Top guys going on to long and getting spanked

With Pac fighting Shane Moseley next month it got me thinking about fights that happen when one fighter is over the hill and the other is in his prime. Some ezample that spring to mind are Holmes vs Ali, Tyson vs Holmes, Calzaghe vs Hopkins/RJJ and Khan vs Barrera. IMO the results of these fights would have been reversed if both fighters were in their primes. Any more examples? Anyone think any of these fights would have been the same result if both fighters were at their peaks?

Lewis v Tyson for me

Mr Bounce wrote:Lewis v Tyson for me

IMO you could put all Tyson's defeat in this category.

We'd literally be here all week if we were to mention them all, as there's been an incredible amount of cases of a once-great fighter taking a shellacking at the tail end of their careers from a fighter who they once (probably) would have had the beating of.

As a ten year old, I remember a fat, old-looking and (literally) decades past his best Duran taking a pounding off William Joppy, which wasn't great to see. As much as I dislike the man and some of the blind fans he brings to the sport, seeing Tyson beaten by Williams and McBride between 2004 and 2005 wasn't much fun, and neither (I imagine) was it seeing Jack Johnson campaigning on all the way up until 1928, losing to many men who he'd have swatted with contempt twenty-odd years earlier.

Aaron Pryor, Wilfred Benitez, Alexis Arguello, Roy Jones Jr and countless others also spring to mind.

Agree with 88Chris that there are hundreds from which to choose.

A hugely significant one, though, would be Paul Pender's taking the middleweight crown from Robinson. It didn't do Robinson any harm, but Pender has never received his dues for being the excellent fighter he was because everybody knew that Sugar Ray was shot.

Pender was a very good craftsman. Perhaps not an ATG, but certainly deserving of more than being remembered as a mere footnote.

I think Morales is due to fall into that catagory soon enough. Not sure if Maidana has the skills to close him down effectively and attack him as Morales still possesses some of the old ring smarts, but if Morales DOES come through, what's next, one of the young hungry lions at LW/LWW or even WW?

Sorry Erik but I think you're in danger of getting Barrera'd.

BTW, don't want to dredge up THAT old argument again but I still see a case for Lewis beating Tyson

I think you picked a bad example with Calzaghe vs Hopkins. Calzaghe was arguably further past his best than Hopkins despite the age. Look at what Hopkins has done after that fight, you can't say he was completely shot when he is still arguably the best Light Heavyweight around.

Lewis would have beat Tyson at any stage of Tysons career

bellchees wrote:I think you picked a bad example with Calzaghe vs Hopkins. Calzaghe was arguably further past his best than Hopkins despite the age. Look at what Hopkins has done after that fight, you can't say he was completely shot when he is still arguably the best Light Heavyweight around.

JC had just come off one his best performances and victories over Kessler. It is probably a bad example because I always felt it was a bad decision I had BHOP winning the fight.

No1Jonesy wrote:Lewis would have beat Tyson at any stage of Tysons career

Really 88/89 Tyson?

HumanWindmill wrote:Agree with 88Chris that there are hundreds from which to choose.

A hugely significant one, though, would be Paul Pender's taking the middleweight crown from Robinson. It didn't do Robinson any harm, but Pender has never received his dues for being the excellent fighter he was because everybody knew that Sugar Ray was shot.

Pender was a very good craftsman. Perhaps not an ATG, but certainly deserving of more than being remembered as a mere footnote.

Interesting point about Pender there, Windy. Even allowing for Robinson's age it was still seen as one of the great upsets, although in hindsight maybe it shouldn't have been. In 1960 Pender was only just scraping in to the Middleweight world rankings, but that was mainly because his career (which had started with a twenty-odd fight unbeaten streak) had been badly disrupted due to persistent hand injuries, which limited his activity and reduced his once-considerable punching power.

As you alluded to, though, as the years went on he was forced to add extra craft and cannyness to his arsenal. His fights with Downes and Basilio showed what he could do. A late bloomer, but a quality fighter all the same and still quite good to watch even now.

prettyboy1304 wrote:

No1Jonesy wrote:Lewis would have beat Tyson at any stage of Tysons career

Really 88/89 Tyson?

