Alright Planeteers, I've been arguing on message boards with people about this off and on for a couple years now and I want to get CP's input on it. The question is this: Who would win in a fight between Bruce Lee and Mike Tyson in his prime? Let's hear it! [Reply]
Originally Posted by Saul Good:
That's actually a very good point. What you're basically saying is that it isn't necessarily true that JKD is superior to boxing...and that's absolutely true. Ultimately, it comes down to who is the better fighter.
To say that Bruce Lee, an actor who never actually completed in legitimate fights, is a better fighter than Mike Tyson is ridiculous. Jean Claude Van Damme got knocked out by a strip club bouncer. Was that bouncer some world class grappler, or did he just punch JCVD in the face?
But do you see the problem with that example? JCVD practiced martial arts. But he wasn't good at it, let alone a master of it.
Bruce Lee was a master at least at the understanding of martial arts. He demonstrated time and time again he knew how to apply those techniques. And he showed that he had exceptional speed and power for his size. On paper, he had an intriguing skill set for an MMA fight. Again, I agree with your skepticism that it translates into the ring. But can we stop comparing him to guys who weren't even good on paper? [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Is this serious? Are you seriously trying to doubt that Bruce Lee wasn't a master of martial arts? I get if you think that wouldn't translate to the ring. But the guy knew his shit. That's not even a question.
He was master, but we've never seen him go against someone that actually wants to beat him. He's never had to apply his expertise in live match.
There's some guys that can make 3 pointers all day and night. That doesn't mean that they can translate that to a real NBA game. Posted via Mobile Device [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
He was master, but we've never seen him go against someone that actually wants to beat him. He's never had to apply his expertise in live match.
There's some guys that can make 3 pointers all day and night. That doesn't mean that they can translate that to a real NBA game. Posted via Mobile Device
That is an entirely different argument. I've said all along it's fair to question if his skills translate into the ring. But again, he walks into that ring with an impressive amount of knowledge, training, and athletic ability. He wasn't just some ordinary martial arts guy. On paper, it was exceptional. I'm not saying that beats Tyson. I'm saying it's a huge understatement to reduce Lee down the way he is by his critics. [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
He was master, but we've never seen him go against someone that actually wants to beat him. He's never had to apply his expertise in live match.
There's some guys that can make 3 pointers all day and night. That doesn't mean that they can translate that to a real NBA game. Posted via Mobile Device
People in that time didn't generally walk around picking fights with those known to be well versed in the martial arts either. The MMA didn't exist then and the only potential equal is if the Kumite actually existed at that time as well. That, of course, depends on whether or not you want to believe Frank Dux.
Why not pit Tyson against any Shaolin monk? After all, they are just weak little men Tyson could walk up to and pick a fight with, knock them out, and walk away. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
But do you see the problem with that example? JCVD practiced martial arts. But he wasn't good at it, let alone a master of it.
Bruce Lee was a master at least at the understanding of martial arts. He demonstrated time and time again he knew how to apply those techniques. And he showed that he had exceptional speed and power for his size. On paper, he had an intriguing skill set for an MMA fight. Again, I agree with your skepticism that it translates into the ring. But can we stop comparing him to guys who weren't even good on paper?
The fuck? Jcvd was 19-1 as a professional kickboxer 18 ko, 48-4 as an amateur
He wouldn't stand a chance in hell vs tyson [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Or the fact that Bruce Lee proved time and time again that he really, really knew his shit. And demonstrated over and over again that he could do that shit. And that he could do it very fast and with a lot of power.
I get people's love for Tyson. Because he was an excellent boxer. But don't understand the reaction of reducing Bruce Lee to some kind of Hollywood actor, as if he's on the same playing field as Jackie Chan or Dolph Lundgren.
Bruce Lee was a martial arts actor in an age before much of the martial arts mysticism had been exposed as impractical and ineffective in real cross disciplinary fighting. Mike Tyson in his prime was an unbeatable boxer. It wasn't BJJ, but it's still a real fighting discipline and would have 60 lbs on him. Nobody hit as hard as fast and hard as Tyson when he was on top, nobody.
Originally Posted by Demonpenz:
Tyson would have destroyed all. Bruce Lee was a cute little story, but come on. it's Mike ****ing Tyson.
Exactly. It's Mike Fucking Tyson. The guy Buster Douglas punked. They guy Holyfield was beating so bad, Tyson went thug rogue and bit Holyfield's ear off...
Bruce Lee would rip Tyson's eyes out and shove them up his stupid Fucking ass. [Reply]