Prime Tyson could have been the best ever?? [Archive]

Brassangel

08-05-2007, 08:10 PM

We never really got Tyson in his prime, in all fairness. He needed the 4 years he was away to develop into a true champion, but he flushed that all away by raping someone. He probably would have been great, even into his (very) early 30's, after his loss to Douglas. After losing to Douglas, he fought Ruddock twice; a man who was definitely a better fighter than was Douglas. Razor Ruddock was the "bread-and-butter" build for beating Tyson, according to his haters. Ruddock was tall, had great reach, a jackhammer jab, wasn't afraid of Tyson, and had stamina. Mike proved that he did have heart, and managed to overcome another Douglas debacle waiting to happen...twice. Had he continued in this trend, instead of going to prison, he would have won the belt again, probably beating Holyfield, and then remained champion for another few years before age caught up to his style (a la Joe Frazier).

Since this is a speculative thread about his potential, I think that we need to include the Douglas loss as a learning point instead of pretending it didn't happen. He showed more heart and potential following his first loss than he did at any other point in his career. He was not the same following his exile, much like Ali.

As a side note: Douglas got into the best shape of his life for the fight with Tyson. He was cut, lean, fast, and had nothing to lose. On the other hand, Tyson trained less than four weeks for the fight, at half time each day, came in visibly softer than usual, just went through a divorce, and stayed up until 2:00 a.m. getting blasted. Douglas prepared for a championship fight, while Tyson prepared for a party. It's a part of boxing. It's a shame that it took this event to push Tyson into caring about winning, only to have him throw it all away anyway.

Every fighter goes into a fight afraid, or at least nervous. They're about to throw punches and take punches, for crying out loud! Tyson was afraid in many of his fights. Ali commented on being extremely shakey going into his fights with Liston. Fear doesn't lose fights automatically.

This thread is rediculous.

Tyson was not the best ever. We can only guess at what he "could have been." That should say more for how great he wasn't. Top 10 material, maybe, but "what if?" isn't a part of determining greatness.

taws6

08-05-2007, 10:53 PM

tyson could have actually been better in his early 30s..who knows

Yaman

08-06-2007, 04:46 AM

poet682006

08-06-2007, 10:22 AM

I doubt it. History(I talked to her yesterday) has shown us that swarmers don't stay fresh untill their 30s. Especially Tyson who started at 20, and would have fought Holyfield, Bowe, Mercer and maybe even Lewis and Foreman. Tyson already had some brutal wars with Ruddock, i think he would have beeen done in his early 30s after warriors like Holyfield and Mercer, the big guys like bowe and Lewis.

An excellent point! Short armed pressure fighters always have a short prime. They have to work much harder than other fighters do to overcome their physical disadvantages and their bodies burn out (see Joe Frazier). Larry Holmes said as much about Tyson while Mike was still in his prime.

Poet

Mintcar923

08-08-2007, 11:21 PM

It's funny how most of you people put Tyson down and judge him based on his last couple of fights. It's obvious he was not the Tyson of old when he fought McBride. He was close to 39 years old. Mind you, Ali, Louis and Frazier were totally shot at this age and may very well have lost to someone of McBride's caliber. Also, it's a misconception that Tyson quit the fight. It was his trainer that insisted on the fight being stopped although Mike did admit he did not really enjoy fighting for the last 15 years. Tyson gave a spirited and somewhat desperate effort in the previous round before his worn-out body finally collapsed at the end. I thought his performances were more spirited in the McBride and D. Williams fights than Ali's performances in the Holmes and Berbick fights. I do realize that Tyson's opponents were not in the same class as Ali's but he definitely showed more spirit. Even after the terrible leg injury suffered in the D. Williams fight, he soldiered on for the next couple of rounds trying to win and even tried to get up using his useless leg.

Enough about the last two fights of his career. Let's go back to the beginning. No other fighter in the history of heavyweight boxing had the dominance that he enjoyed for five straight years. Up until the Buster Douglas fight, no-one had even come CLOSE to beating him or even knocked him down. He steamrolled over everyone he faced. He was hardly ever hit and he may have been the greatest puncher in the history of boxing. If you look at the early Tyson, you'll see a boxer with both a spectacular defence and offense. Perhaps only a young Ali had this kind of natural talent. In his younger years, he had fierce determination and a will to win that nobody else had. Not to mention, he had tremendous speed and deadly power.

I do admit the division wasn't at it's strongest when he was Undisputed Heavyweight Champ, but that wasn't his fault. While it wasn't at it's strongest, it was not at it's weakest either. Spinks and Holmes were still very formidable when they faced him and are in-fact legends. Yes, Spinks was a light heavy; but then so was Billy Conn who nearly dethroned Joe Louis. Spinks was the first man to defeat Larry Holmes who was a man who held the HEAVYWEIGHT title for more than seven years!!! Tony Tucker was undefeated when he fought Mike and a damn good boxer who had defeated Buster Douglas prior to losing to Tyson. Bonecrusher Smith and Frank Bruno weren't the greatest boxers but they sure could punch. Carl Williams and Pinklon Thomas had great jabs.

You cannot say that his wins were against a bunch of stiffs. It's unfortunate that Mike started to seriously slip after all the turmoil in his life. You could obviously tell in the first Bruno fight after the loss of Kevin Rooney. Kevin was the best trainer for Mike. For evidence, look at any fight where Kevin was his trainer. A great fighter needs a great trainer. Let me rephrase that. A great fighter needs the RIGHT trainer. Without Dundee, I don't think Ali would have been as successful. Without Goldman, I don't think Marciano would have made it to the top. It was evident in the Douglas fight that Tyson did not prepare for any sort of challenge and did not have a strong corner.

To make a long story short, Mike's career was cut in 1992 as he was convicted of date-rape in Indiana. He still maintains his innocence but over three years in an Indiana prison certainly did not help him regain his form. Yes, you could argue that Ali went a couple of years without fighting. But, he was free and had access to all the boxing training he wanted wheras Tyson did not. And still, as great as he was, Ali was not nearly the Ali that beat Sonny Liston twice prior to that.

The post-prison Tyson had only moderate success. He easily defeated Frank Bruno and Bruce Seldon and regained two of the belts he used to own before running into Evander Holyfield. If you look at the two Holyfield fights, Mike lost to as much to head-collisions as much as Holyfield's fists. You could see he was clearly hurt by the head butts and finally lost his sanity in the second fight because of it. I'm not taking anything away from Holy as I consider him a great fighter, as well. Maybe the butts were unintentional, but they certainly played a part in Tyson losing the way he did in those two fights. Again, another long lay-off as he was suspended from boxing.

A rusty Tyson finally came back and knocked out Frans Botha but you could see at this point Mike was starting to perform like an older fighter. I suppose he had his lifestyle to blame as much as time away from the ring. Tyson liked the nightlife and loved to party whereas other great heavies seemed to refrain from that type of lifestyle. By the time he faced Lewis, he was obviously a shell of his former self. There were also a lot of rumurs he may have been on meds at the time. Watching Lewis-Tyson was no different than watching Marciano-Louis. Although Lewis and Tyson were around the same age you could see one fighter was at the top of his game whereas the other fighter was practically shot.

So there you have it. How do we judge how good Tyson was? Yes, some of his victories were against fighters who were scared of him but then so were a lot of other of the great heavyweight's victories. You can't say Louis, Foreman, Lewis and Frazier did not have opponents that were scared of them. Thinking of Tyson opponents; I don't believe Holmes, Ruddock, Bruno, Tucker, Thomas and Berbick were afraid of him. For evidence, look at the staredowns. Look at the way Ruddock and Bruno came out and jumped on Tyson throwing everything but the kitchen sink at him. And also, you cannot say Tyson could not take a punch and didn't have heart as Ruddock, Bruno, Tucker and Smith hit him with their best shots and still couldn't put him down. It took Douglas and Lewis many rounds of hitting Tyson cleanly over and over to finally take him out. And we all know how powerful a puncher 6 ft 250 lb Lewis was. Any boxer will most likely go down if their eyes are so swelled that they can't see the punches coming.

And about Tyson vs. the Legends and who would win...

It could be debated until the end of time who would win. I'm sure if Tyson had not faced Douglas in his career, people would've said he'd have crushed him. I'm sure if Ali had not fought L. Spinks, people would have said he'd have easily beaten Spinks. You never quite know what's going to happen in a boxing match. That's what makes it so fun and intriguing. Everyone will have their own opinion and this will never change.

poet682006

08-08-2007, 11:28 PM

Energy

08-09-2007, 01:03 AM

Prime Tyson is probably the best ever, the only one I can see stopping him is Lennox, but still a prime Tyson vs a prime Lennox, I'd have to favor Tyson because in his prime he had it all, the short powerful jab to get inside, the hooks, the body shots, the head movement he was a ****ing machine in his prime, too bad he had a really short prime though...

Yogi

08-09-2007, 01:46 AM

They're easily the most obnoxious and overbearing fans in boxing

There also the most hypocritical fans I've ever encountered, as well, and for evidence, check out Mintcar's comments on Tucker being "undefeated and a damn good boxer" even though he entered that fight going through his own turmoils with very recent management changes, drug issues, and even saw him in court on the very eve of his battle with Tyson dealing with legal issues with another former manager, Dennis Rappaport. But Tyson has some prefight issues against Douglas and it suddenly becomes "unfortunate".

Ditto in the case of Berbick (his prefight troubles with management, court dealing in the days leading up to, numerous hospital visits for puzzling breathing troubles only a couple/few days before, last minute addition of Dundee to his camp, the fact that he tried to back out for the Cooney fight that was propsed to him, etc., etc., etc) make Tyson's in Tokyo look like nothing at all), Thomas, Tubbs, Biggs, Holmes, Bruno*, as any research through the news archives will show that they were ALL dealing with a number of issues going into the Tyson fight, and if one was a fan of any of them, they could most certainly and just as easily write of Tyson's win against them much in the manner Tyson fans write off his loss to Douglas as "unfortunate"

*Bruno not scared? Well true, he did come to fight Tyson in that one, but all of those trips to the shrink in the prefight for the very reason of him being on edge over his meeting with Tyson would certainly bring question to that, or as some Tyson biographers like to put it;

"It's doubtful whether any challenger in the history of heavyweight boxing has been so messed about in the build-up to a championship contest as British hero Frank Bruno." - Mike Tyson: Release of Power

I don't want to turn this into a long winded rant on Tyson, but if one has the opinion that "no-one had even come CLOSE to beating him" then I might suggest that they watch the Tillis fight because CLOSE was exactly what that fight was.

