Thomas wasnt a bad fighter, Dundee even says how good a fighter he was and i think he knows something about good fighters! He done well Against Holyfield and Bowe beat witherspoon. Berbicks record of 50-11 is respectable only being knocked out twice once to tyson. He may not have been the best but there were worse. He was a decent fighter. Smith ill give it too you wasnt a great fighter, but he used a tactic against mike which ws just to survive he didnt wanna fight. Apart from him mike beat the other guys in tremendous fashion..so even if they are bad in ur opinion Tyson made then look even worse, so he cant be blamed for that. As for tucker winning, i have to disagree tyson easily won on the score card..: Julio Roldan (118-113), Phil Newman (119-111), Bill Graham (117-112)

Don't get me wrong, I don't BLAME Mike for the quality of his opposition: He could only fight who was there. What I AM saying is the quality of his opposition HAS to temper any evaluation of his abilities as a fighter. I agree Thomas was a damn good fighter just as I do Bruno. The problem is, at the time he faced Tyson Thomas was going in and out of rehab and I don't believe he could fight anywhere near his peak abilities. I wasn't referring to the score cards where Tucker was concerned I was referring tp the fact he broke his hand in the second round and was a one-handed fighter thereafter. My belief is if he HADN'T broken his hand he may very well have beaten Tyson.

Ah yes Berbick. Only being knocked out twice means he had a pretty good chin not that he was a pretty good fighter. People point to his performance against Larry Holmes as evidence Trevor could fight. The problem with that is at that point in his career Holmes was coming in undertrained and out of shape. Check out the Carl Williams fight or better yet the first Spinks fight. Doing a decent job against an opponent who's undertrained and unmotivated doesn't really say anything about how good YOU are.

As for the dude who's downing Bruno.....you're sounding like the typical American boxing fan who only knows Bruno from his KO losses to Tyson. Why don't actually WATCH some of Bruno's fights besides the Tyson ones? Hmmm?

Poet

Tyson's opposition wasnt all that bad,he just made them look bad. When the Bulls went 72-10 ppl said they didnt really face ppl that were good that year. When a team beats another team or when a fighter beats another fighter pretty bad,it always gets questioned.

Like I stated about Tyson,if you beat most of your opponents one sided,its automatically a bum.When he destroyed Spinks in 91 seconds,ppl tended to say he fought a blown up heavyweight.Stop me if Im wrong,but isnt someone that weighs around 210lb(I think Spinks weight for the fight) and Tyson around 217lbs,then isnt that about equal weight during fight time? They're so many things ppl try to discredit Tyson for.It seems as if destroying your opponents automatically makes them not too good.

When someone clears up the competition, it is always questioned look at tyson Marciano, Prince Naseem, Jones Jr, in some cases its true. But tyson may have fought some bad fighters but he finised them off easily so that shows at least he was a good fighter. I guess Knocking out Spinks, Berbick and Holmes shows how powerfull and accurate tyson was with his punches. As for Bruno he was a good fighter as you said and i totally agree so what does that make tyson wen he beat him twice and convincingly and more easily then Lewis?

When someone clears up the competition, it is always questioned look at tyson Marciano, Prince Naseem, Jones Jr, in some cases its true. But tyson may have fought some bad fighters but he finised them off easily so that shows at least he was a good fighter. I guess Knocking out Spinks, Berbick and Holmes shows how powerfull and accurate tyson was with his punches. As for Bruno he was a good fighter as you said and i totally agree so what does that make tyson wen he beat him twice and convincingly and more easily then Lewis?

Good point but that don't automatically make Tyson better than Lewis. Styles make fights. Tyson struggled with Ruddock, Lewis blew him away. Plus Bruno was scared to death going into both fights with Tyson he was never gonna win.

I was simply saying that Bruno was a decent fighter as lewis another great struggeld with him. But i dnt agree with Bruno being scared of tyson

I was simply saying that Bruno was a decent fighter as lewis another great struggeld with him. But i dnt agree with Bruno being scared of tyson

I thought he looked scared personally. Bruno was decent and if hed trained different and not used the weights he would have been a lot better. Hed have been quicker of hand and foot, maybe power would have increased because of the added speed. Stamina would have been a lot better. I think Bruno had a rock chin he always got stopped on his feet and every time was due to tiredness.

Well on the second tyson fight he was basically down..or on his way down he was falling.. and he was KOd against smith if i remember correctly..good fighter im a big fan cose his a British underdog lol. But i dont think he was scared he went toe to toe, he didnt go down like Seldon!

The Greatest fighter of all time.

It's quite a question isnt it? It's also an opinion question.


The topic of this thread was "Prime Tyson could have been the best ever??".


I say he is "the best ever."

You could call me a "Tyson fanatic." But please call me a "Boxing Fanatic", cause I can't wait for Taylor vs. Pavlik tomorrow. And I can't wait to see who Wladimir Klitschko fights next. I can't wait until Mayweather vs. Hatton.

I wouldnt even know who any of the fighters where if if wasnt for "Iron" Mike.


Thank you Mike for giving me boxing, the greatest sport on earth.

Eh, glass jaw Lewis get's knocked out. it would have taken lewis atleast the same 8 rounds that he needed to take out post-prime Tyson to try to take out Prime Tyson. His chin is not going to survive the Prime-Tyson onslaught for that long, it's common sense. Ripping shots to the body, ripping shots to the head. He also murders any version of that bear George Foreman more easily that lennox

Liston would have a very good chance of taking him out and Ali definately would have (By decision)..

The Greatest fighter of all time.

It's quite a question isnt it? It's also an opinion question.


The topic of this thread was "Prime Tyson could have been the best ever??".


I say he is "the best ever."

You could call me a "Tyson fanatic." But please call me a "Boxing Fanatic", cause I can't wait for Taylor vs. Pavlik tomorrow. And I can't wait to see who Wladimir Klitschko fights next. I can't wait until Mayweather vs. Hatton.

I wouldnt even know who any of the fighters where if if wasnt for "Iron" Mike.


Thank you Mike for giving me boxing, the greatest sport on earth.

Leaving aside you're belief in Tyson as the best ever (which I think by any OBJECTIVE standard is incorrect) I have to commend you on your loyalty to the fighter who got you into the sport. With the exception of the two fighters who trancended the sport, no one fighter is bigger than the sport itself. Creating a BOXING fan is the greatest gift a fighter can give his fan. You clearly recognize the debt of gratitude you have for Tyson making you a boxing fan and that's great! For me it was Ali then Holmes sealed the deal. For others of my generation it was Duran that tuned them into the sport. Maybe it will be Sam Peter that does it for this generation. Who knows?

Poet

"Whatever excuses will be made for Bowe, he looked good in the second fight. Again, I feel like you have been mislead, because Bowe was looking sloppy and worse than before because of Holyfield's strategy as well."

No doubt. Holyfield was very sharp in the fight. But it is difficult to get past the fact that Bowe went from a busy accurate combination puncher to a sloppy one punch at a time lead foot. Bowe also stupidly burned himself out in the first round, trying for a quick knockout for some illogical reason.

"A victory for Bowe, that's what(look at how close the second fight was).
This is the type of wreckless slugging behavior i'm talking about. It would cost Evander fights. "

As far as the fight first: the most damaging tide turning punches from Bowe came in Round 7, 8 and 9 when he was catching Holyfield with the big straight right before he could get in his range; this is what ****ed his left eye up and why he quit working the jab effectively. I won't say Holyfield was being a wreckless brawler, but he wasn't as busy as he should have been when he was trying make his moves inside. Hell, the only real inside back and forth exchanges were dominated by him in the early rounds and did the most damage to Bowe. Obviously, Bowe was slower than owl **** in the second fight and he couldn't catch Evander coming or going most of the time.

"Tyson was never in serious danger of losing because he knew he could beat him, and had the the intense drive to do so(Something he lacked after prison). And lets see here, Tyson took head snapping left hooks and Smashes from a tall, very powerful 230-240 pound big man for nearly 20 rounds. Yet some people still think Holyfield would knock Tyson the **** out. Makes no sence."

I must disagree again. Tyson had a quite a few scary moments in those fights and with the low blows mounting he stood a good chance of even losing the second fight on points or even dq. Again, I'm not sure if Holyfield would knock him out but he is certainly a busier, sharper combination puncher than Ruddock. And while you don't believe Holyfield used the jab and movement enough, Ruddock had no jab, hand speed, and little effective movement.

"And what I meant was: Just because Tyson fought one way against a tall powerful slugger, wouldn't mean he would be fighting the exact replica way against a skilled blown up Cruiserweight. But yes, once Evander gets cheeky and starts trading with Tyson, a couple of uppercuts to the body and head would make him think twice for a while until the fight goes on, when Evander keeps making the same mistake paying for it."