Really... Lewis was too big, too powerful, too much of a jab and was not intimidated by him

I see it as younger inexperianced even though explosive Tyson getting jabbed, frustrated at not getting his left hook off and getting KO'd

prettyboy1304 wrote:

No1Jonesy wrote:Lewis would have beat Tyson at any stage of Tysons career

Really 88/89 Tyson?

Yeah really...even Lewis could have lived with Mike Tyson at his prime which, as you've already alluded to, only lasted 88 or 89 seconds!!!!!!!!!!!

Lewis had a tendancy to be lazy in the ring and alot of the times his jab was nothing more than a range finder. IMO Tyson would just have wore him down and won by late KO.

prettyboy1304 wrote:Lewis had a tendancy to be lazy in the ring and alot of the times his jab was nothing more than a range finder. IMO Tyson would just have wore him down and won by late KO.

Two issues with this. Lewis, generally speaking, had no such tendancy to be 'lazy' in the ring when against his biggest rivals / opponents, and when the pressure was on, which would be the case against Tyson. Another thing - Tyson to 'wear Lewis down?' I'd have thought that, given his poor stamina and his tendancy to get frustrated and go in to his shell when things weren't going his way, Tyson would be the worst possible candidate to wear any Heavyweight down. Wearing an opponent down was neither a strength or style of Tyson's.

Tyson would have needed to rely on getting Lewis out of there inside four or five rounds. After that point, Lewis soundly beats him all day long, for me.

prettyboy1304 wrote:Lewis had a tendancy to be lazy in the ring and alot of the times his jab was nothing more than a range finder. IMO Tyson would just have wore him down and won by late KO.

Again, if you use this "Fighter A at his very best vs Fighter B at his very best" there's plenty to suggest that Lewis keeps Tyson at range with the jab, lands enough straight rights/uppercuts to discourage him from coming in close and, when Tyson loses heart/runs out of ideas, Lewis takes him apart.

In that fight, it's either Tyson early or Lewis late. Either way, it doesn't go to the cards

88Chris05 wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:Agree with 88Chris that there are hundreds from which to choose.

A hugely significant one, though, would be Paul Pender's taking the middleweight crown from Robinson. It didn't do Robinson any harm, but Pender has never received his dues for being the excellent fighter he was because everybody knew that Sugar Ray was shot.

Pender was a very good craftsman. Perhaps not an ATG, but certainly deserving of more than being remembered as a mere footnote.

Interesting point about Pender there, Windy. Even allowing for Robinson's age it was still seen as one of the great upsets, although in hindsight maybe it shouldn't have been. In 1960 Pender was only just scraping in to the Middleweight world rankings, but that was mainly because his career (which had started with a twenty-odd fight unbeaten streak) had been badly disrupted due to persistent hand injuries, which limited his activity and reduced his once-considerable punching power.

As you alluded to, though, as the years went on he was forced to add extra craft and cannyness to his arsenal. His fights with Downes and Basilio showed what he could do. A late bloomer, but a quality fighter all the same and still quite good to watch even now.

I certainly enjoy watching him, Chris.

I have a few of his fights, including the ones against Robinson and Basilio, and while he doesn't exactly set the pulse rating he was certainly a very fine technician.

i think for 99% of fights that happen at the moment you could argue that one fighters is a) past there best or b) highly overmatched.

especially in the heavyweight division

prettyboy1304 wrote:Lewis had a tendancy to be lazy in the ring and alot of the times his jab was nothing more than a range finder. IMO Tyson would just have wore him down and won by late KO.

Echoing what Chris says - Tyson's style was never to wear an oponant out - and when was the last time Lewis was ever worn down?? There is no basis for that comment because there is no past to base it on

Lewis was never lazy with his higher profile fighters and even for a lot of the time against the contemporary fighters. I would say the only real time he was lazy was against Rahman and paid dearly for it and we all know what happened in the return!