Another thing is, yes Tyson did in fact have access to boxing training in prison, and in fact, his actual prison job was in the gymnasium helping out fellow inmates get in shape through boxing training, as well as him basically being in charge of the equipment and such. His daily training routine while in prison was written about back then and from Tyson's own mouth (worked out in the prison gymnasium as if preparing for a fight, so he said), he stated he used to get up every morning to train in the gym and his training also consisted of almost daily eight mile runs around the prison grounds. Heck, anybody who remembers that interview towards the end of his sentence or remember how he looked on his release, would certainly see that those stories of him training in prison must;ve been true because, by appearance, that was a very fit man that came out from behind bars, as he even looked like he weighed quite a bit less than what he did when fighting (certainly at least 30 or 40 pounds lighter than the Tyson, who was not in training at the time, who went into prison as a 240 pound man), and in fact his appearance from that point to the McNeeley fight lent much in the old argument about Tyson being on the roids when he came back to boxing.

Not saying Tyson came out as the same fighter he went in as, no, but only typed that to point out that training options were given to Tyson in prison and he took advantage of them.

Also for an opinion based point brought up, I'll certainly take the Tyson who fought the likes of Ruddock, Stewart and Tillman over the Rooney-trained Tyson who fought Ribalta when "there was a lack of old snap and sparkle in Tyson's work, and at times he was made to look almost pedestrian as he plodded after Ribalta throwing single punches rather than his usual dynamite combinations. (page 132 of Release of Power). From what I saw in the Ribalta fight, I'd say Tyson certainly had much better fights/performances during that time and even post-Douglas.

Tyson was good enough and did accomplish enough to be classified as a great fighter in my view, and he certainly added a bunch of interest to the division during his run. But can we stop with the hypocrisies when it comes to his opponents' situations and his own situations?

Brassangel

08-09-2007, 04:13 PM

10 points for Yogi.

Also, I think that the Tyson who fought Ruddock was a step in the right direction. The loss to Douglas (and I will say it again), may have been good for him.

Yaman

08-09-2007, 05:24 PM

Good points brought up. Tyson was never the same after prison, not after Douglass. I always believed this, and he did look much better after Douglass. It was probably his age that allowed him to take a bad beating, and still be the same after it.
And Yogi, good point about Tyson's physique after and in prison. I think you're right, he definitely worked out a lot and this made him look so muscular and ripped against McNeely. There is a misunderstanding about Tyson being on steroids. Sabbath could learn from this.

SABBATH

08-12-2007, 01:18 AM

There is a misunderstanding about Tyson being on steroids. Sabbath could learn from this.

Jesus ****. I rarely ever post here anymore and I'm still getting sucked into threads.

If anyone thinks heavyweights aren't cranking these days your heads are in the sands. James Toney for God's sake is testing positive. Vitali Klitschko was caught in the amateurs, Roy Jones has tested positive and Evander Holyfield is a given to name just a few. Take a look at Shannon Briggs. Sorry. Professional fighters don't suddenly baloon like that.

Tyson never had a moral dilemna regarding his conduct, nor his consumption of alcohol or drugs. What makes anyone think he would suddenly become righteous when it came to using a drug that would increase his lean muscle mass, strength and aggression? Maybe his erratic behaviour both in and out of the ring was in part from roid rage.

Tyson reportedly came out of prison weighing around 190 lbs. The loss of that much natural muscle mass doesn't jive, especially when he had likely never weighed that much since his teen years. The body plateaus in the late 20's, and a drop of that magnitude of natural lean muscle mass is unlikely.

And for the record before the fanboys jump all over me, this isn't a specific slam on Tyson. I'm sure many athletes from all sports are cranking.

Brassangel

08-13-2007, 01:51 PM

It is good to see you back, Sabbath. Every time I return here the intelligent posters seem to dwindle and fade leaving a new class of fanboys.

Yaman

08-13-2007, 05:04 PM

Jesus ****. I rarely ever post here anymore and I'm still getting sucked into threads.

If anyone thinks heavyweights aren't cranking these days your heads are in the sands. James Toney for God's sake is testing positive. Vitali Klitschko was caught in the amateurs, Roy Jones has tested positive and Evander Holyfield is a given to name just a few. Take a look at Shannon Briggs. Sorry. Professional fighters don't suddenly baloon like that.

Tyson never had a moral dilemna regarding his conduct, nor his consumption of alcohol or drugs. What makes anyone think he would suddenly become righteous when it came to using a drug that would increase his lean muscle mass, strength and aggression? Maybe his erratic behaviour both in and out of the ring was in part from roid rage.

Tyson reportedly came out of prison weighing around 190 lbs. The loss of that much natural muscle mass doesn't jive, especially when he had likely never weighed that much since his teen years. The body plateaus in the late 20's, and a drop of that magnitude of natural lean muscle mass is unlikely.

And for the record before the fanboys jump all over me, this isn't a specific slam on Tyson. I'm sure many athletes from all sports are cranking.

Perhaps it has to do with your past comments, but whatever. Atleast there's good potential of debates when people call each other out.

First off, we weren't talking about today's heavyweights. Tyson's return from prison was a good decade ago, and he didn't baloon. It makes perfect sence for a person with good genetics to reach his old weight, only with muscles that have a lot more definition. How? The answer to that is: Tyson never did weights in the 80s, not even before prison. But he did after prison.

So Yogi's post about Tyson working out hard in prison supports my argument. Other things like his decline in speed and accuracy of his punches also show this(I realise that also had to do with his lay off, though) because those are the side effects when you train like this. Lifting weights doesn't do any good in boxing other than build muscle.

The rest is speculation. I haven't seen any proof of him being 190lb in prison(I've seen the interview, and you couldn't tell exactly). Tyson is a genetic freak, it's not impossible for a guy like him(who trained religiously) to look muscular at 100 kilo's.

VERSATILE2K12

08-13-2007, 05:09 PM

Perhaps it has to do with your past comments, but whatever. Atleast there's good potential of debates when people call each other out.

First off, we weren't talking about today's heavyweights. Tyson's return from prison was a good decade ago, and he didn't baloon. It makes perfect sence for a person with good genetics to reach his old weight, only with muscles that have a lot more definition. How? The answer to that is: Tyson never did weights in the 80s, not even before prison. But he did after prison.

So Yogi's post about Tyson working out hard in prison supports my argument. Other things like his decline in speed and accuracy of his punches also show this(I realise that also had to do with his lay off, though) because those are the side effects when you train like this. Lifting weights doesn't do any good in boxing other than build muscle.

The rest is speculation. I haven't seen any proof of him being 190lb in prison(I've seen the interview, and you couldn't tell exactly). Tyson is a genetic freak, it's not impossible for a guy like him(who trained religiously) to look muscular at 100 kilo's.
Its hard to explain to ppl that arnt familiar with it. I think I share the same genetic makeup in build as Tyson does. It doesnt take me awhile to get more built if I pleased to. It doesnt take me awhile to lose weight if I pleased to. In person Im a big guy,you cant tell from pics Ive had on the net. But like most ppl know,Im a guy that eats fast food at least 2 times a day everyday and doesnt run.Yet Im still in shape physically. Just gotta have it I guess.

SABBATH

08-13-2007, 09:56 PM

I haven't seen any proof of him being 190lb in prison(I've seen the interview, and you couldn't tell exactly). Tyson is a genetic freak, it's not impossible for a guy like him(who trained religiously) to look muscular at 100 kilo's. My concern is more the drop off of 30-40 lbs not what he looked like at 220 lbs. If you are natural then your body plateaus as you hit your late 20's, then you start having trouble keeping weight off, not retaining 30-40 lbs of lean muscle mass.

I'm naturally a heavyweight and haven't seen south of 210 since high school. I'm built very similar to Tyson but a little taller at 6'0. I've went through phases of training/not training/watching what I eat/not watching what I eat etc....and my weight floats between 220-250, and before you get visions of of Jabba The Hut I have 18 inch arms and a waist that only fluctuates between 32-36 inches.

I have seen roid users drop 30 lbs like it was nothing going off cycles, and it raises an eyebrow to me when Tyson allegedly did the same. I'm not making a flat out accusation just questioning.

Frazier's 15th round

08-13-2007, 11:03 PM

Mike Quityson is not the greatest ever. That's all we have to worry about. You can make up a "what if" scenario for anybody.

Yogi

08-14-2007, 01:28 AM

So Yogi's post about Tyson working out hard in prison supports my argument.

Well shoot, if that's the way you interpretated my post, Yaman, then perhaps I didn't explain myself well enough because my post was intended to show that Tyson was not only physically fit (in the "lean" sort of way), but had also reduced his overall size down to about 200 or so when he came out.

I think I also threw something in there about how people became suspicious of Tyson & steroids because he went from a physically fit 200 (apx) pound man when he came out of prison, to a muscular 220 when he faced McNeeley, which all happened in a span of something like four or five months.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Yogi

08-14-2007, 01:50 AM

Here's another way of saying it;

"It was not only Tyson's fortune that shrank. The man who walked free from prison looked a shadow of the 238-pound colossus who was handcuffed and led away to the cells in March 1992. He had kept himself fit in the prison gymnasium with daily workouts, but the awesome physique that used to promote fear in his opponents was much reduced. This led to the anti-Tyson brigade dragging up old allegations that he owed his enormous physical presence to steroids, and that the effect had worn off."

"By the time he climbed back into the ring against McNeeley the awesome 'Iron Mike' shape was back, and people on the outside looking in wondered how he had managed the transformation in such quick time."

Just a couple quick quotes from 'Mike Tyson: The Release of Power'.

poet682006

08-14-2007, 03:50 AM

Of course, as Tyson told the Arizona state trooper: "I love smokin' weed and snortin' coke" ROFLMAO!

Poet

Brassangel

08-14-2007, 01:51 PM

It's reasonable to question steroids in Mike Tyson's career. It should also be noted, however, that some people are simply phsyical freaks, capable of appearing in shape when they have to. Just because Mike looked great against McNeeley, doesn't mean he was in as good of shape (ie: stamina, lung capacity, etc.), as he looked.

I read somewhere about Arnold Schwarzenegger (sp?), long after he stopped juicing and the effects had worn off, that he would let his body go in between films. Then, a couple of weeks before shooting began on a new movie, he simply did his old bodybuilding routine (minus the 'roids, of course), and he looked like a million bucks.

Tyson probably never took them as a kid, though he naturally filled out. He probably started getting chubby (238 lbs.) after his last fight before prison due to lack of activity. Tyson, post Rooney Tyson that is, was notorious for taking lots of lazy time in between fights and simply working out as little as three or four weeks before the fight took place. If, while doing this, he was able to shed nearly 20 lbs in such a short time, I could see how he cut all the way down to 200 exercising day in, day out for nearly 4 years. A change in diet or rehydration methods in a real boxing gym could also account for a jump back to 220 in a few months' time. It was the weight he was comfortable fighting at, so it would make sense that he would do what he could to get back there.