I can't see Evander making the same mistake over and over again, that is not Evander at even his worst. He didn't do that against Cooper nor did he really do it against Bowe in the first fight. I also don't think Holyfield would have brawled on the inside with Mike at any stage of his career, he would be tieing him up like everybody else did; regradless of what he did against Bowe or Cooper.

"And the kind of finisher a prime Tyson was, It wouldn't be looking good for Holyfield. In the meanwhile Holyfield would win most rounds."

The Tyson of the Ruddock fights wasn't that great of finisher.

And you are wrong that 96 Tyson had fine stamina. He looked pathetic. He was gassed early in the fight.[/QUOTE]

I don't see any evidence of him being gassed. Tyson was coming forward and swinging all night, despite eating tons of punches and bullied in the grapple.

Look, I understand the logic behind your argument but it boils down to this: You see Tyson battling it out against a strong tough fighter in Ruddock while I see Tyson struggling with a guy who history has revealed to be a hard puncher and nothing more. And I don't think I'll ever see the wreckless brawler in Evander that you do nor do I believe he would trade with Tyson at any point in his career; regardless of how he performed against anybody else. I mean a healthly Evander had problems with Bobby Czyz before the Tyson fight IIRC.

Don't get me wrong, I don't BLAME Mike for the quality of his opposition: He could only fight who was there. What I AM saying is the quality of his opposition HAS to temper any evaluation of his abilities as a fighter. I agree Thomas was a damn good fighter just as I do Bruno. The problem is, at the time he faced Tyson Thomas was going in and out of rehab and I don't believe he could fight anywhere near his peak abilities. I wasn't referring to the score cards where Tucker was concerned I was referring tp the fact he broke his hand in the second round and was a one-handed fighter thereafter. My belief is if he HADN'T broken his hand he may very well have beaten Tyson.

Ah yes Berbick. Only being knocked out twice means he had a pretty good chin not that he was a pretty good fighter. People point to his performance against Larry Holmes as evidence Trevor could fight. The problem with that is at that point in his career Holmes was coming in undertrained and out of shape. Check out the Carl Williams fight or better yet the first Spinks fight. Doing a decent job against an opponent who's undertrained and unmotivated doesn't really say anything about how good YOU are.

As for the dude who's downing Bruno.....you're sounding like the typical American boxing fan who only knows Bruno from his KO losses to Tyson. Why don't actually WATCH some of Bruno's fights besides the Tyson ones? Hmmm?

Poet

If you're referring to me as that dude then it won't be the only thing that you've got wrong on this thread because i'm British, and i'm not trying to claim that Bruno is a bad fighter... Again, i was interested in how you would compare Big Frank to Trevor Berbick. I have a decent knowledge of Bruno, and do have most of his career...Therefore, i have seen more than just the Tyson fights. My opinion is that Bruno failed against quality opposition.
The Jumbo Cummings fight is a particular favourite. (Not that i rate Cummings as quality opposition). Bruno did well to get through that.

In future mate, PM me before making assumptions. This way i could have confirmed my Nationality, and given you my knowledge of Frank Bruno.

Leaving aside you're belief in Tyson as the best ever (which I think by any OBJECTIVE standard is incorrect) I have to commend you on your loyalty to the fighter who got you into the sport. With the exception of the two fighters who trancended the sport, no one fighter is bigger than the sport itself. Creating a BOXING fan is the greatest gift a fighter can give his fan. You clearly recognize the debt of gratitude you have for Tyson making you a boxing fan and that's great! For me it was Ali then Holmes sealed the deal. For others of my generation it was Duran that tuned them into the sport. Maybe it will be Sam Peter that does it for this generation. Who knows?

Poet


The funny thing is that I never saw Tyson fight a live fight. I became a fan in November 2005 when I saw his fights from the 80's on ESPN classic.

My friend said I jumped on the Tyson bandwagon 20 years too late. LOL!

If Mike Tyson had done what Cus D'Amato had taught him to do, it is unlikely he would have ever lost a fight. Would that have made him the greatest? :thinking:

Hi everyone this is my first post. I was watching old Tyson tapes and i couldnt help but think to myself what would have happened if Cus never died, and rooney stayed as tysons trainer. It seemed that after rooney left tyson stoped training, thought he was unbeatable, partied way too much, and stop being the scientific fighter he once was. I was wondering if cus never died would mike tyson have gone down in history as the greatest heavyweight ever?? It seemed cus was the only one who could completely contol mike. If rooney stayed with tyson the only fighters that would have a chance in my opinion would have been Holyfeild or the late Foreman, maybe Riddock bowe, or Lennox Lewis?? Thoughts???

al though i'm from the old school, i do believe tyson in his prime would have beaten any heavyweight of any era. why do i believe this? not because of his power (there were plenty of power hitters)and not because of his speed(there were a few speedsters too) to me it was because for fighter that fought the "slugger" style, in his prime, tyson was extremely difficult to hit with a solid punch. that, along with his speed and power, to me, made him unbeatable. and people don't fool yourseleves, holyfield and lewis did not fight a prime mike tyson

al though i'm from the old school, i do believe tyson in his prime would have beaten any heavyweight of any era. why do i believe this? not because of his power (there were plenty of power hitters)and not because of his speed(there were a few speedsters too) to me it was because for fighter that fought the "slugger" style, in his prime, tyson was extremely difficult to hit with a solid punch. that, along with his speed and power, to me, made him unbeatable. and people don't fool yourseleves, holyfield and lewis did not fight a prime mike tyson

Don't fool yourself, Tyson didn't fight a "prime" Holyfield either. No he wasn't unbeatable, unless you're one these Tyson fans who try and pretend the Douglas fight never happend. As for Tyson's "great" defense it was a myth: His offense was his defence. Kind of hard to land a solid punch when you're a tomato can running for your fool life.

Poet

As for Tyson's "great" defense it was a myth: His offense was his defence. Kind of hard to land a solid punch when you're a tomato can running for your fool life.

Poet


That's pretty much true. But you gotta admit, he could slip punches with the bob and weave defense. Then land a big counter shot. He did that in several fights. He also had a decent chin which aided him.

That's pretty much true. But you gotta admit, he could slip punches with the bob and weave defense. Then land a big counter shot. He did that in several fights. He also had a decent chin which aided him.

So could Frazier. You beat that by having a good jab. There just weren't quality jabbers in the division at the time Tyson was in his prime. Holmes made Tyson look foolish with his jab, but at 38 and over-the-hill he couldn't keep it up for more than a few seconds. In his prime Holmes could throw that jab all night long. The next time Tyson saw a jab like that was against Douglas. At lot of people put his vulnerability in that fight to the fact that he wasn't bobbing and weaving. Watch the first two rounds though, Tyson TRIED to bob and weave and Douglas wouldn't let him. Douglas would hammer Tyson with the jab everytime he tried to bob and weave and after a couple of rounds of that he gave it up. That's when Douglas started hitting him with lead rights.

Poet

So could Frazier. You beat that by having a good jab. There just weren't quality jabbers in the division at the time Tyson was in his prime. Holmes made Tyson look foolish with his jab, but at 38 and over-the-hill he couldn't keep it up for more than a few seconds. In his prime Holmes could throw that jab all night long. The next time Tyson saw a jab like that was against Douglas. At lot of people put his vulnerability in that fight to the fact that he wasn't bobbing and weaving. Watch the first two rounds though, Tyson TRIED to bob and weave and Douglas wouldn't let him. Douglas would hammer Tyson with the jab everytime he tried to bob and weave and after a couple of rounds of that he gave it up. That's when Douglas started hitting him with lead rights.

Poet


Id like to hear your opinion Poet. Lets say Mike came into the Douglas fight with Rooney, and say Mike had trained hard like he did between 85'-88'. Do you think the outcome would have been different?

Id like to hear your opinion Poet. Lets say Mike came into the Douglas fight with Rooney, and say Mike had trained hard like he did between 85'-88'. Do you think the outcome would have been different?

Yes I do think it would be different. That being said I don't know nessacarily that he would have won the fight. Douglas fought the fight of his life that night and would have been tough to beat for anyone. The difference, I think, is that the fight wouldn't be a one-sided affair like it actually was. Instead I see a nip and tuck fight that goes to the cards with the 12th. round deciding things. All in all I think it would have made for a terrific fight.

Poet

All in all I think it would have made for a terrific fight.

Poet


no dought..

I think that if tyson trained with rooney for the douglas fight it would have gone the limit, and tyson would have probably snuck out a win. Still not sure though cause douglas fought that fight the way ali would have fought tyson so im not 100 percent sure

I agree if tyson had been with Kevin Rooney the outcome of the tyson vs douglas fight would have been different. The odds were against douglas 42 to 1 and tyson hadnt been fighting the same since he had left kevin rooney. His trainer Aaron Snowell at the time of the douglas fight had mentioned tyson would lose after watching him sparr. There were rumors that tyson wasnt prepared or had trained enough for the fight and his corner was lacking skills and equipment. By the fourth round tyson had a swelling in the right eye, his corner had filled a latex glove with icy water to cover his eye. 23 days before the fight buster douglases mother had passed away, if somebody shouldnt have been prepared for the fight it shouldve been douglas.

