Plays out with Ibeabuchi --- completely unproven, & totally over-rated --- laid prone onto a stretcher. The most over-estimated, over-hyped fighter of his generation, without a shred of exaggeration.
Exactly. His only good win was Byrd. Tua was a slug fest that could have went either way. Hell David Izon had a similar slug fest with Tua that was on even terms until he got caught in the final round. Ike is a MYTH. That's all he is. Tyson is a proven great. Ike is a myth. Result ? Mike KO 3. Ike is very easy to hit.
If Tony Tucker could win four rounds against Tyson with a broken hand, I don't think it is far-fetched to say Ike could make it an even fight. Sure, Ike was unproven, but it was never proven that he could be knocked out in three rounds either
Ike never needed to clinch. Maybe he could if it was really needed. If he could, his strength would be a real problem for Tyson, who was always easy to handle in clinches
No he doesn't. Just because he is relatively unproven, and often overhyped, doesn't automatically make him a bum! That's just nonsense thinking. Ike was undefeated. Went to war with Tua for 12 rounds..proving both his chin and his stamina. He stopped Chris Byrd which isn't an easy thing to do (Vitali couldn't and Wlad needed two attempts). These are the facts. Based upon those facts..Tyson doesn't win easily...
Tyson hits him with an elbow, and then Ike snaps, fight is ruled a no-contest, and then we have another Bowe-Golota I
While I don't think that Ike was the "uncrowned champion" that many Lewis haters would have us believe, I do think he is a better and more dangerous fighter than Tyrell Biggs, Bonecrusher Smith or the washed-up Pinklon Thomas that Tyson faced in 1987. Tony Tucker was a good fighter, but it's hard to make a comparison between him and Ike because they were nothing alike. I would rate them about the same as fighters, but Tucker was a boxer and Ike was a brawler. And before anyone says "so was Briggs", it doesn't matter because Briggs was an overhyped amateur who never accomplished anything as a Pro. I see it as similar to Tyson-Ruddock. Ike is game and tough and lands his share of punches, but Tyson's handspeed and better skills give him the advantage in many of the rounds. Tua wasn't as good as a prime Tyson, but he could punch and Ike took plenty of Tua's punches in their fight. As of 1987, Tyson had not faced a big & strong opponent who could punch, fight at a fast pace and take a punch the way Ike did. I think Tyson wins, but if he doesn't get Ike out of there by round 6, it's probably going the distance with Ike losing a clear decision. Maybe something like 8-4 in rounds.
Ike only had to worry about Tua's hook though. Against Mike, he'd have to worry about every single punch in the book, ESPECIALLY the right uppercut. Plus... Mike's punches would be hitting Ike at much higher velocity then Tua's shots, AND in combination. And lastly... its a big misconception that Ike couldnt be hurt, cause Tua CLEARLY had him hurt in the 11th. I think its a very good chance of Mike stopping him. Generally you wont last the distance with a prime Tyson unless your doing a good deal of holding. Ike never struck me as the type of guy who do ANY holding. He'd just go out there and trade with Mike w/little regard for defense, and thats bascially suicide for any heavyweight in history except for a prime Foreman.
I dont know about that Ibeabuchi's annihlation of Byrd and his slugfest with Tua easily trumps anything on Briggs' resume Still, I think Tyson wins this with his handspeed and I like his uppercut against Ibeabuchi
You could have just named the thread "Let's keep our belief to the mythical prime Tyson alive please"
It does, yes --- but in no way do those fights even get near to justifying the widespread & lasting belief in this fella. I can honestly say I cannot come up with a more over-rated fighter --- period, at any point in history. Someone who receives so many accolades for so little accomplished.
Tyson no later than 6. Ike was all too willing to engage and that's never good against young Mike. X2 on Ike being disgracefully overrated also. I'm waiting for Valero to get the same treatment.
I like Ike, seemingly more than some here, I think there are good fighters he'd have a decent chance against. Ibeabuchi-Bowe for instance would be a hell of a war. Ike-Holyfield would have been worth seeing. But, for all the reasons others have mentioned, not a prime Tyson. Just too gung ho and willing to trade.
Pretty much agree with this. The problem I see for Ike though is that as well as being an inch or two shorter than Razor he fought MUCH shorter style wise and had 6" less reach. He'd be much more readily hittable for Mike. This would be more similar to the Tubbs fight I think, though it'd be harder for Mike.
Ike-Bowe would be a war, but theres no way I could imagine Ike beating the 92 Bowe either. Riddick would have killed him with uppercuts.
The Tubbs fight? I don't see that at all. Tubbs was a 6'3" slick boxer type with average power, he was similar to the likes of Greg Page and/Quick Tills. He doesn't resemble Ike even a little. I'm not saying that Ike is identical to Ruddock, but I see the fight unfolding and being as far more similar to Tyson-Ruddock than Tyson-Tubbs.
Nah. Ike may be overrated by some, but he proved himself to be legit by beating Tua and Byrd. I remember the media trying to hype Tyson-Briggs as an Ali-Frazier for the 80's, but I kept thinking poor Briggs (not even a poor man's Ali) was gonna get beaten to a pulp by Tyson.
I(and most others) had him losing the Tua fight, and Byrd is honestly one of the most overrated heavyweights of all time. Chris whole claim to fame was Vitali's shoulder giving out. And stop calling him BRIGGS, your confusing me, making it seem as if Mike fought that bum with dread locks. You know damn well the mans name was BIGGS.
He proved himself legitimate, in the context of a rising fighter en route to a title shot. He did not, IMO, prove himself legitimate, in the context of being rabidly discussed in Boxing circles everywhere as one of the great, "What Ifs?" more than ten years on. This is where I find him enormously over-sold. In the context of Ibeabuchi, Byrd & Tua are often spoke of as though they were Frazier & Ali.
Well Tubbs (who didn't look 6'3 to me) was a guy who chose to trade in the pocket for stretches and not clinch much & who also had good punch variety and offensive skill. I stand by my ostensibly silly comparison. It would look more like stretches of the Tubbs fight than the Ruddock fight, IMO.