Or he just took steroids...I really have no clue. I'm merely speculating. :thinking:

Yaman

08-14-2007, 02:41 PM

My concern is more the drop off of 30-40 lbs not what he looked like at 220 lbs. If you are natural then your body plateaus as you hit your late 20's, then you start having trouble keeping weight off, not retaining 30-40 lbs of lean muscle mass.

I'm naturally a heavyweight and haven't seen south of 210 since high school. I'm built very similar to Tyson but a little taller at 6'0. I've went through phases of training/not training/watching what I eat/not watching what I eat etc....and my weight floats between 220-250, and before you get visions of of Jabba The Hut I have 18 inch arms and a waist that only fluctuates between 32-36 inches.

I have seen roid users drop 30 lbs like it was nothing going off cycles, and it raises an eyebrow to me when Tyson allegedly did the same. I'm not making a flat out accusation just questioning.

Then again, the combination of a diffirent diet and workout must have contributed to the loss of mass as well. Tyson ate a lot(overweight before fights, even today he walks in at around 250), he needed the food to keep his build. A lot of Tyson's family members were obese, and he carried these genetics as well as far as I can tell. So he basicely goes to jail, doesn't get as much food, works out and lift weights for years. Keeps a lean ripped physique, then gets out of jail to fight again and gets back to his old diet and is back to his old weight, only with a more impressive look because of the training he did for years..and because Tyson was this genetic freak, he could get back to this physique in maybe half a year. Just my thoughts.
Oh btw, I think that it's possible Tyson took steroids much later in his career, though. Such as before the Etienne fight.

Well shoot, if that's the way you interpretated my post, Yaman, then perhaps I didn't explain myself well enough because my post was intended to show that Tyson was not only physically fit (in the "lean" sort of way), but had also reduced his overall size down to about 200 or so when he came out.

I think I also threw something in there about how people became suspicious of Tyson & steroids because he went from a physically fit 200 (apx) pound man when he came out of prison, to a muscular 220 when he faced McNeeley, which all happened in a span of something like four or five months.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Very well then, no problemo. But I think now it does in this post.

The Iron Man

08-17-2007, 11:32 AM

I think Tyson could have been the best heavyweight ever, and if we are talking about primes then he probably was.

As for a prime Lewis beating a prime tyson, i think tyson would win this. Put it this Way, Douglas, Rahman and McCall are around the same level of fighter and in his Prime Lewis lost to two "Douglas'

catskills23

08-17-2007, 06:51 PM

tyson was never 200 pounds when he was released from prison . That is pure crap he was 240 pounds at least.

Brassangel

08-18-2007, 02:35 AM

You can question Sabbath's opinions, but rarely his sources. I remember reading that Tyson was pretty lean when he came out of prison. Whether it had anything to do with juice, or simply a different workout schedule/diet is what's in the air.

The Iron Man

08-19-2007, 09:31 AM

In Prison Tyson focused alot on Weights, were as before he was doing more push ups, press ups the only weight training he really done were Rolls.

Brassangel

08-21-2007, 01:39 PM

Weight/strength training is a great way to shed pounds, if it's high rep workouts not focused on bodybuilding.

Ah, this thread got boring...

FUMIN 88

08-21-2007, 01:45 PM

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???

no................

ForemanCrossArm

08-22-2007, 10:32 PM

Honestly, I think Tyson was too small to be the greatest HW of all-time. His career was over when Buster got up from the uppercut in the 8th round [and when Bruno retired, ha, joke.] and proved that if your a big enough HW with enough talent and/or heart you are going to be able to wear him down, hurt him, and put him out of his misery eventually.

Had it not been Buster then it would've been Bowe, or Foreman, but one of them would've done the exact same thing. Lennox Lewis of the early 1990's probably would've gotten floored, he didn't have the bulk to surive the uppercut at that point-and-time.

Brassangel

08-22-2007, 11:40 PM

I don't think that Foreman in 1990's beats Tyson. Contrary to the belief that it would happen like it did with Frazier, Tyson can actually fight at mid-range. He used the quick, triple jabs to get where he needed to be, and could fire from any position. He had much greater handspeed than Foreman did, and I don't think he would have had problems hitting home. It would be a tough fight, but an old George Foreman doesn't win the title in the 90's if Tyson hadn't gone to prison. I think that Tyson could win the fight much the same way that Morrison did, only with a little more excitement.

Furthermore, big, strong men aren't a formula for beating him. He gave up height, reach, (and heart), in nearly every professional fight he fought. Consider that, after Douglas, he fought Ruddock twice, a man who stood 6'3", weighed 230+ pounds, and hit just about as hard as Mike did. Donovan was a legit contender for a good stretch, though he never quite got there. Ruddock was not afraid of Tyson, and he proved that he could take bombs, deliver bombs, fire a solid jab, and go the distance if necessary. Yet, Tyson didn't fold, he didn't quit, and he didn't get frustrated. He just kept working; it was a side of Tyson that we never saw before, and we never saw again. These two fights were proof that Mike could have gone somewhere.

I don't know how many times this has to be said, but it seems that every time you turn around, someone is saying that, "Tall guys who weren't afraid of Tyson would have eventually beaten him...", and "Holyfield, blah blah blah.." Holyfield didn't prove anything. He beat a Tyson that had 4 years away from the ring, and it took him 11 rounds of Mike standing absolutely still before the ref decided to stop it. Holyfield himself has said in multiple television interviews and news articles, to this day, "I know I didn't fight the real Mike Tyson...." and, "I got into the best shape, mentally, physically, and when I got into that ring, expecting to fight a monster, he just stood there while I threw punches. I knew something wasn't right." The 2nd fight...well, I've commented on that one plenty of times.

I get so frustrated for being among the few who view this character with a non-bias view. To the posters here, Tyson is either "unbeatable if he kept Rooney," or, "he reached his best, and it sucked!". I guess the silliest part is the wasted energy I've just spent on this topic, once again, for the sake of eliminating the presupposed assumptions.

I'm old, and tired; I'm sure this whole thing will sound retarded when I read it in the morning.

Great topic! :nonono:

poet682006

08-23-2007, 12:24 AM

Ah! Brassdip**** is weighing in on yet another subject he knows absolutely NOTHING about.

Poet

ForemanCrossArm

08-23-2007, 01:51 AM

The Iron Man

08-23-2007, 01:08 PM

EVERYONE who either went the distance or beat Tyson (other than Holyfield, 6'2.5") stood 6'3"+ or weighed more than 260. This is like, what, 10 dudes. There is only one exception other than Holyfield, and he was the Real Deal so that is kinda' his excuse, and that would be James Tillis.

If you were 6'3" and had the heart to be a muscular 230+ you would have a chance.. even against Tyson in his prime. And Tyson was going at a pretty damn good clip heading into Holyfield I.. He had 8 fights between then and Buster, against not great but accomplshed competition, and 6 of those fights didn't go 4 rounds! And 2 of them were title fights.

Holyfield shouldn't be dissed here.. he had had ONE fight between Bowe III, Moorer, and Mercer.. all of which could've been losses. Yet he actually righted the ship (sound familiar..) and beat the baddest man on the planet, twice.

And.. uh.. Foreman didn't go down ONCE between '87-'97.. 'nuff said.

Well Danny Williams werent over 6'3" he was 6'1", and he beat Tyson, why cose tyson werent in his prime. Neither was he wen he fought Holyfield, Lewis or Mcbride. Ali came back from a 3 years break, and lost to Leon Spinks and that guy is nothing now, Tyson comes back from 4 years prison losses to Holyfield and his killed about it. Anyone can see tysons skill had diminished since before prison. Lewis Beat Tyson wen he was 36, and its now said how lewis was better than tyson, and that there is noway tyson could have won. Trevor Berbick beat a 39 year old Ali..now is berbick better than Ali? No. Lewis fought his best fights in his 30s, was in his best shape in his 30s, that it something many fighters havent achieve..hell lewis' prime was basically in his late 30's, so you cant judge tyson on that. In both their primes Tyson and Lewis lost. Rahman, McCall and Douglas are around the same in ability, and lewis lost to two "Douglas' in his prime.

ForemanCrossArm

08-23-2007, 11:07 PM

Danny Williams maybe wasn't tall, but he was still "big" as he weighed 260+ (50 lbs. heavier than prime-Holyfield).

Tyson wasn't washed up when he faced Holyfield.. The fight went quite a few rounds, Tyson was coming off two straight TITLE MATCH WINS.

And Lewis was in his best shape at around the time of the Tommy Morrison hype. He was basically a taller, bigger Holyfield. The slimmer Lewis would've dominated the EasternBlocBro's, not relying on a cut to escape with the win.. He lacked focus [at times], and that is probably why the added bulk helped him accomplish more in the late 90's..

I wish we could've seen Riddick Bowe, Tyson, Holyfield, Foreman, and Lewis fight eachother at around '91-ish or so..

The Iron Man

08-24-2007, 11:08 AM

poet682006

08-25-2007, 10:15 AM

Tyson wasnt at his best wen he faced Holyfield, he may have had to title wins, but they werent against opponents as good as Holyfield, he didnt have as much head movement, he accepted more clinches. He walked into punches. Its a shame We couldnt see them lot fight around that time.. but tyson didnt have Kevin Rooney then so his skills would have diminished.

Watch Tyson's old fights: He clinched a lot more than people think. Mostly it was a desire to gain room to punch. When the ref would separate the two fighters Tyson would be right where he wanted to be: At medium range where he had room to throw the leaping punches he liked.

Poet

The Iron Man

08-25-2007, 03:03 PM

Yeh true, but he accepted more clinches later on, he would just walk into people to clinch, he allowed people to come in and clinch were usually he would attack them if they came in close.

ForemanCrossArm

08-25-2007, 08:06 PM

Uh, have you ever seen rounds 1-10 of Holyfield-Tyson I.. ? I'm guessing, from your last post, nope.

All things aside, past all of the bickering, lets just make one little thing clear.. He would've made a helluva' cruiserweight..