So could Frazier. You beat that by having a good jab. There just weren't quality jabbers in the division at the time Tyson was in his prime. Holmes made Tyson look foolish with his jab, but at 38 and over-the-hill he couldn't keep it up for more than a few seconds. In his prime Holmes could throw that jab all night long. The next time Tyson saw a jab like that was against Douglas. At lot of people put his vulnerability in that fight to the fact that he wasn't bobbing and weaving. Watch the first two rounds though, Tyson TRIED to bob and weave and Douglas wouldn't let him. Douglas would hammer Tyson with the jab everytime he tried to bob and weave and after a couple of rounds of that he gave it up. That's when Douglas started hitting him with lead rights.

Poet

The Douglas fight I thought in my opinion,was Tyson doing really well.He was bobbing and weaving trying to get in.He even threw some jabs in the mix to get in also.He also threw combos. When learning more of the peek a boo style,ironically I look at this fight for good tips on how to move.He did a damn good job at it versus Douglas.

The Douglas fight I thought in my opinion,was Tyson doing really well.He was bobbing and weaving trying to get in.He even threw some jabs in the mix to get in also.He also threw combos. When learning more of the peek a boo style,ironically I look at this fight for good tips on how to move.He did a damn good job at it versus Douglas.

He was certainly TRYING for the first couple of rounds but Douglas wasn't lettining him. Douglas was doing EXACTLY what you're supposed to do with a bobber and weaver: Using the jab to make him pay for it, and eventually stop doing it so you can bring other weapons into the mix. Douglas fought that fight the way I always envisioned a prime Larry Holmes fighting Tyson.

Give credit to Tyson too. He stopped bobbing and weaving because of the jab. That's just smart IMO. If something isn't working or your opponent is stopping you from doing it, YOU STOP DOING IT! You try something else! Tyson did that, give him credit for having the ring smarts to see that something wasn't working and changing his tactics. Again, Douglas fought the fight of his life that night and would have been tough for anyone to beat. Witness Douglas' switch to lead rights after Tyson stopped bobbing and weaving. He wasn't letting ANYTHING Tyson did keep him from dictating the fight.

PS. A word on the tactic of bobbing and weaving. I see people write all the time: "Tyson slid when he stopped bobbing and weaving" or "If only Tyson b&w like he used to he'd be unstoppable" ect. ect. ect. Bobbing and weaving is just a tactic, among many other boxing tactics. It's not a panacea for Tyson or anybody else. Like every other boxing tactic there's a tactic that beats it. Every tactic is effective against at least one other tactic; every tactic has a counter-tactic that beats it. It's part of what boxing is: Move, counter-move. It goes on in the ring all the time: Fighters constantly adjust to the tactics their opponents are using. The fighter that makes the smartest adjustments has a big edge working for him in the fight.
Hell, it's one of the things that keeps boxing interesting.

Poet

He was certainly TRYING for the first couple of rounds but Douglas wasn't lettining him. Douglas was doing EXACTLY what you're supposed to do with a bobber and weaver: Using the jab to make him pay for it, and eventually stop doing it so you can bring other weapons into the mix. Douglas fought that fight the way I always envisioned a prime Larry Holmes fighting Tyson.

Give credit to Tyson too. He stopped bobbing and weaving because of the jab. That's just smart IMO. If something isn't working or your opponent is stopping you from doing it, YOU STOP DOING IT! You try something else! Tyson did that, give him credit for having the ring smarts to see that something wasn't working and changing his tactics. Again, Douglas fought the fight of his life that night and would have been tough for anyone to beat. Witness Douglas' switch to lead rights after Tyson stopped bobbing and weaving. He wasn't letting ANYTHING Tyson did keep him from dictating the fight.

PS. A word on the tactic of bobbing and weaving. I see people write all the time: "Tyson slid when he stopped bobbing and weaving" or "If only Tyson b&w like he used to he'd be unstoppable" ect. ect. ect. Bobbing and weaving is just a tactic, among many other boxing tactics. It's not a panacea for Tyson or anybody else. Like every other boxing tactic there's a tactic that beats it. Every tactic is effective against at least one other tactic; every tactic has a counter-tactic that beats it. It's part of what boxing is: Move, counter-move. It goes on in the ring all the time: Fighters constantly adjust to the tactics their opponents are using. The fighter that makes the smartest adjustments has a big edge working for him in the fight.
Hell, it's one of the things that keeps boxing interesting.

Poet

Tyson did have fights in which he didnt bob and weave alot,for example the Biggs fight and Holmes.I dont feel like thinking too hard,so thats good enough. He had other tactics he used,there are different style of Tyson in different fights. I watch him so much daily that I see this. Ive seen at least 5 different forms of Tyson. All in the 85-88 range. The patient aggression is the best one. He used it best against Holmes and Biggs as Ive stated.He would explode in,throw his combos and get out or tie up.

I myself bob and weave alot. I havnt had anyone counter it yet,but when I do get that person I always have different plans to change up.

Tyson did have fights in which he didnt bob and weave alot,for example the Biggs fight and Holmes.I dont feel like thinking too hard,so thats good enough. He had other tactics he used,there are different style of Tyson in different fights. I watch him so much daily that I see this. Ive seen at least 5 different forms of Tyson. All in the 85-88 range. The patient aggression is the best one. He used it best against Holmes and Biggs as Ive stated.He would explode in,throw his combos and get out or tie up.

I myself bob and weave alot. I havnt had anyone counter it yet,but when I do get that person I always have different plans to change up.

Truth is Versi the average poster is no where near as sophisticated a fight analyst as you are. You use that knowledge yourself to box. Me, I've just been watching boxing for 35 years and have a lot of experience. I've seen what you're talking about with the Holmes fight and IMO I believe Tyson went into that fight NOT planning on bobbing and weaving for fear of Holmes' jab. As it turned out he needn't have worried because at Holmes' age he couldn't sustain his jab. Interestingly enough, from everything I've read, the Holmes fight was the one Tyson worried about the most. Cus had always told Mike that there was always a chance that a great fighter in the twilight of his career might pull out one last great performance.

Poet

Truth is Versi the average poster is no where near as sophisticated a fight analyst as you are. You use that knowledge yourself to box. Me, I've just been watching boxing for 35 years and have a lot of experience. I've seen what you're talking about with the Holmes fight and IMO I believe Tyson went into that fight NOT planning on bobbing and weaving for fear of Holmes' jab. As it turned out he needn't have worried because at Holmes' age he couldn't sustain his jab. Interestingly enough, from everything I've read, the Holmes fight was the one Tyson worried about the most. Cus had always told Mike that there was always a chance that a great fighter in the twilight of his career might pull out one last great performance.

Poet

Im sure he was alittle worried and pissed. Holmes pissed him off before the fight.haha.Not a good thing to do. The forms that Tyson had.I had wished he was more versatile to switch them up if one wasnt working. Heres a few different styles from fights he had in the 80. Tyson vs. Scaff(more loose,waits outside for a counter,see more of this vs.Richardson),Boyd(tons of lateral movement,tons of foot movement),Biggs(explosive coming in,then getting out),Green(bobbing and weaving the whole time(Frazier like),Ribalta(body punching artist),Spinks(right at you with hands by temple,short compact hit combos in the pocket). All different style of Tyson.

Im sure he was alittle worried and pissed. Holmes pissed him off before the fight.haha.Not a good thing to do. The forms that Tyson had.I had wished he was more versatile to switch them up if one wasnt working. Heres a few different styles from fights he had in the 80. Tyson vs. Scaff(more loose,waits outside for a counter,see more of this vs.Richardson),Boyd(tons of lateral movement,tons of foot movement),Biggs(explosive coming in,then getting out),Green(bobbing and weaving the whole time(Frazier like),Ribalta(body punching artist),Spinks(right at you with hands by temple,short compact hit combos in the pocket). All different style of Tyson.

He should have worked the body a LOT more consistantly than he did. Too much headhunting. He had the perfect body-type to be an awesome body puncher (like Frazier) but just couldn't resist the urge to headhunt.

Poet

He should have worked the body a LOT more consistantly than he did. Too much headhunting. He had the perfect body-type to be an awesome body puncher (like Frazier) but just couldn't resist the urge to headhunt.

Poet

Tyson wanted it over quickly.I think Im more of a bodypuncher myself. My hooks to the body has to be close to twice as hard then my hooks upstairs. Plus hitting down stairs could distract the person,because he's more worried about the body.Then its your time to aim for the head.