As dave says this is a fight that will deffo not go to the scorecards and with both fighters at the top of their abilities - Tyson is getting nowhere near Lewis's chin

88Chris05 wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:Lewis had a tendancy to be lazy in the ring and alot of the times his jab was nothing more than a range finder. IMO Tyson would just have wore him down and won by late KO.

Two issues with this. Lewis, generally speaking, had no such tendancy to be 'lazy' in the ring when against his biggest rivals / opponents, and when the pressure was on, which would be the case against Tyson. Another thing - Tyson to 'wear Lewis down?' I'd have thought that, given his poor stamina and his tendancy to get frustrated and go in to his shell when things weren't going his way, Tyson would be the worst possible candidate to wear any Heavyweight down. Wearing an opponent down was neither a strength or style of Tyson's.

Tyson would have needed to rely on getting Lewis out of there inside four or five rounds. After that point, Lewis soundly beats him all day long, for me.

Tyson had stamina issues? He was still going strong against Smith and Tucker which went the distance.

Lewis' jab lacked snap. He had clumsy footword nd wouldn't get out of the way quick enough. Tyson for me within 8 rounds after Lewis taking a sustained beating.

azania wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:Lewis had a tendancy to be lazy in the ring and alot of the times his jab was nothing more than a range finder. IMO Tyson would just have wore him down and won by late KO.

Two issues with this. Lewis, generally speaking, had no such tendancy to be 'lazy' in the ring when against his biggest rivals / opponents, and when the pressure was on, which would be the case against Tyson. Another thing - Tyson to 'wear Lewis down?' I'd have thought that, given his poor stamina and his tendancy to get frustrated and go in to his shell when things weren't going his way, Tyson would be the worst possible candidate to wear any Heavyweight down. Wearing an opponent down was neither a strength or style of Tyson's.

Tyson would have needed to rely on getting Lewis out of there inside four or five rounds. After that point, Lewis soundly beats him all day long, for me.

Tyson had stamina issues? He was still going strong against Smith and Tucker which went the distance.

Lewis' jab lacked snap. He had clumsy footword nd wouldn't get out of the way quick enough. Tyson for me within 8 rounds after Lewis taking a sustained beating.

Yes, Tyson most certainly did have stamina issues, he himself has admitted this and partly attributed it to a lung condition which he has suffered with from a young age. Yes, Tyson was still there at the bitter end of the Tucker and Smith fights (although Smith hardly made him expand himself too much, did he?) but surely you can't deny that he looked nowhere near as dangerous in the last six rounds of those fights as he did in the first six? Similarly to Dempsey, Tyson was a fantastic four to six round fighter, but was rarely ever the same after that point. I maintain that his only hope would be to get Lewis out of there early as Lennox could be a slow fighter - there's no way on God's green earth that he gives Lewis a "sustained beating" throughout the duration of the fight.

IMO Lewis wouldn't have been able to cope with a relentless Tyson. Stamina issues are a myth he went the distance with Smith and Tucker and never tired out more than any other top fighter would.

azania

Just a quick question. Why does Tyson give Lewis a "sustained beating" when the latter was never on the wrong end of one?

Barring 2 howitzers he was never troubled for sustained periods of a fight. And don't mention his last fight, after your wittering about how Charles was past it then you can't then claim Lewis was in shape and motivated.

As Douglas' trainer said - "If Tyson wasn't in shape and motivated he wouldn't have gone 4 with the beating he took".

Simply too good for Tyson as he never had issues turning up for the big fights. And i find your view a bit contradictory that you knock Rocky and then seem to put Tyson on a pedestal when his prime "era" was arguably much, much weaker than Rocky's. But anyway

azania wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:Lewis had a tendancy to be lazy in the ring and alot of the times his jab was nothing more than a range finder. IMO Tyson would just have wore him down and won by late KO.