The Iron Man

08-25-2007, 08:40 PM

Corse i have seen it, Tyson doesnt finish aswell as he used to he rocks Holyfield and leaves it, he lost the Killer Instict despite this on his return to boxing he was still a good boxer, but before prison he was great..and will always be regarded as great by me and many others

ForemanCrossArm

08-25-2007, 10:00 PM

Thunder Lips

08-26-2007, 01:18 PM

Again, I maintain that Tyson fought very well in the Holyfield fights; probably the best he ever fought in his second career. Watch the early rounds, Tyson is pulling quick sneaky combinations out of his ass and I doubt anybody not named Holyfield would have been caught with them. Watch how sneaky that right hand slip is, and remember that was a killer punch for Tyson that could finish most anybody. Tyson looked great but Holyfield was simply greater. Holyfield may have been on the decline but he pulled off two remarkable swansong performances(unless you count the destruction of a hungry but fat Moorer); near flawless though the first fight is hardly as one sided as people seem to make out these days.

Yes, Holyfield does get rocked in the 4th round of the first fight, though not close to getting knocked out; he is cleary hurt and shaking up. Tyson catches him with a hard combos to the body and the head that buckle his knees quite a bit. Holyfield fought a near perfect fight but Tyson still got some tough shots in throughout.

And old man Foreman would have got the **** beat out of him by Tyson. Hell, another small heavy in Moorer was beating the **** out of Foreman before he ignored his corner's warnings of the loaded right hand. Foreman had a brave, inspired performance against Holyfield and he knocked out Cooper but he lost to Morrison and got pounded by journeyman for the rest of his second career until the Briggs fight. Please.

The Iron Man

08-26-2007, 04:07 PM

Um, he never rocks Holyfield during the whole fight. (At least Holyfield doesn't show it)

He out-boxed, clinched at the right times, used the ring way better, and wasn't even wobbled by that one really awesome combo (round 8 I believe).

He beat Tyson at his own game.

Never got rocked..watch round five, tyson hits him hurts him and Holyfield moves off and tyson dnt come forward. They come back together he hits him again Hurts "The Real Deal" but doent finish like he used to. He lost his Killer Instinct.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zr-FRpofJg

Look Tyson even rocked him in the 10th, but he didnt finish aswell as he had done before prison

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAuA7i2Xgdg&mode=related&search=

poet682006

08-26-2007, 04:23 PM

Never got rocked..watch round five, tyson hits him hurts him and Holyfield moves off and tyson dnt come forward. They come back together he hits him again Hurts "The Real Deal" but doent finish like he used to. He lost his Killer Instinct.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zr-FRpofJg

Look Tyson even rocked him in the 10th, but he didnt finish aswell as he had done before prison

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAuA7i2Xgdg&mode=related&search=

I fear once again Tyson KoolAid is being consumed. It's a well known fact of nature that Tyson nuthuggers see only what they want to see when viewing his fights.

Poet

The Iron Man

08-26-2007, 04:34 PM

poet682006

08-26-2007, 04:39 PM

Are You Kidding? even the commentators agree..some people just dnt like given tyson credit..yeh Holyfield was the better fight i aint disputing im just saying how tysons Skills had diminished, they even say in rnd 10..tyson dosent have that Killer Instinct any more

Heres a good read for you :
http://www.********boxing.com/news.php?p=5073&more=1

The commentators for that fight were shamelessly pro-Tyson. Pachecho turned around in the middle of the fight but Albert and Czyz continued sucking Tyson's nuts right until the end.

Poet

The Iron Man

08-26-2007, 04:44 PM

It's a well known fact of nature that Anti-Tyson People see only what they want to see when viewing his fights.

Read that article?

poet682006

08-26-2007, 04:52 PM

It's a well known fact of nature that Anti-Tyson People see only what they want to see when viewing his fights.

Read that article?

Read Steve Farhood's article covering the fight in Ring Magazine? The fight he was watching was a LOT different from the one YOU were seeing. When was the last time you watched the fight BTW? Not selected highlights, the WHOLE fight?

Poet

The Iron Man

08-26-2007, 04:57 PM

Cant have been too Long ago..i have all of tysons fights since berbick and up to Andrew Golota. You say he saw a fight differnt from what i saw..yet the commentators and That article both agree with me..hmm but yet im the one seeing the fight incorrectly.

poet682006

08-26-2007, 05:13 PM

It's a well known fact of nature that Anti-Tyson People see only what they want to see when viewing his fights.

Read that article?

Cant have been too Long ago..i have all of tysons fights since berbick and up to Andrew Golota. You say he saw a fight differnt from what i saw..yet the commentators and That article both agree with me..hmm but yet im the one seeing the fight incorrectly.

I'll do you better. I have EVERY Tyson fight from his pro debut to the McBride fight. A point of fact is I'm not a Tyson hate: I have nothing against Tyson himself. It's his delusional, KoolAid drinking, nuthugging fans I don't care for. Too many bought into that BS hype from back in the 80s, that he was some unstoppable force. It was all horse pucky, an illusion, a fighter who NEVER existed. Here we are twenty years later and STILL people are worshipping the fighter who never was. And yes, they see what they want to see. The truth is, Tyson fought reasonably well the first four rounds but at NO time did he have Holyfield in trouble and at best he split those rounds on the cards. After round 4 Holyfield quite frankly beat Tyson up. And THAT is what anybody who watches the fight objectively will see.

Poet

The Iron Man

08-26-2007, 05:36 PM

poet682006

08-26-2007, 05:51 PM

Yeh im Not denying Holyfield Beat him..in almost every round. But its eveident (esecially if u have every fight) that his Skills Deminished after prison. Wen he first started pro boxing he had the Invinsability tag on him as did Foreman and Liston and of couse no1 can keep that up forever, especially seeing what happend in tysons life. Id like to ask you your Thoughts on what would happen if Tyson Fought Holyfield Pre Prison? and do u agree the tyson that fought holyfield was not as skilled as the one that fought before prison!?

Yes, I thought he wasn't as good after he got out of prison, BUT Holyfield wasn't as good either at the time the two fought: That cuts both ways. Pre-prison I thought at the time that Holyfield would beat him them then, but of course, that fight never happend. When they DID fight, ironically, I believed Tyson would win because I thought Holyfield was completely shot coming out of the third Bowe fight. As it turned out, Holyfield WAS past his prime but was NOT complely shot. He still had several good fights left in him. Tyson probably did too but he took to fighting only once a year when he wanted an infusion of cash. Mistake. We never got to see those good fights left to Tyson. In my opinion his best fights were the two Ruddock fights: They were competitive and entertaining. His best personal performance was, I believe, against Pinklon Thomas.

Poet

VERSATILE2K12

08-26-2007, 09:00 PM

I dont think anyone has all of Tyson's fights.

poet682006

08-26-2007, 09:03 PM

I dont think anyone has all of Tyson's fights.

I do. All proffesional ones anyway.

Poet

VERSATILE2K12

08-26-2007, 09:06 PM

I do. All proffesional ones anyway.

Poet

Larry Simms.:smashfrea

poet682006

08-26-2007, 09:10 PM

I dont think anyone has all of Tyson's fights.

Larry Simms.:smashfrea

Damn Versi, I just checked my list and I'm missing three. The Simms fight is one of them. I could have sworn I had them all.

Poet

VERSATILE2K12

08-26-2007, 09:12 PM

Damn Versi, I just checked my list and I'm missing three. The Simms fight is one of them. I could have sworn I had them all.

Poet

The Simms fight wasnt recorded ppl say.I have all of his fights besides that one. Most ppl dont have the Jose Ribalta fight,or Mitch Green.

poet682006

08-26-2007, 09:16 PM

The Simms fight wasnt recorded ppl say.I have all of his fights besides that one. Most ppl dont have the Jose Ribalta fight,or Mitch Green.

I have both the Green and Ribalta fights.

Poet

VERSATILE2K12

08-26-2007, 09:21 PM

I have both the Green and Ribalta fights.

Poet

oh yeah. I like watching the Ribalta fight.

The Iron Man

08-26-2007, 09:29 PM

I have watched all the fights apart from Simms..ive also heard it wasnt recorded.

Mike Tyson77

09-03-2007, 01:05 PM

I gotta say Tyson is #1 in my book. If it wasnt for him I wouldnt know Joe Louis,Jack Johnson,Carman Basillio, and way too many other great fighters that I like now. Tyson opened the door to the boxing world for me, I owe him for that.

The Iron Man

09-03-2007, 01:39 PM

Yeh he opend the Boxing world for me aswell, but i cant put him at number 1 as the list isnt decided on that. My all time favourite is Tyson but my ATG is Jo Louis. With tyson at 3 or 4

Mike Tyson77

09-03-2007, 01:46 PM

Yeh he opend the Boxing world for me aswell, but i cant put him at number 1 as the list isnt decided on that. My all time favourite is Tyson but my ATG is Jo Louis. With tyson at 3 or 4

It's an opinion question. Ive heard good arguments for Holmes,Johnson,Ali,Marcaino,Louis as well as Tyson for being #1. But at the end of the day, it's still an opinion.

Just keep in mind though I wouldnt know who Joe Louis is if it wasnt for Tyson. And I love watching Joe Louis fights.

poet682006

09-03-2007, 01:53 PM

It's an opinion question. Ive heard good arguments for Holmes,Johnson,Ali,Marcaino,Louis as well as Tyson for being #1. But at the end of the day, it's still an opinion.

Just keep in mind though I wouldnt know who Joe Louis is if it wasnt for Tyson. And I love watching Joe Louis fights.

Well, I can honestly say it wasn't any one fighter who got me into boxing. It was boxing that got me into particular fighters. When I was young in the mid 70's I fell in love with boxing itself rather than fighters. And I'm still that way. I have my favorite fighters of course but in the end I love boxing more than I love the fighters in question. To me, no fighter is bigger than the sport and if none of my favorites ever existed I would still be watching boxing.

Poet

The Iron Man

09-03-2007, 02:05 PM

Of course its an Opinion, and im saying why In My opinion Tyson is not on the top of my list, how ever much i wish he was!

-CANE-

09-03-2007, 05:39 PM

Maybe had things been different he could have been greatest of all time, but they weren't, Tyson for me comes in at no10. For all his ability in the ring though he lacked mental attributes, he never had the confidence if anyone stood up to him and although he never quit in the ring, he quit in his head and never dug as deep as he should of, and never had the attitude of Holyfield in as I'm gonna win at any cost. He also slowed down after 6-7 rounds even in his prime, and resorted to throwing single shots. Having said that, he is one of my favourite fighters and he re-ignited the heavyweight division and made boxing great again. But you could say that a prime Lennox Lewis could have been the best ever. No one ever saw a real prime Lennox Lewis, by the time steward got hold of him and eventually shaped him into one of the greatest boxers the heavyweights had ever seen, he was into his 30's and past his physical peak, and when he was at his physical peak when he destroyed Ruddock and Bowe **** himself and threw away the belt, he was a very amatuerish boxer compared to the late Lennox Lewis. Has Steward trained him from the very beginning its quite possible he would have retired undefeated, but we will never know.