Yes I do think it would be different. That being said I don't know nessacarily that he would have won the fight. Douglas fought the fight of his life that night and would have been tough to beat for anyone. The difference, I think, is that the fight wouldn't be a one-sided affair like it actually was. Instead I see a nip and tuck fight that goes to the cards with the 12th. round deciding things. All in all I think it would have made for a terrific fight.

Poet

Buster Douglas was the 42-1 underdog for the Tyson fight, and rightly so. I take nothing away from Douglas as it was a great performance against Tyson, but he let himself down in his first title defence against Holyfield. If he could have stayed as motivated as he was for the Tyson fight throughout most of his career then we may very well be talking about a great fighter! But he is remembered as a massive under achiever. That said, i think the Tyson camp (and almost everyone else) made a grave error in under estimating Douglas at the time. IMO Tyson wasn't prepared for the fight, and although Douglas didn't have a great record (losing to some mediocre opposition) i think that he came into the Tyson fight on the back of six straight wins, including victories against Trevor Berbick and Oliver McCall. OK, they are hardly victories that should have worried Mike Tyson, but taking the fight against Buster Douglas was ill advised IMO, as Tyson wasn't close to 70% in his preparation IMO, and he (and his 'yes' men) expected an easy night. The bottom line is that a fully motivated Tyson should beat the motivated Buster Douglas that he faced in 1990.

It's not necessarily the jab that beats the b&w (bob & weave). Frazier, who bobbed slower, and took longer coming back up than did Tyson, managed to slip an average of 14 jabs per round against Ali, who jabbed much faster than did Douglas even in the 1970's. Why was this?

For one, Tyson was standing flat-footed, which was normally not his style. He obviously came in out of shape, and was simply less explosive than usual. More importantly, he would perform a very predictable left+right b&w, almost never changing it up, that ran into the jab because Douglas always threw two or three at a time, catching Mike on the way back from a dip.

Secondly, Mike never slipped the jab, he just bobbed as a distraction, hoping to set up that giant bomb of a punch to put Douglas down. He also never followed any successful slips with a step to the right, followed by combination punches to the body or the head. Instead he walked straight into a clinch. He never received any advice on the matter because he brought a posse with him instead of a qualified group of intelligent, boxing cornermen. The bob & weave Mike used was designed, and implemented strongly by Cus to avoid the long jab and counter with leveraged punches.

The only reason Mike looked "good" in the first two rounds was because he spent a lot of energy hoping to have an early night, which would be followed up by an extremely late night of partying around Tokyo. He didn't take that fight to be a champion, he took it to party and get a paycheck.

Douglas wasn't so different from Tyson following this fight. He came in 12-15 pounds heavier against Holyfield, barely threw any punches, and had sagging breasts like an elderly woman without a bra.

The whole incident was a fiasco, and strangely wonderful at the same time.

It's not necessarily the jab that beats the b&w (bob & weave). Frazier, who bobbed slower, and took longer coming back up than did Tyson, managed to slip an average of 14 jabs per round against Ali, who jabbed much faster than did Douglas even in the 1970's. Why was this?

For one, Tyson was standing flat-footed, which was normally not his style. He obviously came in out of shape, and was simply less explosive than usual. More importantly, he would perform a very predictable left+right b&w, almost never changing it up, that ran into the jab because Douglas always threw two or three at a time, catching Mike on the way back from a dip.

Secondly, Mike never slipped the jab, he just bobbed as a distraction, hoping to set up that giant bomb of a punch to put Douglas down. He also never followed any successful slips with a step to the right, followed by combination punches to the body or the head. Instead he walked straight into a clinch. He never received any advice on the matter because he brought a posse with him instead of a qualified group of intelligent, boxing cornermen. The bob & weave Mike used was designed, and implemented strongly by Cus to avoid the long jab and counter with leveraged punches.

The only reason Mike looked "good" in the first two rounds was because he spent a lot of energy hoping to have an early night, which would be followed up by an extremely late night of partying around Tokyo. He didn't take that fight to be a champion, he took it to party and get a paycheck.

Douglas wasn't so different from Tyson following this fight. He came in 12-15 pounds heavier against Holyfield, barely threw any punches, and had sagging breasts like an elderly woman without a bra.

The whole incident was a fiasco, and strangely wonderful at the same time.



Thamk you. I was getting tired of reading people trying to defy the obvious common knowledge that Tyson was far from himself in the Douglas fight. Even the commentators were saying this in the early rounds, long before things started to become hopeless for Tyson.

It's not necessarily the jab that beats the b&w (bob & weave). Frazier, who bobbed slower, and took longer coming back up than did Tyson, managed to slip an average of 14 jabs per round against Ali, who jabbed much faster than did Douglas even in the 1970's.

He also took a lot of those jabs as well. After both the first and third fights with Ali Frazier's face looked like it lost a fight with a woodchipper. The proof was written all over Frazier's face: He took a beating in both fights. It wasn't a steady stream of lead rights that did the damage either: It was primarily Ali's jab that did the damage.

Poet

Thamk you. I was getting tired of reading people trying to defy the obvious common knowledge that Tyson was far from himself in the Douglas fight. Even the commentators were saying this in the early rounds, long before things started to become hopeless for Tyson.

Oh please. Would you Tyson nuthuggers quit trying to make excuses for boy?
He got beat and beat badly: Live with it.

Poet

Oh please. Would you Tyson nuthuggers quit trying to make excuses for boy?
He got beat and beat badly: Live with it.

Poet

There's a difference between excuses and observations. Yes, Tyson got beat badly by Buster Douglas, but anyone who believes that Tyson was at his best for this fight is seriously deluded. A fully motivated Tyson would have beat a fully motivated Buster Douglas, there's no doubt in my mind about that.

I Just thought id put this in for all to see its from a interview with Kevin Rooney in 2004.

Mike's loss to Buster Douglas. Many people were saddened to see him on the canvas struggling to grab his mouthpiece. What did you think of that fight?
I wasn't saddened because I saw it coming. But, I was saddened when I saw Mike's next fight after Spinks, eight months later. He fought Frank Bruno (their first fight) and his skills had already become diminished. I could tell he wasn't training like he should. If Bruno could fight, he would have knocked Mike out that night. Bruno landed a punch that buckled Mike, but Bruno didn't know what to do after that! When I saw that, I knew it wouldn't be long before he got knocked out. For me, that was sad... to see Mike's skills start to unravel.

But for Douglas, the minute I saw Mike walk into the ring, I knew he wasn't in shape. I saw the fat. He wasn't ripped. I just KNEW he was partying it up in Japan before that fight. They really like to party over there in Japan. Believe me! I found that out when we went over to Japan the year before to fight (Tony) Tubbs. But, we had to refrain until AFTER the fight. It was a long plane ride over there, something like 14 hours. When we got there, Mike slept for a while and then I woke him up for a 3 mile run. Then, he would go to the gym and he worked out hard. There was no fooling around before the Tubbs fight!

Two weeks before the Douglas fight, I heard Mike weighed 250 and had to take off 30 pounds. So, he dehydrated and starved himself. In the first few rounds, Douglas came out throwing a few jabs and you could see that he was nervous. But, he was throwing punches and Mike wasn't! If I had been in Mike's corner that night, I would have said: 'Look Mike, you came all the way over here and all you did was party. You've only got 3 or 4 rounds in you and you better throw EVERYTHING you've got. If you don't knock him out in that time, I'm throwing in the towel.' If Mike had done that, he could have knocked Douglas out. But, he didn't. He let a scared fighter get brave. Once you do that, you've got problems. Brave fighters don't go back to being scared. So, as the rounds went on... Douglas got confident! And when Douglas got knocked on his ass, he punched the canvas and got up. The next round, he beat the hell out of Mike... and then stopped him.

Frazier's face did get swollen from jab work, but like I had pointed out earlier, he simply threw 3-4 times as many as did Douglas. Even still, Frazier ducked low, came back up slowly, and was still able to connect with Ali enough to punish him. Frazier didn't give up on the strategy, and that's why he ended up victorious (in their first meeting, when both fighters were closer to prime condition). Mike wasn't slipping the double jab because he was bobbing as useless motion. He didn't wait for a punch to come, he didn't use it to set up further activity, he did it for show. It was a very predictable bob, and Douglas simply threw enough punches out there to hit him.

Thanks Iron Man for posting that interview. I forgot about that.

I was watching Tyson-Holyfield II last night, and noticed something that the commentators never make mention of. When Holyfield was throwing combinations, which he threw a lot of in the first two rounds, Tyson was slipping an enormous number of them, and others were glancing the top of his head. Sure, he landed here or there, primarily in the first round, but Tyson would allow the first one to land, and then he'd slip the next three. He also remembered to throw his own punches before Holyfield could hug him. Gradually, as the second round wore on, Evander slowed down and tried to get inside quickly to avoid Mike's jab+straight right. I think that had it continued this way, Mike would have started landing uppercuts when Evander bent over at the waist to come in. It's possible that Holyfield may have started to grow tired from the excessive early punching, and Tyson's strategy would have taken over. Did anybody else notice this?