Two issues with this. Lewis, generally speaking, had no such tendancy to be 'lazy' in the ring when against his biggest rivals / opponents, and when the pressure was on, which would be the case against Tyson. Another thing - Tyson to 'wear Lewis down?' I'd have thought that, given his poor stamina and his tendancy to get frustrated and go in to his shell when things weren't going his way, Tyson would be the worst possible candidate to wear any Heavyweight down. Wearing an opponent down was neither a strength or style of Tyson's.

Tyson would have needed to rely on getting Lewis out of there inside four or five rounds. After that point, Lewis soundly beats him all day long, for me.

Tyson had stamina issues? He was still going strong against Smith and Tucker which went the distance.

Lewis' jab lacked snap. He had clumsy footword nd wouldn't get out of the way quick enough. Tyson for me within 8 rounds after Lewis taking a sustained beating.

Lewis taking a sustained beating? Are you for real here? But then again i suppose you are basing this on previous fi..... oh wait a minute!

The only way i see a prime tyson beating a prime lewis is connecting with a left hook but the only problem with this is we are using the condtition of prime for both fighters.... Lewis is too big, too powerful and a damn site too technical for a young/middle or old tyson

if any of the two is going to give a sustained beating it'd be Lewis giving one to Tyson from range with long right hands set up from the jab

coxy0001 wrote:azania

Just a quick question. Why does Tyson give Lewis a "sustained beating" when the latter was never on the wrong end of one?

Barring 2 howitzers he was never troubled for sustained periods of a fight. And don't mention his last fight, after your wittering about how Charles was past it then you can't then claim Lewis was in shape and motivated.

As Douglas' trainer said - "If Tyson wasn't in shape and motivated he wouldn't have gone 4 with the beating he took".

Simply too good for Tyson as he never had issues turning up for the big fights. And i find your view a bit contradictory that you knock Rocky and then seem to put Tyson on a pedestal when his prime "era" was arguably much, much weaker than Rocky's. But anyway

I see this fight as being similar to Tyson/Biggs fight. Also an aged and past it Hold gave Lewis fits for 12 rounds and Lewis squeaked a decision. That was a peak Lewis also.

I have always said that there are no such things as lucky punches, but those punches which caught Lewis, whether motivated or not in training, would have felled a horse. I dont judge Lewis on that.

I feel sorry for lewis in that he didn't have a challenger in their prime for his to be rested. His closest ran a mile from him (Bowe - who I believe would have beaten Lewis).

azania wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:azania

Just a quick question. Why does Tyson give Lewis a "sustained beating" when the latter was never on the wrong end of one?

Barring 2 howitzers he was never troubled for sustained periods of a fight. And don't mention his last fight, after your wittering about how Charles was past it then you can't then claim Lewis was in shape and motivated.

As Douglas' trainer said - "If Tyson wasn't in shape and motivated he wouldn't have gone 4 with the beating he took".

Simply too good for Tyson as he never had issues turning up for the big fights. And i find your view a bit contradictory that you knock Rocky and then seem to put Tyson on a pedestal when his prime "era" was arguably much, much weaker than Rocky's. But anyway

I see this fight as being similar to Tyson/Biggs fight. Also an aged and past it Hold gave Lewis fits for 12 rounds and Lewis squeaked a decision. That was a peak Lewis also.

I have always said that there are no such things as lucky punches, but those punches which caught Lewis, whether motivated or not in training, would have felled a horse. I dont judge Lewis on that.

I feel sorry for lewis in that he didn't have a challenger in their prime for his to be rested. His closest ran a mile from him (Bowe - who I believe would have beaten Lewis).

Styles make fights and Holy has never been a mug but lets not forget the daylight robery of the 1st fight and Lewis imo clearly won the 2nd

Bowe would never have beaten Lewis in a million year - not because he wasn't a skilled fighter but because he had already lost the fight in his mind! Lewis scared the hell out of Bowe and this showed not only in the bin dumping saga but in the confrontation out of the ring after Bowe just beat Holy and Lewis telling him he will knock him out.....

Lets also not forget about Don King paying Lewis to not fight Tyson... why do you think that was??