The Iron Man

09-03-2007, 06:50 PM

I doubt retired undefeated, he had a suspect chin and so was always in danger of being KOed. Tyson had more of a chance of going undefeated than lewis did if he kept, Rooney and cayton, also is Cus and Jimmy Jacobs didnt die

WelshDevilRob

09-03-2007, 07:13 PM

Tyson had most of the tools to be the Greatest but he lacked a few such as adaptability and a boxing brain. He could only fight one way and when that didn't work he ran out of ideas and often got frustrated.

He's in my Top 10 but he would never have been the Greatest of alltime and as his career proved he isn't. Still he was an exciting fighter to watch. George Foreman would have murdered him though.

The Iron Man

09-03-2007, 07:33 PM

Did Liston adapt?lost to Aliteice did frazier adapt? battered by foreman did foreman adapt? beaten by Ali. Yet i bet they are on ur list of all time greats and above tyson

-CANE-

09-03-2007, 07:35 PM

WelshDevilRob

09-03-2007, 07:39 PM

Did Liston adapt?lost to Aliteice did frazier adapt? battered by foreman did foreman adapt? beaten by Ali. Yet i bet they are on ur list of all time greats and above tyson

Tyson wasn't adapting against people like Bonecrusher Smith, James Tillis, Mitch Green, Tony Tucker etc.

I liked watching Tyson fights but he was not as good as Ali, Frazier and Foreman etc.... Tyson never fought anyone in their league unless you consider Tony Tubbs to be Great?

The Iron Man

09-03-2007, 07:44 PM

Im british man and am not biased at all against Lewis. His in mt ATG list, but all of his knock outs are single punches, his chin was alrite but not comparable to ali and holmes who got up after massive shots, remember Ali wasnt knocked out against cooper he got up. i cant remember many times seeing lewis getting up from a knock down. Tyson took 10 rounds of beatings agsint douglas and 8 against lewis, they both said other the fights how he took their best shots. Tyson took Ruddocks and Brunos best shots who were both great punchers, thats y his chin is not questioned.

The Iron Man

09-03-2007, 07:47 PM

All of those fights you named tyson won so obviously there was no need to adabt! He fought who was avaliable, he beat Spinks and Holmes both good and great fighters, im not sayin he was better than Ali. but foreman there is a case, george didnt adapt either and got embarassed by Ali, he werent smart enough to even damage the body

-CANE-

09-03-2007, 07:55 PM

StackMo

09-03-2007, 08:40 PM

Absolutely correct. Stole my thunder as not much was left to be said.

Mike Tyson77

09-03-2007, 09:02 PM

The Noose

09-03-2007, 10:41 PM

Iron Man - Lewis never had a suspect chin, he just got too ****y and lazy. I suggest you checkout youtube and look for Lewis had a great chin and see how many punches he took full on from anyone worth mentioning and then come back and tell me the same thing. Anyone can be kod especially at hw, at least Lewis ko defeats were to big hitters, Tyson got sparked by Douglas who couldn't punch his way out of a paper bag. Douglas never not once knocked out any top fighters, except for Iron Mike, but does anyone say he had a suspect chin, no. Ali got dropped by Cooper, and although he was a big puncher, he never weighed nearly as much as McCall and Rahman and I doubt hit as hard as either of them, yet Ali's jaw was never questioned. Just because he was british and you like to call our hw horizontal he had a suspect chin, I don't agree. In the McCall fight he was up at 6 and the ref stopped it, the only time a hw champ hasn't been allowed to continue after getting up, just because America wanted the title back. And the Rahman fight well Lewis got lazy and didn't see it coming, and it was one hell of a punch, capable of flooring Ali and Tyson and just about any other hw

U believe the ref didnt allow Lewis to continue against McCall because he was british?
Im british and i believe Lewis shouldnt of been allowed to continue. As he was protesting his legs were giving way. I dont believe the ref was biased. There is no real evidence of that.

Iron - Sorry didn't see you was from uk. Lewis took shots off Tyson,Tua,Mercer,Holyfield,Ruddock,Briggs and everyone else. Hell he even took great shots from McCall and Rahman. The McCall punch he was coming onto it which doubles it's power anyway, and he got up and it was stopped. He took great shots off Rahman which he saw and braced himself for, the one that got through was because he was being lazy and ****y and didn't see it, and if you can't see it coming, you can't brace yourself for it. Lewis was better than Tyson and would have beaten him prime or no prime. Tyson took 5 beatings in his career, Lewis took none, even well past his prime, no-one ever gave Lewis a beating. That should tell you something. Tyson was great, but Lewis was greater.

The reason Tyson took 5 beatings is because he could take a punch. Lewis on the other hand got sparked out twice with single shots. Every fighter gets caught with bombs they dont see coming, but most either take it, get hurt but recover, go down for a count.Lewis got stopped.
Even against Henry Akinwade he was caught and touched down but it wasnt called a knock down.
He had a decent chin, but not comparable to Tyson or Ali.

Tyson was shot wen he fought Lewis, yet it still took Lewis 8 rounds to finish him. Tyson at his best got hit very little. Lewis would have real trouble landing clean, and if he did Tyson would be able to take it.
Lewis on the other hand could not take a Tyson combination. IMO.

-CANE-

09-04-2007, 05:41 AM

Bobby Pazuzu - You say the reason took 5 beatings was because he could take a punch, I never said he couldn't. But he also took the beatings because he wasn't as good as what a lot of people think. He took the beatings because they were better than him. Tyson fans always make excuses and say he wasn't in his prime, or he never trained properly. Also I said Lewis had a very good chin, but I never said it was comparible to Tyson's or Ali's. I believe they had better chins than Lewis, but Lewis's was very good and just because he suffered two ko losses everyone suspects he had a glass jaw, and a prime Tyson would have kod him, that is utter bull****.
I also said that no -one ever questioned Tyson's chin or Ali's, what I meant by this, was not saying Lewis's was comparible or better becuase it wasn't, but that Douglas couldn't punch for **** and still stopped Tyson, but no one questions his jaw. Had the McCall ko happened on Tyson and not Lewis, all Tyson fan's would have said 'lucky punch' and what a great punch it was and he was walking on to it, which doubles the power. And had Lewis been beaten up badly by douglas and then kod, they all would have said, ha got outboxed and beaten up by a nobody, and gets knocked out by someone that can't punch. You say Tyson was shot when he fought Lewis, well Lewis was well past it as well, and way way past it when he fought Klitchko, but he always found a way to win and never got beaten up, he also had 5 times as much heart at Tyson and 5 times much more confidence. Even Tyson in his prime, as that is the only argument all Tyson fan's use, did have the power to knock Lewis out, and while a possibility, I don't think it would have happened. Lewis wouldn't have got lazy against a prime Tyson as he did in his losses when he thought he could switch off. The better the opponent the better Lewis fought. He would have run for 6 rounds, banging Tyson with the jab and keeping him at bay, and stopping him in his tracks with devastating uppercuts, as Tyson tried to bull his way in. Tyson would have thrown combos in the early rounds, but not all would have got through, and fallen on Lewis arms, Lewis would have gave back just as much, which would have deterred Tyson. Who we all know never won a fight against a world class fighter that stood up to him, prime or no prime. Lewis would have kod Tyson in rounds 11-12 or won a unanimous decision, busting him up badly.

The Noose

09-04-2007, 08:25 AM

Im not interested in what Tyson nuthuggers would or wouldnt say. I know there are alot of them, and theyre ****in annoying as hell.
I consider myself Tyson fan, and wouldnt of just made excuses for him if he got KO'd the way Lewis did.
Talking about excuses....Lewis was lazy? He walked onto the punch which doubled the power? That is always used as an excuse by Lewis fans. Eventhough they are both true, i dont know of any other heavyweight champ to be KO'd twice with 1 punch against such opposition. Laziness is a poor excuse for a champion.
Lewis didnt have a glass jaw. Both his KO losses were huge shots. But his chin was questionale at times.
Douglas was a big heavyweight that hit Tyson with power shots for 10 rounds.
Tyson and Lewis had very different styles. Tyson without his combinations, movement and hunger was just a big puncher. There is a huge difference between him at his best and him after prison.
Lewis was always a boxer first, reling on his great jab and setting opponents up for righthands, he never hd a 3 year lay off, and his style meant he could continue to be successful as he got older. He may of lost his speed slightly, but always had his technique, somthing Tyson lost in 1989!

I have huge respect for Lewis. He grew wiser as he aged, the complete opposite to Tyson who only grew worse.
Il always believe Tyson would KO Lewis for these reasosn; Tyson in his prime didnt have trouble slipping boxers jabs,he would lip and counter with great speed and timing. Lewis wasnt able to hit Tyson cleanly with his uppercut eventhough Tyson was shot, i dont see how he would do it against a young fast Tyson.
Tyson might take some big shots, but Lewis, i dont think, could take too many of Tysons shots within the first 6 rounds.
Its either Tyson early or Lewis late. But Tyson would alwys be dangerous.

poet682006

09-04-2007, 09:57 AM

I think it's a mistake to say Douglas couldn't punch. He DID score a one punch KO over Mike White; someone Michael Moorer, who defininately COULD punch, had trouble getting out of there.

I've said it before, but boxing fans seem to hang at the extremes: Either a fighter has one-punch KO power or he can't punch at all; there is no inbetween. Obviously there are many levels of power between those two extremes but it never seems to be recognised in these sort of discussions.

Poet

-CANE-

09-04-2007, 12:43 PM

Bobby - Nice to hear from a Tyson fan that isn't a nut hugger. Your'e right about Lewis being lazy, especially against inferior oppostion, he also liked to fight at his own pace and control the tempo. But he showed in both rematches that they were flukes. Tyson although past it, never avenged defeat against Holyfield a fight he should have won. Tyson was intimidated against Holyfield because he knew Holyfield wasn't intimidated by him. You see he lacked mental confidence and never dug deep when he had to, which is the true mark of a champion, something Lennox did on numerous occasions, surely an educated boxing fan must agree with me on this. I also think your correct in the assesment of a fight between the 2 had they met earlier when Tyson was in his prime. Either Tyson kos him by 6 or Lennox beats him on points or stops him in the last 2 rounds. Personally I think the latter, but even if Tyson had knocked him out, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have intimidated Lennox and he would have done a number on Tyson in the rematch. I personally think no one ever saw a real prime Lennox, because in his physical prime, when he had plenty of speed and power against Ruddock he was very amaturish and had his feet to wide apart, but after being with steward for a few years was a much better boxer technically, but was a lot bigger and slower, too big for my liking. Had steward had him from turning pro, and he met Tyson at his physical peak I think we would have seen Lennox better than at any time in his career, that would have been a prime Lennox and that Lennox would have beaten Tyson, or had an even better chance of not getting knocked out by him.