In my book, Tyson was the best ever in his prime (pre-Douglas). Best puncher, that is. Most people say Foreman, but I say Tyson. Foreman winged his punches, but Tyson's were short, direct and far more devastating.

People in the Foreman camp like to point to how he lifted Frazier off his feet with an uppercut. People (like myself) in the Tyson camp like to point to how he destroyed Trevor Berbick, a much taller opponent. The way he had Berbick floundering around the ring was almost comical...

See for yourself: Tyson vs. Berbick (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcTPZbavamk)

Frazier's face did get swollen from jab work, but like I had pointed out earlier, he simply threw 3-4 times as many as did Douglas. Even still, Frazier ducked low, came back up slowly, and was still able to connect with Ali enough to punish him. Frazier didn't give up on the strategy, and that's why he ended up victorious (in their first meeting, when both fighters were closer to prime condition). Mike wasn't slipping the double jab because he was bobbing as useless motion. He didn't wait for a punch to come, he didn't use it to set up further activity, he did it for show. It was a very predictable bob, and Douglas simply threw enough punches out there to hit him.

Thanks Iron Man for posting that interview. I forgot about that.

I was watching Tyson-Holyfield II last night, and noticed something that the commentators never make mention of. When Holyfield was throwing combinations, which he threw a lot of in the first two rounds, Tyson was slipping an enormous number of them, and others were glancing the top of his head. Sure, he landed here or there, primarily in the first round, but Tyson would allow the first one to land, and then he'd slip the next three. He also remembered to throw his own punches before Holyfield could hug him. Gradually, as the second round wore on, Evander slowed down and tried to get inside quickly to avoid Mike's jab+straight right. I think that had it continued this way, Mike would have started landing uppercuts when Evander bent over at the waist to come in. It's possible that Holyfield may have started to grow tired from the excessive early punching, and Tyson's strategy would have taken over. Did anybody else notice this?

Holyfield was doing a Tyson move and trying to get him out their early.If thats not an ego trip I dont know what it.haha. At the rate he was going I could see him really tiring by the 5th round,but we'll never know.

The mental game and desire are needed. The will to improve yourself and continue to dominate. Tyson simply didn't have it. Imagine if he had the work ethic of B-Hop or Mayweather? Maybe then he'd be an all time great. But showing up out of shape and being a lazy fighter doesn't suddenly make it acceptable to lose.

They're excuses. And excuses don't change the fact that it was still a loss.

As for Douglas.... and underachiever is the best way to describe him. His weight was always heavy, he had fights in the bag that he gave away, and even after the Tyson fight he quickly went back into his lazy ways. The fight he put on that night was beautiful. It would've been nice to see what he could do if he could've stayed motivated... just like Tyson.

It may not make the loss acceptable but its still a reason for it. Tyson did have motivation wen he had the right trainers, which was a big thing for him and many people to get motivated. I think Kevin Rooney Said "Tyson knew more about boxing than his trainers" apart from him of course. Douglas fought a good fight, but tyson didnt. Tyson got beat! (although he was winning on the score cards) but in no way was it tyson at his best.

It may not make the loss acceptable but its still a reason for it. Tyson did have motivation wen he had the right trainers, which was a big thing for him and many people to get motivated. I think Kevin Rooney Said "Tyson knew more about boxing than his trainers" apart from him of course. Douglas fought a good fight, but tyson didnt. Tyson got beat! (although he was winning on the score cards) but in no way was it tyson at his best.

But the point is Tyson SHOULDN'T have been leading on the cards. It was like, what fight where the judges watching? That was a bad decision waiting to happen before Douglas settled things himself. That was a one-sided fight and it wasn't Tyson on the happy end of it.

Poet

Yeh i dont agree with the decision either, but that wasnt my main point lol. The fight was fairly one sided, but as i said earlier and as Kevin Rooney has said, and many other boxing analysts, if tyson trained properly and had Kevin Rooney he would have won that fight

Instead, this is what happened:

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9C619rzN98Q"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9C619rzN98Q" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Even with poor training, out of shape, and hungover, against a man who was ready for anything, this atrocity still took shape. Don't get me wrong, Douglas was whooping Mike to that point. I used to think, however, that Douglas was completely cognisent of his surroundings, but he was visibly wobbly, especially when he stood up. The guy in the background is counting three numbers ahead of the ring ref, and the ref is counting rediculously slow. He even pauses in between number counts to look at Mike, and then without putting his gloves together and signalling he's okay, the ref gives Douglas the go-ahead at 14-er, 9.

The whole thing is a little shady, like someone wanted Mike to lose that night. Don King perhaps? Knowing Mike's condition, he arranges the biggest upset in history, which of course would bring about a colossal rematch down the road (had Mike not gone to prison), and lots of money. He then plays it off at the presser like it was a robbery. The only guys not in on the whole deal were the two fighters.

Okay, so that last paragraph was something a hugger would say. Tyson did get whooped, but he still knocked the guy out. That's what happens sometimes when a guy has lots of power. Think of Tua vs. Rahman I, Foreman vs. Moorer, Marciano vs. anybody he was losing to, etc.

The only problem with that argument is that no travesty took place. Anyone watching that fight can see that Douglas was NOT out and was following the ref's count. He could have gotten up at any point, unlike Tyson who tried to deepthroat his mouth piece first.

Poet

Yeah, he was following the ref's count, after the ref reached 5 or 6 (which was actually 8 or 9), and then he stood up in pretty poor shape. That means he wouldn't have attempted to stand up until 8 or 9, which any sensible referee would then use to wave off the fight, granting the KO to Tyson. Douglas wasn't stable, and he didn't even signal to the ref that he was ready. The ref plainly assumes it, and Douglas gets saved by the bell. Sitting in the corner, he was able to shake the cobwebs. Mike was aware of the ref's count too during his own knockdown, which is why he was frantically seeking his mouthpiece to beat the count. The ref was lightning quick to stop it at 9 even though Mike stood up.

Again, I'm not saying Mike should have won, as he was getting beat. But he actually did win, despite the beating he was taking, and suffered from some very poor ref'ing.

Instead, this is what happened:

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9C619rzN98Q"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9C619rzN98Q" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Even with poor training, out of shape, and hungover, against a man who was ready for anything, this atrocity still took shape. Don't get me wrong, Douglas was whooping Mike to that point. I used to think, however, that Douglas was completely cognisent of his surroundings, but he was visibly wobbly, especially when he stood up. The guy in the background is counting three numbers ahead of the ring ref, and the ref is counting rediculously slow. He even pauses in between number counts to look at Mike, and then without putting his gloves together and signalling he's okay, the ref gives Douglas the go-ahead at 14-er, 9.

The whole thing is a little shady, like someone wanted Mike to lose that night. Don King perhaps? Knowing Mike's condition, he arranges the biggest upset in history, which of course would bring about a colossal rematch down the road (had Mike not gone to prison), and lots of money. He then plays it off at the presser like it was a robbery. The only guys not in on the whole deal were the two fighters.

Okay, so that last paragraph was something a hugger would say. Tyson did get whooped, but he still knocked the guy out. That's what happens sometimes when a guy has lots of power. Think of Tua vs. Rahman I, Foreman vs. Moorer, Marciano vs. anybody he was losing to, etc.

Yeah, he was following the ref's count, after the ref reached 5 or 6 (which was actually 8 or 9), and then he stood up in pretty poor shape. That means he wouldn't have attempted to stand up until 8 or 9, which any sensible referee would then use to wave off the fight, granting the KO to Tyson. Douglas wasn't stable, and he didn't even signal to the ref that he was ready. The ref plainly assumes it, and Douglas gets saved by the bell. Sitting in the corner, he was able to shake the cobwebs. Mike was aware of the ref's count too during his own knockdown, which is why he was frantically seeking his mouthpiece to beat the count. The ref was lightning quick to stop it at 9 even though Mike stood up.

Again, I'm not saying Mike should have won, as he was getting beat. But he actually did win, despite the beating he was taking, and suffered from some very poor ref'ing.


Tyson KO8 Douglas

Oh for crying out loud. Good thing Douglas was paying attention to the official in the ring, the only count that matters. Douglas clearly slams his glove into the canvas out of frustration and is looking the ref directly in the eye as he waits for the count. Please. I'm a big Tyson fan myself but he did not knock out Douglas.

"Mike was aware of the ref's count too during his own knockdown, which is why he was frantically seeking his mouthpiece to beat the count. The ref was lightning quick to stop it at 9 even though Mike stood up."

What the ****? Mike was grabbing at the ref when he was trying to stand, he had no legs and looked like a blind drunk trying to find a mouthpiece that was laying right in front of his face. The ref should have been shot if he let the fight continue with Mike like that.

