As far as being live from the opening bell, Tyson was as dangerous as anyone. Whether anything as subjective as "most dangerous" can be put in any kind of order is questionable. You can argue about who was better between Tyson and Dempsey. Who was actually more dangerous isn't really worth debating, IMO.
Depends on how you define "dangerous".....historically, anyone with one-punch KO power was considered dangerous regardless of what else they did or didn't bring to the table.
Offensively, Tyson is just about as dangerous as anyone. However, I tend to look at it this way. Of the truly dangerous Heavies at the elite, all-time level, the most dangerous one has to be the one whose weapons & advances are the most difficult to blunt & neutralise. Is that Tyson? I don't believe so, no.
I think Tyson and Dempsey were the two msot dangerous. By most dangerous, it doesn't mean they can beat anyone, but they boith had an unnatural aggression and whirlwind attack. They were fast, mean, STRONG. They were capable of causing the greatest bodily harm. Ali would probably beat both, but he wasn't dangerous in the sense that he had fighters cowering in fear and acknowledgement of their defeat at the opening bell. One punch knockout artists like Demspey and Tyson, and they fast and aggressive nes are the most dangerous because they can kill you the fastest and with the slightest opening..
Liston and Foreman deserve consideration since both could KO you without you getting close enough to land anything of your own.....and of course both scared their opponents ****less.
Comment