Lastly the Rahman fight was Lewis complacency but the Mcall fight I believe he should have been allowed to try and defend himself against the next attack after beating the count seeing has he was the champion which i believe he would have gone on his bike and saw the round out....

Don King payed Lewis not to fight Tyson because their was more money in an all American fight with Holyfield. King never cared about Tyson just used him as a circus act.

No1Jonesy wrote:

azania wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:azania

Just a quick question. Why does Tyson give Lewis a "sustained beating" when the latter was never on the wrong end of one?

Barring 2 howitzers he was never troubled for sustained periods of a fight. And don't mention his last fight, after your wittering about how Charles was past it then you can't then claim Lewis was in shape and motivated.

As Douglas' trainer said - "If Tyson wasn't in shape and motivated he wouldn't have gone 4 with the beating he took".

Simply too good for Tyson as he never had issues turning up for the big fights. And i find your view a bit contradictory that you knock Rocky and then seem to put Tyson on a pedestal when his prime "era" was arguably much, much weaker than Rocky's. But anyway

I see this fight as being similar to Tyson/Biggs fight. Also an aged and past it Hold gave Lewis fits for 12 rounds and Lewis squeaked a decision. That was a peak Lewis also.

I have always said that there are no such things as lucky punches, but those punches which caught Lewis, whether motivated or not in training, would have felled a horse. I dont judge Lewis on that.

I feel sorry for lewis in that he didn't have a challenger in their prime for his to be rested. His closest ran a mile from him (Bowe - who I believe would have beaten Lewis).

Styles make fights and Holy has never been a mug but lets not forget the daylight robery of the 1st fight and Lewis imo clearly won the 2nd

Bowe would never have beaten Lewis in a million year - not because he wasn't a skilled fighter but because he had already lost the fight in his mind! Lewis scared the hell out of Bowe and this showed not only in the bin dumping saga but in the confrontation out of the ring after Bowe just beat Holy and Lewis telling him he will knock him out.....

Lets also not forget about Don King paying Lewis to not fight Tyson... why do you think that was??

Lastly the Rahman fight was Lewis complacency but the Mcall fight I believe he should have been allowed to try and defend himself against the next attack after beating the count seeing has he was the champion which i believe he would have gone on his bike and saw the round out....

Oh the first fight was an absolute robbery. Lewis won by a country mile. You are right, styles make fights. And Lewis had the perfect jab for Tyson to evade. A jab without snap which was pawed and pushed out. I see Tyson getting underneath and throwing fast combos and punishing the body as he did against Biggs.

As for Bowe, if only he believed in himself a little more. He had it all imo. Great inside fighter (something which lewis could not do) and a better jab with faster hands. Lacked the extra factor which all great champions have...absolute self belief.

King gave Lewis step aside money to make the Holy/Tyson fight which was a bigger fight at the time. Nothing about ducking there. Strickly business.

Manny Steward said shortly after that fight that in no way would Lewis have beaten McCall on that night. Mainly because of his lack of a jab. He maintained that stance even after becoming Lewis's trainer.

Sugar Ray Leonard and his ego allowed for loses over inferior fighters like Hector Camacho and Terry Norris. Neither would have lived with him in his prime.

Tyson didn't had stamina issues?!?!?!?

Seriously Az, how are you coming to these conclusions? Its similar to your "Vitali would be KOd by Ibeabuchi" line. A man who went life/death with Tua and then beat Byrd - to stop a guy who has never even been put on the floor. Riight.

Tyson is your typical punching HW. In a similar fashion to a young George Foreman - he tired late in a fight and could be taken out.

There is a reason why the Tyson camp PAID George Foreman not to fight him. George didn't have a bad chin, would have weathered Tyson's bombs - and detonated some shots of his own. When he wasn't backed down - he would have stopped Tyson late. Tyson's team was genuinely worried about this prospect and so paid Foreman's camp off.

And that was the "peak" Tyson. Maybe, as those with sense have always said - his peak was too short and he wasn't that good.

None of the challengers he beat hold a candle to Marciano - nor do they last long. Oh, and Marciano beats Douglas from pillar to post.