ForemanCrossArm

09-04-2007, 01:14 PM

prime tyson versus pre-The Fight frazier woulda' been great.. (or, basically, Spinks Tyson versus Ali Frazier)

Mike Tyson77

09-04-2007, 01:31 PM

I personally think no one ever saw a real prime Lennox,

I personally think on ever saw a real prime Tyson. He spent what would have been his best years in prsion for a crime in which their was no evidence to convict him on.

Tyson learned a lot from the Douglas fight. It made him better. Jack Johnson and Jack Dempsey both got KTFO early in their careers, but it made them better.

The Noose

09-04-2007, 07:50 PM

I personally think on ever saw a real prime Tyson. He spent what would have been his best years in prsion for a crime in which their was no evidence to convict him on.

Tyson learned a lot from the Douglas fight. It made him better. Jack Johnson and Jack Dempsey both got KTFO early in their careers, but it made them better.

I dont think the Dougles defeat made Tyson better. It made Ruddock more confident, but Tyson still got hit too much and was wild. He then went to prison.

The Noose

09-04-2007, 07:56 PM

The Iron Man

09-05-2007, 11:31 AM

Iron - Sorry didn't see you was from uk. Lewis took shots off Tyson,Tua,Mercer,Holyfield,Ruddock,Briggs and everyone else. Hell he even took great shots from McCall and Rahman. The McCall punch he was coming onto it which doubles it's power anyway, and he got up and it was stopped. He took great shots off Rahman which he saw and braced himself for, the one that got through was because he was being lazy and ****y and didn't see it, and if you can't see it coming, you can't brace yourself for it. Lewis was better than Tyson and would have beaten him prime or no prime. Tyson took 5 beatings in his career, Lewis took none, even well past his prime, no-one ever gave Lewis a beating. That should tell you something. Tyson was great, but Lewis was greater.

Lewis didnt take Tysons best shots, and if u watch the fight i think thats fair to say, yeh tyson got beaten and bad, but that was lewis at his best, he improved with age and that is obvious. Dont bull **** me about he was moving into a punch, you take it or you dont. The fact is Lewis got knocked out each time by one punch. Tyson got beaten in his losses because this didnt happend, because it couldnt happen he had a better chin, look at the great fighters they all took beatings, Ali, Louis, Frazier, Liston. All great but still took beatings Lewis and Douglas even say Tyson took there best punches. Against holyfield tyson took the punches was knocked off balance once. As for you saying tyson didnt follow up he losses, the douglas one was impossible as he was a gonner by the time tyson would fight him next, there was never going to be a third holy fight and the other he was old. I think you should read my post in the Top 5 Heavyweights or top 10 its in one if them topics. Also watch the tyson interview i posted

-CANE-

09-05-2007, 06:06 PM

Iron Man - First of all I did check out your Tyson interviews, check out my reply. I am not a Tyson hater, he's one of my favourite fighters. Secondly Lewis didn't take Tyson's best shots, but he took the best he had to offer on that night, and he got hit with a few good punches, and avoided the rest. Yes he improved with age, but only technically and that was all down to training for a period of time under the great manny steward. He was a lot bigger and slower than when he fought ruddock, so Lewis wasn't in his prime when he fought Tyson, despite a lot of people thinking that. Try reading a couple of posts up, my discussion with Bobby Pazuzu regarding a prime Lennox and a prime Tyson. They were both great fighters, and had they met when Tyson was in his prime, and everyone seen Lennox's prime because no-one ever did, if manny steward had trained him from the beginning a prime Lennox would have been when he fought Ruddock, when he weighed a lot less and was twice as fast as later in his career and could still take out most heavyweights with one shot and anyone with his combination punching over a period of time, but a lot better technically. You see Lennox as good as he was when he fought Ruddock was still like an amateur with his feet wide apart and not setting himself properly to get maximum leverage and power, and wasn't very good on the inside like he was later in his career, that Lennox the one we never saw would have IMO beaten Tyson in his prime. When he was fighting Ruddock as he was fast and amateurish, I say his speed gives Tyson some problems but he gets knocked out because he was off balance and still had a lot to learn technically. The late Lennox that we saw like when he fought Tyson, had Tyson been in his prime, its a pickem. Either Tyson ko's him by 6 or Lennox beats him on points or stops him late. I also agree with you in that Tyson had a better chin, much better, one of the best the heavyweight division has seen, I've never said anything other than that, but that fact alone doesn't make Tyson greater, just because Lewis got ko'd twice. It also doesn't mean for certain a prime Tyson would ko any version of Lewis. What I said was Lewis had a really good chin, but not comparable to Tyson,Ali or Holmes. Being a great isn't just on who had the best chin. Its also not bull**** or an excuse that he walked onto McCall's shot which doubled the power, any boxing fan knows if your coming onto a shot rather than moving a way from it, it severly increases the chances of knocking you out, and carries more power because you are coming onto it. He got up at 6, yes he was shaky and may well have been stopped had it gone on, but he was never given the chance to prove it, so no-one can say for sure. He might of hung on for dear life and made it to the end of the round and recovered, no-one knows. By the time he fought Rahman he had slowed down considerably, was over confident and lazy and never trained properly and never acclimatized himself to the conditions in S.A. An excuse no, that's he's fault he should have been better prepared and got knocked into oblivion, and this time was never getting up. But he picked himself up and trained properly for the rematch, took just as good as punches in the rematch and produced an ever better one in getting revenge and proving that the first fight was a fluke and that he was the better man. That is the mark of a true champion. Yes it was impossible for Tyson to rematch Douglas, he did rematch Holyfield even though way past his prime, and got beat again, even at that stage of his career I still say he had enough speed and power and boxing ability to beat Holyfield on both occasions, except for one thing his mental toughness. He never really truly dug deep in the fights he was losing to try and win, with possibly the exception of the douglas fight, but even then it was more a case of trying to take his head off with one shot, and coming in straight on or just standing there trying to slip punches, while trying to land a big one of his own. Where was the lateral movement and the combination punching and the true grit and determination when he really needed it, it was never there. No he never quit in the ring even when he was beaten mentally, he wanted to prove his manhood and take his beatings like a man, just like against Lewis, which he even says in his interview that you posted. He resigned himself to the fact that he wasn't gonna win, but he was gonna take as much punishment as possible and not quit. That's why comparing Mike Tyson even a prime one, against any of the other greats, yes he did have a good chance of beating them all, but had the other fighters stood up to him and lasted 6-7 rounds, the more likely outcome is he loses, because of his mental attitude and confidence, and the fact that even when winning fight's in his prime the tendency was after 6-7 rounds he slowed down considerably, not throwing combinations and looking for a single shot and neglected the lateral movement as well, and against great fighters not the likes of Tucker,Smith etc he is more likely to come unstuck. That is why I only have Tyson at no.10, and not as great as the likes of Holmes,Ali,Lewis and even Holyfield,Louis etc. I'm not saying its not possible for him to beat them because for 6 rounds he was one of the best, if not the best fighter of all-time, but fights are over 12 rounds, and you need to be able to adapt in fights, you need heart, you need to dig down as deep as possible and you need a mental confidence as well, something Tyson never really showed when the chips were down.

The Iron Man

09-06-2007, 08:28 AM

Lewis improved with age as tyson declined in age, so i think thats its almost like comparing the Marciano-Louis fight or the Ali-Berbick fight, to me you cant judge a fighters rankings by there last fights. Its Usually for money, and with diminished Skills. Lewis was closer to his prime than tyson wen they fought each other. I believe being larger helped Lewis with his game, and with many fights with hard hitters e.g. Tua. I disagree with neve seeing lewis' prime, as you see every fighters prime, i belive u mean he didnt reach his full potential as with tyson. Prime isnt something that may come, prime is the time wen u are fighting at your best. Nothing to do with age or potential. So its no good saying the lennox we never saw would have beaten him, the tyson we never saw would have been the greatest ever but it didnt happen so we cant compare that. For A lewis-tyson prime fight, we would need to fighters from different eras, as a 86-90s tyson would KO the smaller Lewis within 6 rounds, But the 93-00 lewis would abbliterate the Diminished, head hunting tyson. The Reason you give for Lewis losing to Rahman is basically the same reason as to why Tyson Lost to Douglas, Holyfield and Lewis. He wasnt training as much he was too big headed, even though it dnt think he could of beaten lewis if he did train harder he didnt have the skills anymore. But still in these fights he fought like a warrior looking for a way to win, taking the punches the fact was he didnt prepare so losing was inevitable. As for Lewis he didnt prepare and got knocked out each time by one big shot, that shows the difference between their chins. As for Tyson not having Heart i dont agree with that as i have stated above he never gave in, lewis i dont think ever come back from the cavas to win, and there artn any occassions were he was geting beat like tyson and he came back

-CANE-

09-06-2007, 09:24 AM

Iron - Yes Lewis did improve with age, but only technically, because he was older and heavier though he diminished in speed of hand and foot, and although bigger and planting his feet correctly to get more power, it wasn't any better than when he was younger, because speed can give you more power, if you can't see the punch coming you can't prepare for it, so I would say his power stayed about the same. No Leenox didn't reach his full potential. So what would happen if they met in their primes, you said prime Tyson ko's early Lewis in 6, and prime Lewis obliterates and old Tyson. So what do you think prime Tyson and prime Lewis would be? You said in the fights Tyson lost he fought like a warrior, looking for a way to win. For someone with such knowledge of the game he didn't look much did he, he kept trying the same thing over and over again, coming straight in and trying to take their heads off with one big punch. I do believe he still had the skills, but couldn't apply them when his back was against the wall. Look at the 1st couple of rounds against Lewis, he looked like the old Tyson, but Lewis stood up to him and fired back and put him off his game plan, neglecting everything he does so well and just going for the knockout shot. Why didn't he carry on fighting like that in the 3rd round onwards, it doesn't just disappear and it wasn't stamina, he was put off mentally. Lewis had got to him just as Douglas and Holyfield had previously. You say Tyson never had heart and never gave in, but watch the fights, he did give in mentally. He was gonna get beat in his own mind and while trying to still go for a ko win, hed been completely put off his own game plan. Holyifeld looked to be getting beat on numerous occasions and was in all sorts of trouble, what does he do. He takes all and sucks it up and gathers himself, and throws back as many punches as he can, not single shots that my friend is the true heart of a warrior. You keeps going on about Lewis getting kod with single punches, and that wouldn't happen to Tyson, and that shows the difference in their chins. How many times do I have to say I agree, I've never said Lewis's chin was anywhere near Tyson's, but it was good. That does not make Tyson a better fighter. You also say you don't think Lewis ever came back from being dropped to win a fight, neither did Tyson. And you also say there aren't any occasions where he was getting beat like Tyson was and came back to win, well again I disagree. Lewis was getting beaten by Bruno and was hurt on a view occasions, he took them and came back with a cracking left hook followed by a barrage of punches. Lewis had a great fight with Mercer and Mercer threw plenty of shots, Lewis sucked them up and hit him back with just as many, giving it his all and not just looking for a single shot. Shannon Briggs hurt Lewis a few times and hit him with several combinations, Lewis just stands there and waits for him to stop punching then unleashes a barrage of punches himself, again against Klitscko he seems to be taking a beating but comes back into the fight and refuses to be beat, gives it everything. No these fights I mentioned weren't beatings in the sense that Tyson took, but that's because Lennox had true heart and wouldn't let them become beatings, he would have gone down fighting his heart out, not just looking for a single shot, like Tyson. Tyson in his defeats could have given so much more and if that wouldn't have been enough, then he would have gone out like a true warrior that would have been real heart. I ask myself as a Tyson fan where you watching them fights Tyson was losing and thinking COME ON Mike what are you doing, throw some combos, get stuck in or where you just saying keep doing what you are doing eventually you'll land one.

