12 and Corbett, at 35, beat Jim Jeffries for 22 rounds while 35 year old Tyson got beaten in eight by a lesser version of Jeffries. Corbett TKO3
Corbett was doing spousal abuse before Tysons Grandfather was even born. I think Tyson has a chance with his skills and power, but that is offset by the sheer volume of grainy black-and-white fotos of Corbett. In fact, I dont think that Corbett's bollox was ever exposed to coloured film. They didnt really dig coloured things back in his day, you see. I just cannot see Mike getting anything out of this. I mean, head movement and defense is all very well, but when the other guy uses oil in his hair and is called "Gentleman"...thats a tall order for any fighter. Corbett W State Athletic Commission Won Sanction The Fight Tyson.
Corbett would have been overwhelmed. Sometimes, Irish, better fighters existed in the past, & sometimes, they existed in the future. That's just how it works. I doubt Corbett could handle what Tyson brings. I do, however, think there is some chance one of Corbett's contemporaries may've had considerably better luck. Maybe.
I thought you were being facetious. My mistake. In all seriousness, it's not a match-up I can see your Corbett's, Fitzsimmons' or Johnson's having much luck in. You'd need an exceptionallly athletic fighter, a big fighter, with a proven track-record in both armour-plated durability &, just as significantly, the ability to really forego the finesse & subtleties someone like Corbett fancied in favour of bullying Tyson at close-quarters --- wrestling, bodypunching, a brawling, mauling style, with the chin & heart to stand-up to the Tyson arsenal. Corbett doesn't have the tools. I would not be at all surprised if he could write an essay on how to beat Tyson which was grand. Corbett had a tremendous Boxing brain, & it carried him far, as he magnified opposition chinks. To do it against Tyson in reality, however, would not be within his power, IMO.
The very man I had in mind. However, there would be a lot of guesswork involved in that fight. I say Jeffries would have the best shot, but I am uncomfortable trying to consider what those odds would be.
It's very difficult to say, IMO. Jeffries fought in an era of miniscule gloves, which maximised the hurt from each punch. It amplified blows from fighters, adding weight to Jeffries' claim as having one of the elite-level chins in Heavyweight championship history. Even so, did he ever face a hitter on Tyson's level? Fact is, he did not --- not with that much velocity behind the punches, at any rate. If Jeffries beat Tyson, it would be at close-quarters. Jeffries was bigger, stronger, & better-equipped at this range to bully Tyson. He was a pretty debilitating puncher in his own right, too. Especially to the body. In some ways, I think of Jeffries as a bigger Marciano. He was better than Marciano, for mine --- a much more athletic figure, with no lesser chin, will or endurance, & his size makes him more formidable still. He also faced remarkably strong opposition for a man of so few fights. Still, questions remain. Tyson would be far & away the most debilitating offensive force Jeffries has ever seen, & he was a man who made himself available to hit. I dare say the fight's outcome could be known within the opening two rounds --- that is, exactly what impact Tyson's punches, sure to find their mark early, have on Jeffries. If he can take the best of them, Tyson should still have a chance, on the back of his quicker hands & the hope he may overwhelm Jeffries without actually concussing him, but it would be fair to say Jeffries' chances would soar markedly if, indeed, he could stand upto what Tyson could dish out. I doubt Tyson can out-muscle & out-fight Jeffries --- in fact, I'm quite sure he could not, if things turned rough. At any rate, the rest of the notables from in & around that time --- Corbett, Fitzsimmons, Johnson, as well as the better contenders, such as Sharkey & Choynski --- would just be victims, IMO.
Tyson would be forced to rely on his technique. Any mistakes would see him being kidded into clinches and close-up scraps with Jeffries and thats where Tyson unravels, not just physically, but mentally too. Jeffries going 15 rounds with Jack Johnson after 6 years out and dropping 60lbs in training is testament enough to his overall general fitness. He definitely never fought anyone as fast as Tyson.
Oh man, those guys were barely boxers... Dempsey changed the course of history with his style... everybody before it looks woefully obsolete by comparison Tyson executes Jeffries, Johnson, Corbett... there is no way ever that any of them see more than 2 rounds against him... Dempsey kills them too
Corbett was quick of his feet, evasive, tough to hit, had a great jab, was a great counter-puncher and had tons of stamina. Corbett probably didn't face an opponent who was like Tyson albeit he beat up Sullivan comfortably, but Sullivan was not a skilled boxer. Tyson definately would have caused Corbett trouble and would not have stopped coming forward and would have found a way of getting through a few times, but Corbett could take a punch. Can't really compare Sullivan's punch power to Tyson's, but Sullivan did have punch power. I think Corbett wins this one via TKO late in the fight of a 12 round contest.
Jack Johnson beats Tyson imo. Had a great defense - if not the greatest defense in Heavyweight history, his timing was spot on and packed a punch too.
Oh I see, are you saying that Irish Mick Jameson was better than JJ Jeffries? Or that Sammy Schaff was on Jeffries level? This is a new departure.
You could also throw in Bob Fitzsimmons, Tommy Burns, Marvin Hart, & Jess Willard and Tyson would beat all seven of them one after the other all on the same night in a "Foreman vs Toronto Five" type match.
What makes people so certain Jeffries' chin is going to collapse under Tyson's punch? I am a long way from saying that couldn't happen, but Jeffries never budged an inch against any puncher he fought, & Tyson (admittedly, post-prime) showed an inability to move Holyfield --- a fighter with a great, but not unbreakable --- jaw with clean blows. I wouldn't suggest Tyson couldn't hurt Jeffries, but there is absolutely nothing to support the notion Tyson's punches would definitively level Jeffries.
Well of course, since Jeffries only fought about 20 times and was not beaten until his ill-adviced comeback we can't know for sure. However watching from tapes how poor Jeffries' techniques were and how clean he got hit, it is plausible to think that he could not do as well. For example Kevin Johnson has never been knocked down so he could be impervious to punishment, but if you had to make a pick between him and Tyson, most would lean towards Mike inside the distance I think
Lesser men than Jeffries absorbed enough punishment from Tyson without capitulating in two rounds. I shoudl think even if Tyson does get him out of there, it'd take more than that. I'm not convinced at all Tyson necessarily even wins the fight, much less decapitates him.
Sorry man, but from all the footage I've seen of Corbett, it left me with the impression Tyson would knock the utter shit out of him. He's pretty fast, I'll give him that, but he would be so ridiculously open I just can't see him surviving very long at all. Like it or not, but modern boxing is so far removed from those days it's crazy.
I'll give you that, that modern boxing is more advanced in it's way of training etc, but Corbett at the time was called the "Father of Modern Boxing" because of his scientific approach to fights and his cutting edge technique. Some said he changed pugilism from a brawl to an art form. I don't think he would have been as open as many believe and who's to say his style of fighting back then wouldn't of worked against Tyson.
Corbett was a pioneer all right but you have to understand where the technique were when he arrived. For example a left hook was his innovation (an almost modern one compared to the wild haymakers thrown in the past) as was using side to side movement. Even though Corbett deserves props for developing the sport, I do think Tyson could figure out these tactics
Yep, Corbett was an important cog in the development of the sport, but it's gone on way further than what he was doing at the time. It's like the first version of Windows, it was important for it's time, but it doesn't compare to Windows 7.
__________________ I think I already expressed my opinion of that match-up by including Jeffries in the Tyson vs Extreme Old Timers version of the Toronto Five. To be honest, I'd be more interested in seeing how most of these guys would do against Butterbean or maybe Tex Cobb rather than Tyson.