I guess it's easy to get frustrated when you are dominating a fight and then get caught. Kelly Pavlik did that against Jermain Taylor in the 2nd round of their recent fight. He got ****y, and then got caught getting overconfident. He stood up quick after the knockdown, however, and was aware of the ref's count, but he was obviously not as together as it would seem, as one could see from his wobbly stature the remainder of that round. In similar fashion to Douglas, he came back to win anyway.

Douglas stood up and stumbles back, right around the 1:21 mark. Then watch him walk a zig-zag back to his corner with about 1:17 to go on the clip. Just because he was aware of the ref, doesn't mean he was perfectly coherent, and it doesn't erase the terrible job the ref performed. He actually pauses in between counts 6 and 7, just to look around the ring for some unknown reason.

Douglas even spends the first part of round 9 simply fending a winded, though slightly urgent Tyson, just to regain his composure.

I know Douglas "beat" Tyson that night. One of my first posts on this website was a lengthy dissertation outlining the reason why, regardless of this moment, Douglas beat him. It still doesn't take away from the fact that Mike still scored a KO, without being scored a KO.

"I guess it's easy to get frustrated when you are dominating a fight and then get caught. Kelly Pavlik did that against Jermain Taylor in the 2nd round of their recent fight. He got ****y, and then got caught getting overconfident. He stood up quick after the knockdown, however, and was aware of the ref's count, but he was obviously not as together as it would seem, as one could see from his wobbly stature the remainder of that round. In similar fashion to Douglas, he came back to win anyway."

Uh...eh...this has nothing to do with anything.

"Douglas stood up and stumbles back, right around the 1:21 mark. Then watch him walk a zig-zag back to his corner with about 1:17 to go on the clip. "

No, none of this happens. I mean..I can see the video, you posted it. Is there a pink elephant I'm missing as well? He maybe looked a little weary but unless I'm hallucinating I see Douglas stand up on his own two feet, get in a boxing stance as the bell rings, and walk back to his corner in a straight line.

"Just because he was aware of the ref, doesn't mean he was perfectly coherent, and it doesn't erase the terrible job the ref performed. He actually pauses in between counts 6 and 7, just to look around the ring for some unknown reason."

The count shouldn't start until Tyson is in his corner, not as soon as the guy falls. The count is fine and the microsecond pause doesn't make a difference; the camera misses what he sees so it could be anything. Besides, Douglas is clearly waiting for the official "9." Ignore the ****tard tossing up his fingers outside the ring, he's on "3" before the ref can even get Tyson in his corner.


"It still doesn't take away from the fact that Mike still scored a KO, without being scored a KO."

And Douglas walks a zig zag that only you can see as well....

**** NO!!!!!!!!!!


Let this thread die!!!!!

**** NO!!!!!!!!!!


Let this thread die!!!!!

Just for that Im keeping it up.

Just for that Im keeping it up.
:lol1:

........

No Thunder Lips, no pink elephant. You're just extra dumb.

I really can't believe this went on that long, when it lost seriousness about 4 pages ago. :lol1:

Anyone think michael moore could have beaten tyson?

IS Moore had a Machine Gun and Body Army?? The No

No Thunder Lips, no pink elephant. You're just extra dumb.

I really can't believe this went on that long, when it lost seriousness about 4 pages ago. :lol1:

Yeah, I'm sure all that stubborn stupidity was just you being sarcastic.....

well he beat holyfield

And he Lost Against Tua and Foreman. And holyfield floored him 4 times in the re-match. This is a guy with a Glass Chin, against a tyson he wouldnt last long. Mayb Like Tua KO 1

And he Lost Against Tua and Foreman. And holyfield floored him 4 times in the re-match. This is a guy with a Glass Chin, against a tyson he wouldnt last long. Mayb Like Tua KO 1

Hey Iron Man, I was thinking about doing a computer tournament for the Heavyweights. Round robin, everyone fights everyone. No single elimination.

Poet

Hey Iron Man, I was thinking about doing a computer tournament for the Heavyweights. Round robin, everyone fights everyone. No single elimination.

Poet

Yeh sounds like a good idea..mayb we could then add that to the list as another category 10 for beating every1 1 for beating one, and so on! Just Lemmie know the score! Send me a pm or something wen ur ready!!

Yeh sounds like a good idea..mayb we could then add that to the list as another category 10 for beating every1 1 for beating one, and so on! Just Lemmie know the score! Send me a pm or something wen ur ready!!

Sure thing! I need to check and see what my bout limit is. I want each fighter to fight all the others five times each to keep fluky results from having too much influence.

Poet

How would this work then? Wot would u use to determine the winner? would we discuss it or go over their attributes?

How would this work then? Wot would u use to determine the winner? would we discuss it or go over their attributes?

Well, overall winning pct. wins the tournament. It should make for some interesting discussions as to who beat who and why.

Poet

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/YFr9XY47XVE"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/YFr9XY47XVE" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

A prime mike tyson was unbeatable/unstoppable (1986 - 1988) after this u saw him steadily deteorating, when he lost to buster douglas he actually knocked him out for 13 seconds if u c correctly so in reality he didnt even lose... and as for him against lewis he was far past his prime nd on medication at the time. Tyson sparred with Lewis in 1984 nd in the first round he knocked him out of the ring... so wat dus tht say? a prime mike tyson had the speed of a welterweight nd the power of a semi-truck. He easily wud have beaten muhammad ali as u could compare him to joe frazier who had beaten muhammad ali before. Also majority of mike tysons fights were 1 - 4 knockouts, muhammad ali's weren't. Mike Tyson would have continued as maybe the greatest heavyweight of all time if cus was stil by his side along with kevin rooney, i believe he could have beaten any heavyweight during his peak, shame he peaked for a short period though.

A prime mike tyson was unbeatable/unstoppable (1986 - 1988) after this u saw him steadily deteorating, when he lost to buster douglas he actually knocked him out for 13 seconds if u c correctly so in reality he didnt even lose... and as for him against lewis he was far past his prime nd on medication at the time. Tyson sparred with Lewis in 1984 nd in the first round he knocked him out of the ring... so wat dus tht say? a prime mike tyson had the speed of a welterweight nd the power of a semi-truck. He easily wud have beaten muhammad ali as u could compare him to joe frazier who had beaten muhammad ali before. Also majority of mike tysons fights were 1 - 4 knockouts, muhammad ali's weren't. Mike Tyson would have continued as maybe the greatest heavyweight of all time isf cus was stil by his side along with kevin rooney, i believe he could have beaten any heavyweight during his peak, shame he peaked for a short period though.


Tyson= The Greatest

how can you deny that? I think prime tyson won most of his fights because his opponents feared him, Douglas did not fear a prime tyson, and he dominated him, if Douglas can beat Tyson, Lewis can beat Tyson.

Tyson infact did beat him.... he knocked him out for 13 seconds, and as for him losing he didnt even train for the fight nd was past him prime nd had lost the passion for boxing. A 1986 - 1988 Tyson could beat any of the greatest heavyweights.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=9C619rzN98Q - this is the video that proves that he didnt even lose to buster douglas!!!

Ok, lets not go down the road of tyson was a God, he wasnt. And dont get me wrong im a MASSIVE tyson fan, probably a much bigger one than you. Just take a step back and think before you write, he mayb your idol and that but he is still human. Many of the Greats would have been able to beat tyson, Ali, Louis, Holmes. But tyson IMO would have been able to beat them aswell it would be an amazing fight between tyson and any other great. And most would go either way. And "in reality" he didnt lose to douglas??! huh in reality he did lose. Lets get that straight Tyson was first to admit he fought a good fight. But yes tyson didnt prepare and he had to lose weight quick, but the he knocked him out thing is kinda weak, i mean no1 can know if Buster would of beat the count, but the fact is he did. If its any consilation to you Tyson was winning on the cards.. And Easily would of beaten Ali! erm.. you say cose he was comparable to Frazier! ask frazier if any of he fights with Ali were easy! "Also majority of mike tysons fights were 1 - 4 knockouts, muhammad ali's weren't." ok and that means nothing, ones a big puncher who has the ability for these wins, it doesnt make one a better fighter only more exciting. I agree with your last statement tho!! can i stress im a big tyson fan ask any1 here! but you have to see things both ways in a debate

Ok, lets not go down the road of tyson was a God, he wasnt. And dont get me wrong im a MASSIVE tyson fan, probably a much bigger one than you. Just take a step back and think before you write, he mayb your idol and that but he is still human. Many of the Greats would have been able to beat tyson, Ali, Louis, Holmes. But tyson IMO would have been able to beat them aswell it would be an amazing fight between tyson and any other great. And most would go either way. And "in reality" he didnt lose to douglas??! huh in reality he did lose. Lets get that straight Tyson was first to admit he fought a good fight. But yes tyson didnt prepare and he had to lose weight quick, but the he knocked him out thing is kinda weak, i mean no1 can know if Buster would of beat the count, but the fact is he did. If its any consilation to you Tyson was winning on the cards.. And Easily would of beaten Ali! erm.. you say cose he was comparable to Frazier! ask frazier if any of he fights with Ali were easy! "Also majority of mike tysons fights were 1 - 4 knockouts, muhammad ali's weren't." ok and that means nothing, ones a big puncher who has the ability for these wins, it doesnt make one a better fighter only more exciting. I agree with your last statement tho!! can i stress im a big tyson fan ask any1 here! but you have to see things both ways in a debate

okay i agree with wat ur saying..... i admit that tyson would have been beaten by the greatest heavyweights including ali yes. wat i meant when i said in reality is that he won the fight he knocked out buster douglas for 13 seconds so infact he did win, as the referee counted a slow count.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=9C619rzN98Q

"Tyson is gonna be exposed by spinks, Im picking Spinks to win."

