Who is a better boxer, Muhammad Ali or Mike Tyson?

Answer 1

You can't compare the two. Tyson doesn't hold a candle.

Answer 2

Vinny ~
In my opinion, you wrote "Boxer" and we all know that Ali was a pure boxer and Tyson was a pure puncher. Ali is the standard by which all boxers are judged and the flip side to that is all punchers are judged by Tyson's punching power, the biggest problem with this is with the exception of Sugar Ray Robinson there was no other boxer close to being a pure boxer than Ali, meanwhile there are plenty of Heavyweight punchers that were equal if not better than Tyson in the punching department.
Every fighter after 1969 compared their boxing skills with Ali as far as speed and grace in the ring, the brawler is the last guy you wanted to be known as. Ray Leonard, Billy Costello, Floyd Mayweather, Zab Judah, Chris Byrd and countless others tried to imitate Ali's style and grace some came close and there are some that are better than most but there was/is only one Ali
Jack Dempsey, Sonny Liston, Ernie Shavers, George Foreman this list goes on and on and you can compare each one of the Heavyweights to a young Mike Tyson and in some respects one of those fighters might be considered a harder puncher than Tyson.
Ali was by far the better boxer of the two, light-years apart.
Thanks for the question Vinny.

Answer 3

Muhammad Ali for sure, Pound for pound, Skill, Anything else that makes a boxer, Tyson is just insane

Answer 4

Muhammad Ali.

Think about it. Muhammad Ali dominated the heavyweight division from 1964-1967. The only thing that stopped him from dominating it longer was his unjust suspension for refusing to be drafted into the U.S. Army. When he came back, he wasnt the same and it seemed that everyone else caught up with him as far as speed and talent. But he still was a top tier fighter from 1970 -1978 and in the process he won the title twice during that time.

Mike Tyson dominated the heavyweight division from 1986-1989. He was the most feared heavyweight ever during that span. However, after Buster Douglas beat him, he wasnt the same. The last top flight fighter he beat was Razor Ruddock in March & June of 1991. After that, who did he fight? An old Frank Bruno? Bruce Seldon? Frans Botha? Hell even Evander Holyfield was considered a shot fighter when him and Tyson fought and Tyson was beaten handily in their first fight and was on his way to getting KO'd in their second fight.

Bottom Line...Ali was far better!!!!

Answer 5

Ali is the better boxer, Tyson is the better fighter

Answer 6

Hate to disagree with all of you here...but here's my view. Ali is a very skilled fighter and was very quick so he's a better boxer. Mike is mostly a slugger who comes out strong the first few rounds and trys to knock out the other guy. As to who would win I don't know but if it went more than a few rounds I think Mike could be in trouble.

Answer 7

The better boxer is Ali...It's not even close...

If we want the sport to move past the 70's and 80's and up to the year 2006, we need to stop bringing these guys up 12-times a week in hypothetical scenarios...

Answer 8

I'm going to piss a lot of people off with this.

Muhammad Ali is the greatest heavyweight champ that ever lived. That is primarily because of his supernatural, God-given talent. Very few fighters are born with that level of innate talent (Roy Jones is another), that enables them to get away with things like dropping their hands or punching going backwards, things that any pure boxer would never do.

Mike Tyson was by far the more superior boxer, in that the skills that propelled him to greatness in his prime, were right out of a textbook and forged through thousands of hours of training.

Answer 9

your question is somewhat vague, for me, as tyson was not a pure boxer. ali was more a boxer, tyson was more a puncher. i agree w/one of you that tyson's skills were honed in the ring over thousands of hours of training. ali, who skills developed from his natural tendencies, was no classically styled boxer either. remember, most wrote him off when he first showed up because of his then unothordox style. in those days, you were supposed to move side to side...not backwards, like ali did. the experts cautioned that he would be seriously hurt leaning away from punches like he did. they would say, "...if a freight train is coming at you down the track, don't move backwards, step to the side and off the track..." his unique and God-given talent was so revolutionary that, after him, so many fighters tried to copy his style. i think most failed miserably in attempting to do so. tyson had a rather effective jab, in his prime, and was a far more complete fighter then. unfortunately, like foreman before him, he depended on the power too much and his skills went to crap. a shame bec he was quite an interesting fighter and really knew how to turn a punch and maximize his power, and put combinations together.

at any rate if forced to answer your question, as to who was the better "boxer"...gotta be ali, he revolutionized the sport, got better and smarter w/age, and no one's ever been able to copy his style effectively since or have the impact he did. tyson, got worse or, rather, more one-dimensional as he got older. i love them both and i consider them, arguably, the two best heavyweights of all time, but ali just towers over mike in so many ways that comparisons really aren't fair.

Answer 10

Mike Tyson for sure he would pummel Muhammad Ali because he punches harder and has the downhill advantage seeing how 'the greatest' is in a wheel chair. Maybe the shaking would throw iron mike off though.

Answer 11

Ali