The Iron Man

09-06-2007, 10:02 AM

Yeh True, Tyson would look for one good shot wen he was losing, and it wasnt the best tactic but he was trying still andi believe if he had better corner men in those fights he would of been better tactically, ive seen a interview with Kevin Ronney and what he would of told mike in the Doulgas and Holyfield fight. This could of helped tyson, you must remember his corner men were inexperienced and basically **** if they tell mike he can only win by KO thats what he will look for. Lewis had heart yes im not denying that, but as for the knocked downs, how many times did he beat the count and carry on to fight in his carrer? Lewis Tyson in both their primes would be a great fight, soo close, but tyson would be faster than the lewis fought and would be able to evade punches much better, as lewis' chin isnt great i think tyson would win by KO probably around 6 again the same as a non prime lewis. When i said tyson never gave in i meant, gone down to take the 8 or got KOd by a one off punch, i know mentally he gave in but physically he didnt. As for lewis getting hurt and comming back, so did tyson he got hurt many times in his career but fought back, aslo against Bruno, Ruddock many times. Against Golota tyson was losing and found that big punch, which usually didnt work but thats how he would look for wins, as i said earlier his corner men could no advise anything better.As for the Klitscko fight i was very dissapointed that lewis didnt go for a re-match it was alot like tyson Going back to prove he was a better fighter than Rudock but Lewis instead retired.And wen watching the tyson fights i think exactly the same man, exactly the same. I believe if he had Rooney and cus then he would have done that

-CANE-

09-06-2007, 11:14 AM

Iron - Fair enough, regarding the prime Tyson prime Lewis fight you said Tyson by ko6 again, do you think if had gone on into the latter rounds Lewis is the more likely winner. What you said about Tyson having a better corner, his tactics would have been better, that's basically what I said with Lewis had he been trained by Steward from the beginning, he didn't he had who he had, he also has more knowledge of boxing than any other fighter, and shouldn't have needed a corner to tell him what to do, he should have realised himself. Lewis was floored twice in his career and he beat the count once up at 6, but wasn't given the chance to continue, whether he would have gone on to win or not no one will ever know. But he should have been given the chance in a fight that big. Tyson never got off the floor to win either, can't remember or not whether he actually beat a count or not. I too was disappointed Lewis never had the rematch with Klitchko as I think he would have stopped him in emphatic fashion around the 8 round, but he was very clever and knew he was at the very end of his career and possibly ready for the taking. It wasn't the greatest way to go out, but I think he was well on top of Klitchko by the time of the stoppage and even without the cuts, would have finished it. Klitchko had appeared to run out of steam, and was taking some thunderous punches. Some of them uppercuts he took would have taken out almost anyone, Lewis was landing more frequently and Klitchko wouldn't have taken them all night. But at the end of the day he retired as champion, which not many do and he beat everyone he ever faced, he unified the belts and was 3 time champ. He beat everyone there was to beat, including 2 other greats in Holyfield and Tyson. There was only 2 other fighters he never fought, and that was Bowe who ducked Lewis and would have lost anyway, and Moorer who IMO wouldn't have lasted 4 rounds with Lennox. He also had more title fights than anyone else in history with the exception of Ali,Holmes and Holyfield. And he boxed in the strongest the heavyweight division had ever been, with the possible exception of the 70's than in any other era. That is why despite those 2 ko losses, which he avenged. In my mind on achievment,quality of opposition,length of reign,fighters beat,overall record,number of title fights,titles won and boxing ability he comes out in the top 3 all time greats and Tyson at no10. On all of these Lennox Lewis was greater than Mike Tyson. Could Tyson have beat Lewis both in their primes YES, could Lewis have beat Tyson in their primes the answer is YES. Could Mike Tyson have been the greatest ever YES (Had he been taught discipline at a young age, and had the mental tougness and confidence of a Holyfield) Could Lennox Lewis have been the greatest ever YES (Had steward trained him from the start) But things were as they were so who was the greatest using all the criteria:- Lennox Lewis

mickeyb

09-06-2007, 12:08 PM

Tyson in his so called prime never fought anyone half as good as Lewis, and Lewis in his prime never fought someone half as good as tyson in his prime.

therefore it's like comparing Ali v Dempsey, we'll never know but imo only two results possible, Tyson to ko Lewis like Rahman did or Lewis to beat Tyson like Douglas did. I think credit to both of them that if they did fight in prime ten times it wouldnt be one sided. My money would go on Lewis as history proved he focused more in big fights were as Tyson went into every fight the same if fully trained. Shame in never happened, Bowe, Holyfield, Lewis and Tyson could have been like Ali, Frazier, Foreman and Norton from the 70's.

Frazier's 15th round

09-06-2007, 06:46 PM

Douglas KO10 Tyson

Mike Tyson77

09-07-2007, 01:20 PM

Douglas KO10 Tyson

Tyson KO8 Douglas

poet682006

09-07-2007, 01:24 PM

Tyson KO8 Douglas

Nope! That's Don King propaganda and sour grapes by the Tyson nuthugging crowd.

Poet

Mike Tyson77

09-07-2007, 01:26 PM

Nope! That's Don King propaganda and sour grapes by the Tyson nuthugging crowd.

Poet

I always count to like 11 or 12 everytime I see that KD.

poet682006

09-07-2007, 01:30 PM

I always count to like 11 or 12 everytime I see that KD.

So? You could have counted to 20 in Dempsey - Tunney. It doesn't matter when his ass hits the canvas, the count starts when the opposing fighter goes to a neutral corner. More to the point, Douglas was fully conscious and watching the referees count: He could have gotten up at anytime. Funny how Tyson is gracious in defeat but his nuthugging fans are the biggest sore losers on the planet.

Poet

Mike Tyson77

09-07-2007, 01:32 PM

So? You could have counted to 20 in Dempsey - Tunney. It doesn't matter when his ass hits the canvas, the count starts when the opposing fighter goes to a neutral corner. More to the point, Douglas was fully conscious and watching the referees count: He could have gotten up at anytime. Funny how Tyson is gracious in defeat but his nuthugging fans are the biggest sore losers on the planet.

Poet

Dempsey beat Tunny in my book.

Brassangel

09-07-2007, 01:34 PM

Even if the knockdown in the 8th round would have been recognized as a KO and Tyson wins, there would have been tons of criticism towards Mike about getting pounded every round and stealing a lazy win with one punch. It would have messed him up mentally, hearing that he's a sloth. Of course, that may have motivated him, but it may also have motivated Douglas to stay in that kind of shape for a rematch.

Also, Douglas was clearly watching the ref with the intent of getting up at 8. His eyes weren't glazed over, he didn't come out wobbly in the next round, and he took over right where he left off. Even if the official was wrong, the fighter is supposed to follow said ref's count, which Douglas was clearly doing.

Just so you know, the ref does take longer than 10 to get to 8, but Douglas was obviously listening to the count, and not a stopwatch at ringside.

poet682006

09-07-2007, 01:35 PM

Dempsey beat Tunny in my book.

Dempsey refused to go to a neutral corner. He had no one to blame but himself that Tunney got extra time to recover. No fighter should benefit from his own wrongdoing.

PS. I'm a fan of Jack Dempsey and I don't care for Gene Tunney, but in this instance Dempsey was in the wrong.

Poet

Mike Tyson77

09-07-2007, 01:38 PM

Tyson was drinking the night before the fight and not training. Not to mention he had 3 morons in his conor with a condom or rubber glove full of water. Of course that's all Tysons fault, but how many fighters could have beaten Douglas that night under those conditions?

I was drinking last night and can bearly type let alone fight that Douglas.

poet682006

09-07-2007, 01:40 PM

Dempsey beat Tunny in my book.

They always have every excuse when Tyson gets his ass kicked. Tyson NEVER loses, it's always the corners fault or he wasn't training hard or the moon was full or Don King's hair gel got in his eyes ect. Anything to avoid saying "Tyson got his ass kicked".

Poet

Mike Tyson77

09-07-2007, 01:44 PM

They always have every excuse when Tyson gets his ass kicked. Tyson NEVER loses, it's always the corners fault or he wasn't training hard or the moon was full or Don King's hair gel got in his eyes ect. Anything to avoid saying "Tyson got his ass kicked".

Poet

Youre right, "Tyson" got his ass kicked. "Iron" Mike didnt.

You can't tell me that the 90's Tyson was the same as the 80's. Same person, just different fighters.

poet682006

09-07-2007, 01:49 PM

Youre right, "Tyson" got his ass kicked. "Iron" Mike didnt.

You can't tell me that the 90's Tyson was the same as the 80's. Same person, just different fighters.

That would be "Leg-Iron" Mike. I don't buy into the hype of the 80s Tyson being some unstoppable force. I said he was vulnerable then and I say he was vulnerable now. The poor state of the Heavyweight division in the mid to late 80s made Tyson look better than he really was. As I'm fond of saying, the "prime" Tyson was an illusion: He never really existed anywhere but in the imaginations of his devoted followers. Even if you choose to forget the post-prison Tyson and end his career with the Ruddock fights he STILL doesn't crack my top 12 all-time Heavyweights.