-Teddy Atlas





Tyson KO1 Spinks

Teddy Atlas had a grudge against tyson.. he said tyson would lose most of his big fights and one of them happend so he looked like this guy he knew tysons weakness and all that ****e.

Lets just get this right. Infact tyson didnt win the fight, he should of because he took it too lightly and there is a small case for the slow count! but he didnt win. He isnt the only great to lose to some one of Busters callibre..Lewis comes to mind. It happens, but he came back after a 3 year break like Ali and won two titles.

It happens, but he came back after a 3 year break like Ali and won two titles.



yessur!!!!!!!!!!!

how can you deny that? I think prime tyson won most of his fights because his opponents feared him, Douglas did not fear a prime tyson, and he dominated him, if Douglas can beat Tyson, Lewis can beat Tyson


guess that means Foreman sucked and Ali was the only one who didn't fear him, because everyone sure as hell feared Foreman, he even said so himself.
In all seriousness Tyson was a good boxer with the right trainer, I could easily see him taking down Ali. (IMO the 30's Ali was better than a young Ali, more thinking and durability).

Heres a few of the most overused excuses:

Spinks: buffed up light heavy that was owning until he met Tyson (yea don't worry Floyd Mayweather sucks to, he's a buffed up middleweight)

Berbick: called the worst heavyweight ever by everyone still living in the black and white era.

Holmes: past his prime, lets just forget that he took back 2 belts until he met Tyson.

Tony tucker: Let's not talk about him

He took down a Holmes( in his 30's) I can't see why he couldn't take down Ali in his 30's(the one that beat Foreman) who was already showing signs of Parkinson's. If Ali tried a rope-a-dope I could see him going down very..VERY fast to a fighter like Tyson.

I have a strong suspicion people like to rip on Tyson because he became so popular, its the same with any sport, someone who shows up and owns everyone gets 101 excuses on why their reign of ownage was obsolete.

Apples, I don't agree with the statement that people feared Tyson that's why they lost, but do you really think that anyone that Tyson fought in his prime was as good as Ali, Foreman or Lewis?

Apples, I don't agree with the statement that people feared Tyson that's why they lost, but do you really think that anyone that Tyson fought in his prime was as good as Ali, Foreman or Lewis?

If your going by achievements then no Tyson does not surpass them, but if they were to fight in there primes Tyson would most definitely win, although Foreman would probably give him a real tussle.

I'm not blinded by the past in my opinions, I watch fights the way they are, Tyson hits harder, hes fast and he has excellent defense..enough said.

Those 3 fighters you listed aren't nearly as well rounded, Foreman hits hard but has no skill, Ali is a good thinker but has pretty weak defense, and Louis really doesn't pose a threat at all with his 1930's-40's bar room brawling stance, leaving his head open and all...

I really don't like to rip on anyone's favorites, but a lot of people really need to step out of their era and realize boxing has progressed.

If your going by achievements then no Tyson does not surpass them, but if they were to fight in there primes Tyson would most definitely win, although Foreman would probably give him a real tussle.

I'm not blinded by the past in my opinions, I watch fights the way they are, Tyson hits harder, hes fast and he has excellent defense..enough said.

Those 3 fighters you listed aren't nearly as well rounded, Foreman hits hard but has no skill, Ali is a good thinker but has pretty weak defense, and Louis really doesn't pose a threat at all with his 1930's-40's bar room brawling stance, leaving his head open and all...

I really don't like to rip on anyone's favorites, but a lot of people really need to step out of their era and realize boxing has progressed.

Ali would beat him the way Douglas did but would also get into his head at the same time.
Cus told Tyson many times never to fight someone like Foreman, because he couldn't win.
Louis stop Tyson with a powerful barrage unless he gets caught more than a few times.
And Lewis who he meant, sparred with Tyson at a younger age and gave him a hard time. Beat him as a professional, although shot. But proved that he would probably do it the same way in their primes, although this fight could very well be a toss up.

I have reason to Believe that in the spar between tyson and Lewis when they were 16, that tyson had the better of him. In a documenary about the fight they had Lewis said wen cus told them they would meet, he thought to himself "i wish we dont met, this guys an animal in the ring".

yea in the first round when the sparred in 1984, mike tyson actually knocked lewis out of the ring, so wat does that tell you? and mind you this was when tyson was only 16 and still growing! But i have to give it to lewis aswel he was a true champion too, but if they both met at their peaks id have to give it tyson.

Well couldb be a case of chinese whispers with the knocking out the ring thing!

Well couldb be a case of chinese whispers with the knocking out the ring thing!

Naa that aint a case of chinese whispers, ive seen it on youtube and a documentary, he knocked him out of the ring in the first round.

You need to remember Tyson peaked much earlier than Lennox did. While Tyson was wearing a title belt Lennox was still in the amatuers.

Poet

Ali would beat him the way Douglas did but would also get into his head at the same time.
Cus told Tyson many times never to fight someone like Foreman, because he couldn't win.
Louis stop Tyson with a powerful barrage unless he gets caught more than a few times.

Ali would get into his head for sure, but beating him the same way Douglas beat him sounds pretty far fetched, I don't think Ali could touch Tyson during his power years (years that he trained hard, and partied less w/o don king and prison)

Holmes had one of the best jabs boxing has ever seen, and him although 38 years of age was still game enough seeing he almost became undisputed champion again, but Tyson stopped him.

Tyson did extremely well against "jabbers" during his reign, he started getting hit way more the less he trained. However if you watch his fights that he has whilst making his way up to the belt (85-88) he has excellent defense and avoids the jab quite well.

Foreman is tough, so this fight could go both ways, but Tyson has speed and endurance, Foreman has neither. Foreman destroyed Frazier, but Frazier was slow as hell and packed less power than mike. However, This fight still could go 50/50.

Joe Louis was no doubt one of the many ATG's of his era, however, I can't see Louis standing a chance against Tyson, even an old one. Louis is to slow, has no footwork and his style is very old fashioned. All IMO of course. I really highly doubt Louis could even go one round with a technically and physically superior fighter. Louis fought guys like Marciano, and what did everyone in Louis's era have in common? lack of speed thats what.

Once again, no disrespect for for the ATG's

He took down a Holmes( in his 30's) I can't see why he couldn't take down Ali in his 30's(the one that beat Foreman) who was already showing signs of Parkinson's. If Ali tried a rope-a-dope I could see him going down very..VERY fast to a fighter like Tyson.

Comparing the fat, slow, 38 year old version of Holmes that fought Tyson to the Ali that fought the fight of his life to beat Foreman is pretty comical. I'm a little sick of hearing excuses for Tyson against Douglas (a 42 to 1 underdog against the extremely overrated at the time Tyson,) Holyfield (who owned him in both fights,) Lewis (who wasn't much younger than Tyson at the time he demolished him,) etc. Pounding a few tomatoe cans and geriatrics (like "bonecrusher" Smith) when he was younger does not qualify him for any top 10 list.

If course there are reasons why tyson lost to douglas. If he fought him 10 times before all the **** that happend he would of won every single time. He caught tyson at almost the worst time in his career, Bruno could of beaten tyson but he style was all wrong as you all know power is the last thing to go. Age is not a massive factor in a fighters prime. As we said earlier tyson outclassed lewis wen they spared as youngsters, and tyson peaked at a much younger age. And due to managers die/getting sackd/don king/robin givens. He slowly diminished, were as the opposite happend for Lewis..new trainer etc. How could he have been over rated at that time? and how does he not qualify for the top 10? Youngest Ever Champ-Undisputed Champ-2 time champ-first to combine 3 different belts-Lineal Champ-37 fights unbeaten-4yr reign-One of the fastest and Mos devistating Punchers.

Comparing the fat, slow, 38 year old version of Holmes that fought Tyson to the Ali that fought the fight of his life to beat Foreman is pretty comical. I'm a little sick of hearing excuses for Tyson against Douglas (a 42 to 1 underdog against the extremely overrated at the time Tyson,) Holyfield (who owned him in both fights,) Lewis (who wasn't much younger than Tyson at the time he demolished him,) etc. Pounding a few tomatoe cans and geriatrics (like "bonecrusher" Smith) when he was younger does not qualify him for any top 10 list.

speaking of comical, calling Holmes at 38 slow is pretty stupid, Holmes beat some big names in his comeback, thats living evidence that he did NOT suck at 38.

Lewis, got his ass beat during their young days, Lewis has said himself in documentaries that Tyson scared the **** out of him, Tyson wore no head gear whilst Lewis did, and Lewis still would get cut up and beaten.

AND, ali at 35 was showing signs of parkinsons, He used thinking to defeat Foreman, not physical attributes, so yes a 38 year old Holmes was in better shape than a 34-35 year old Ali. If you knew anything about The Tyson douglas fight you would know they are not excuses but the raw truth.

Thats just as lame as saying Berbick was better than Ali because he beat him.

Let me start off by saying I love Mike Tyson. Sentimentally,one of my all-time favorite fighters but I have trouble with him being mentioned in the breath of the some of the divisions all time greats.

Skill-wise Tyson had some of the most complete skills of any heavyweight in history. The handspeed, combination punching, defense, power plus add in that awesome intimidation factor and he was the total package. I don't know if there is any heavyweight in history with those kind of tools at their disposal so in that aspect I can agree he had the potential to be the sports pound-for-pound greatest of all time.

However, I think when judging his body of work against the all-time greats is where the problem comes in. He has one win against a great fighter (Spinks), he has two wins against one decent heavyweight (Ruddock) and two brutal beatings against a very skilled, but lazy fighter (Douglas) and an all-time great (Holyfield). Then you look at the rest of the competition he faced, and see how absolutely weak the division was in the 80's and realize its nigh on impossible to compare him evenly with other legendary heavyweights.

Is it Tyson's fault that he was in one of the weakest decades in the division's history? Of course not. But you would also expect that if he was the fighter that everyone claimed he wouldn't have gotten slapped around as badly as he did against Douglas and Holyfield.

People argue that he wasn't in his physical prime when he fought Douglas and I disagree. I don't think his physical prime really started a decline until after the second Holyfield fight. Up to that point his biggest weakness was discipline. Once he left the folds of everything Cus built around him he ceased to be anything remotely like the fighter he was. The defense and combinations were largely gone. The training discipline out the window. He was reduced to being nothing more than a headhunter. There were brief flashes of the old Tyson at times over the years but never enough to warrant a belief that he would ever be anything like he was.

Tyson's biggest enemy was listening to the people in his life he were only looking out for themselves. Robin Givens & Don King. He elected to split with Rooney & Co. in order to get the fast, big money with Don King and he paid the price. Where Rooney kept Mike disciplined, King surrounded him yes men and allowed him to do what he wanted. If King actually gave a damn he would have made sure Mike had a better training group than Rory Holloway, John Horn and that other moron who served as a trainer. I mean damn, they didnt even know enough to bring and endswell and ice and were reduced to using a rubber glove filled with ice water. What does that tell you about the people Mike surrounded himself with?

Anyways, it's possible Tyson could have been the best to ever lace up the gloves given his original skillset but we'll never really know because he doesn't have the resume to make comparisons. Having said that I think the Tokyo version of Douglas and Holyfield possessed all that needed to be had to defeat Tyson at anytime period. Granted, a Rooney trained Tyson would have faired much better against both but a talented fighter that didn't fear Tyson and took the fight directly to him was the ultimate key to beating Mike at any point in his career.

That's just my opinion tho'.


Hawk.

Prime Tyson is the best fighter ever. Tyson who beat Spinks would have beaten ANY fighter of any era

Prime Tyson is the best fighter ever. Tyson who beat Spinks would have beaten ANY fighter of any era

Are you implying that Michael Spinks was as good as any heavyweight in history?

Are you implying that Michael Spinks was as good as any heavyweight in history?He didn't mean that at all, he said the version of Tyson that fought Spinks would have beaten any HW. That doesn't imply Spinks is the best HW ever.


Tyson definetaly had potential to become the GOAT, just too many obstacles for him to overcome in and out of the ring.

He didn't mean that at all, he said the version of Tyson that fought Spinks would have beaten any HW. That doesn't imply Spinks is the best HW ever.


Tyson definetaly had potential to become the GOAT, just too many obstacles for him to overcome in and out of the ring.


Well I wasn't sure what he meant. It's why I asked for clarification.

I love Tyson, but even in his prime Ali would have beaten him (if Ali was at his prime or close to it), also Larry Holmes too. Tyson was never good fighting on the backfoot, and if someone stood up to him he imploded and fell away. Ali would keep that jab in his face, and could take any shot Tyson threw (Ali stood up to Shavers, Foreman and Liston-serious punchers!), he'd frustrate Tyson and see him off.

Similar gameplan would see Holmes thru. To beat Tyson, at anytime, you'd need a great jab, and courage to stand up to his shots. A prime Tyson would force **** most people, but there are some fighters that would beat him.

Prime Lewis beats Prime Tyson for me.

How do you figure pal? Tyson was murdering Lewis in their sparring sessions, Lewis himself said Tyson was too much for him in those days. Tyson was meant to destroy the best of the best in terms of boxers. Lewis just ran into the Tyson he knew he could beat. If you look at it like this Tyson was clearly on his decline when he faced Lewis and Lewis was at his best and fighting his best.

:boxing: Prime for Prime Tyson knocks Lewis out with one punch a solid left hook that sends him to the canvas like Rahman did to him with one punch. Lewis was known for getting cracked with one punch to send him down, when he faced Tyson it was his time not Tyson's.

Lewis was afraid of Tyson in the 80's that is a fact pal.

Tyson by very very early knockout wit one punch prime for prime!

I love Tyson, but even in his prime Ali would have beaten him (if Ali was at his prime or close to it), also Larry Holmes too. Tyson was never good fighting on the backfoot, and if someone stood up to him he imploded and fell away. Ali would keep that jab in his face, and could take any shot Tyson threw (Ali stood up to Shavers, Foreman and Liston-serious punchers!), he'd frustrate Tyson and see him off.

Similar gameplan would see Holmes thru. To beat Tyson, at anytime, you'd need a great jab, and courage to stand up to his shots. A prime Tyson would force **** most people, but there are some fighters that would beat him.

Just like Holmes was not a great fighter when pressure was applied just like every other great boxer. Tyson is the type of fighter to shut down any boxer who tries to box him. Holmes Ali it doesn't matter what boxer it was in the history of boxers Tyson would destroy them because of this. Slide the jab and counter with a brutal left hook.

Ali said Tyson would knock him out with one punch if he could catch him, which in this case the only question is. Is Ali faster moving backwards than Tyson moving forward?

You need to remember Tyson peaked much earlier than Lennox did. While Tyson was wearing a title belt Lennox was still in the amatuers.

Poet

Correcto my friend. Lewis was afraid of the 80's Tyson and felt that the Tyson he did face was nothing short of washed up. Do you honestly think Tyson was going to let anyone defeat him on his way to the title shot against Berbick? He told Cus before he passed away that he was going to win it for him and look what he did, when Tyson is mentally charged and focused that guy could do anything. He lost interest because of all the obstacles he had to over come outside of the ring.

Lewis would have gotten his ass knocked good had he faced Tyson of the 80's.

How do you figure pal? Tyson was murdering Lewis in their sparring sessions, Lewis himself said Tyson was too much for him in those days. Tyson was meant to destroy the best of the best in terms of boxers. Lewis just ran into the Tyson he knew he could beat. If you look at it like this Tyson was clearly on his decline when he faced Lewis and Lewis was at his best and fighting his best.

:boxing: Prime for Prime Tyson knocks Lewis out with one punch a solid left hook that sends him to the canvas like Rahman did to him with one punch. Lewis was known for getting cracked with one punch to send him down, when he faced Tyson it was his time not Tyson's.

Lewis was afraid of Tyson in the 80's that is a fact pal.

Tyson by very very early knockout wit one punch prime for prime!

A lot of people were afraid of Mike back in the 80's, mostly because of the hype the media created over him squashing some tomatoe cans and some washed up bums. The first that wasn't, a bum named Douglas, knocked him out. Even an inflated 34 year old cruiserweight named Holyfield knocked out a 30 year old Tyson. I've heard way too many excuses for him, he was fun to watch, was very quick for a heavy, and threw some nice combinations and had pretty good power. But an iron jaw he did not have, and at 5'11", he simply was not tall enough to deal with heavies like Lennox Lewis. Prime Mike was good, but he loses to Louis, Liston, Foreman, Holmes, Holyfield, Lewis, and probably W. Klitschko, Frasier would have been a pickem.