Poet

Brassangel

09-07-2007, 01:52 PM

Tyson was completely unprepared for a championship level contest. You could see after 3 rounds that he didn't want to be there. Douglas looked as good as any well-rounded heavyweight in the previous 15 years. He was still swinging fast, hard, and accurate in the 10th round. He did what a champion does to prepare for a fight, and that sort of zeal hadn't been seen in the heavyweights in some time. The circumstances were rare, but perfect for one of the greatest (albeit saddest) moments in boxing history.

Mike got whooped. He never would have allowed that to happen if everything was "as usual" with Rooney in his corner, 6 months of non-stop training, and a good night's sleep. No Buster Douglas in any shape would have taken Tyson prepared like he was when he was going for the belts. It would have been good, but Mike was simply a machine.

In his prime (which I feel as though we never truly got to see the best of him), he was as close to unbeatable as one may find in the heavyweight division, but he didn't get there...plain and simple. He had many 2nd chances to regain the stature as the game's best (ie: after Douglas, Holyfield 2, etc.), and he failed every time.

Despite this, he was still awesome. "State of the division" is relative; just because he made them look that bad, doesn't mean they were that bad.

Mike Tyson77

09-07-2007, 02:04 PM

-CANE-

09-07-2007, 02:51 PM

I'm sorry I don't buy it, It wouldn't have mattered who was in Tyson's corner that night. As I've said previously, If there was any boxer out there, that knew the game inside out, it was Tyson, he has probably watched more fights and studied them more than any other fighter in history, he should have known what to have done in all of the fights he was losing, but on every occasion he was put off his game plan, simply because they stood up to him, and any real Tyson fan should know this, that was always his biggest problem even way back in the early days in his amatuer fights, read the accounts of Teddy Atlas and co, even when Tyson was winning fights, if they kept getting up and standing up to him even with not much success, Tyson would come back to the corner at the end of a round and make up excuses that his hand broke or his wrist was damaged, simply because he never liked it when opponents stood up to him. Although he never quit in the ring, he quit mentally when someone stood up to him, and it completely put him off his game plan. Even in his so called prime he was a 6-7 round fighter and then lost concentration and neglected everything that made him such a terrific fighter offensively and defensevely. In every fight he lost, he realised from early on that they weren't gonna just lie down, and most important weren't intimidated by him, which in turn intimidated Tyson and therefore put him off his gameplan, he would look tentative and when he did attack it was from straight on, just throwing single shots and looking for the win. He had all the tools to beat Holyfield and Lewis except for the mental toughness, he never really knew how to fight back when everything was against him. Look at the Lewis fight, he started off against Lewis great, looking like old Tyson for 2 rounds. But Lewis stood up to him and fired back and this was what put Tyson off, he came out in the 3rd round looking like a different fighter, where did his skills go, they didn't just disappear and it wasn't stamina it was mental. I am a Tyson fan, but not a nuthugger and as a knowledgable fight fan, I could see all his weaknesses, I said the same thing way back in 87-88 and I was right all along. He believed the hype about himself, everyone said he was invincible and he thought everyone would just lie down and when they never he didn't know what to do, all he had to do would have been fight as he normally did, slipping punches, lateral movement and hard fast combos switching from head to body, he should have known that but when you lose your confidence and don't think your gonna win, you do stupid things. How many Tyson fans watched his defeats and were screaming at the TV come on mike what on earth are you doing, where is the lateral movement, the slipping of the punches, where are the combos, why are you just wading in straight on throwing single shots, be honest you all were but used excuses he didn't train or hes past his prime, when in fact all along he was missing that one important ingrediant in a great fighter, and that is a great mind, and the true heart of a champion to suck it up, and fire back with as much as you can, not just single shots.

The Noose

09-07-2007, 02:57 PM

Mike Tyson77

09-07-2007, 03:09 PM

poet682006

09-07-2007, 03:12 PM

That doesn't wash. That crop of Heavyweights were bad before Tyson broke on the scene to make them look worse. I've been watching boxing for more than thirty years and they are EASILY the worst era in Heavyweight history. Trevor Berbick holding a championship belt? Tony Tubbs doing the same? Please, it's enough to gag a maggot. One thing I credit Tyson for is cleaning up that mess. He may not make my ATG list but he DID do yeoman's work in cleaning out a bad bad division.

Poet

Mike Tyson77

09-07-2007, 03:14 PM

That doesn't wash. That crop of Heavyweights were bad before Tyson broke on the scene to make them look worse. I've been watching boxing for more than thirty years and they are EASILY the worst era in Heavyweight history. Trevor Berbick holding a championship belt? Toney Tubbs doing the same? Please, it's enough to gag a maggot. One thing I credit Tyson for is cleaning up that mess. He may not make my ATG list but he DID do yeoman's work in cleaning out a bad bad division.

Poet

I guess you think the 30's and 40's where better?

poet682006

09-07-2007, 03:23 PM

I guess you think the 30's and 40's where better?

Actually I do, there were a lot of good fighters in the Heavyweight division in the 30s and 40s. The 20s and 50s weren't very good but still better than the mid to late 80s. You're falling into the modernist trap of thinking if it happend before you were born it automatically sucks. The 90s were one of the best eras ever for Heavyweights: Only the 70s were better in my estimation. So I hardly fall into the catagory of believing the old days were always better, an accusation I can predict will come next from you. Unlike you, I'm open minded about the various eras in boxing and I can find great (and not so great) fighters from the turn of the century till this very day. I refuse to shut my mind off an impose artificial limitations on my thinking.

Poet

poet682006

09-07-2007, 03:25 PM

Mike Tyson77

09-07-2007, 03:35 PM

Actually I do, there were a lot of good fighters in the Heavyweight division in the 30s and 40s. The 20s and 50s weren't very good but still better than the mid to late 80s. You're falling into the modernist trap of thinking if it happend before you were born it automatically sucks. The 90s were one of the best eras ever for Heavyweights: Only the 70s were better in my estimation. So I hardly fall into the catagory of believing the old days were always better, an accusation I can predict will come next from you. Unlike you, I'm open minded about the various eras in boxing and I can find great (and not so great) fighters from the turn of the century till this very day. I refuse to shut my mind off an impose artificial limitations on my thinking.

Poet

Jack Johnson is my #2 favorite fighter. I like the old fighters, but I dont believe the 80's where the worst. I think Tyson, Tucker, or Tubbs would have done the same thing if they fought in Louis's time.

I mean C'mon, Tony Galento said he trained off of beer and burgers!

Brassangel

09-07-2007, 04:15 PM

Tyson learned from the Douglas fight.

This is the part people fail to recognize. His next four fights were completely different then the ones leading up to, and including the Douglas fight. Unfortunately, he couldn't handle his personal life and he went to jail.

He encountered opponents before who weren't afraid of him (Green, Holmes, Ferguson (before his nose got broken), etc.) and he still executed enough to win at least a convincing decision. Tyson himself said that he was scared going into every fight, and yet, he still got the job done. He didn't hope to frighten his opponents into submission, he hoped to batter them into submission. Sometimes, when that didn't work, he got frustrated, and quit. 99% of those instances came after his trip to prison.

The 80's were pretty lame in the heavyweight division, but every fighter was tall, lean, and modelled after the previous lineal champion, Larry Holmes. They were supposed to be the bread-and-butter forumla for beating Mike Tyson, with strong jabs, stamina, good chins, confidence, etc. It didn't matter; he came into the division at the start of the surge of super-heavyweights, and he still cleaned it up faster, cleaner, and with less question than any heavyweight in history. He would have been a champion in any era, just not as dominant.

His fights with Ruddock are clear examples of Tyson's ability to show heart, stamina, and not quit just because the opponent fights back. Ruddock was a better boxer than Douglas, and hit a crap-ton harder, yet Mike proved he was a champ.

And yes, hurricane, it was very frustrating to watch Mike stand there like a sack of sand, not caring about getting hit, and only throwing one punch at a time. The corner isn't his sole reason for losing, as I listed many other factors here, and in my previous post(s); many of which are, admittedly, his own fault.

poet682006

09-07-2007, 06:01 PM

Jack Johnson is my #2 favorite fighter. I like the old fighters, but I dont believe the 80's where the worst. I think Tyson, Tucker, or Tubbs would have done the same thing if they fought in Louis's time.

I mean C'mon, Tony Galento said he trained off of beer and burgers!

Galento is hardly the prototypical fighter of the 1940s. He got away with his antics because he hit like a truck; in this case you've picked out the exception not the rule. Tucker and Tubbs being champions in the 40s? I don't think so because neither would have lasted 6 rounds with Joe Louis.

Poet

Yaman

09-07-2007, 06:24 PM

Ahh few more pages. What's this about gentlemen? Let me in on the action lol.

them_apples

09-07-2007, 06:37 PM

Thunder Lips

09-07-2007, 06:43 PM

This is the part people fail to recognize. His next four fights were completely different then the ones leading up to, and including the Douglas fight. Unfortunately, he couldn't handle his personal life and he went to jail.

He encountered opponents before who weren't afraid of him (Green, Holmes, Ferguson (before his nose got broken), etc.) and he still executed enough to win at least a convincing decision. Tyson himself said that he was scared going into every fight, and yet, he still got the job done. He didn't hope to frighten his opponents into submission, he hoped to batter them into submission. Sometimes, when that didn't work, he got frustrated, and quit. 99% of those instances came after his trip to prison.

The 80's were pretty lame in the heavyweight division, but every fighter was tall, lean, and modelled after the previous lineal champion, Larry Holmes. They were supposed to be the bread-and-butter forumla for beating Mike Tyson, with strong jabs, stamina, good chins, confidence, etc. It didn't matter; he came into the division at the start of the surge of super-heavyweights, and he still cleaned it up faster, cleaner, and with less question than any heavyweight in history. He would have been a champion in any era, just not as dominant.

His fights with Ruddock are clear examples of Tyson's ability to show heart, stamina, and not quit just because the opponent fights back. Ruddock was a better boxer than Douglas, and hit a crap-ton harder, yet Mike proved he was a champ.

And yes, hurricane, it was very frustrating to watch Mike stand there like a sack of sand, not caring about getting hit, and only throwing one punch at a time. The corner isn't his sole reason for losing, as I listed many other factors here, and in my previous post(s); many of which are, admittedly, his own fault.

All true.

The "intimidation" myth is pretty headache inducing. Most fighters didn't stand up and trade with Tyson because they would have got knocked out. Even Douglas avoided Tyson with his reach and stiff jabs/right hand leads, when he did get caught he ended up on his ass.

poet682006

09-07-2007, 06:54 PM

how can the 80's be the worst.. Tyson, Holyfield and Lewis were all spawned from the 80's. While the 80's did have a great load of tomato cans (that all fought the same) that got clobbered by the big names I still don't think it was the worst. The early nineties seemed to have a good deal of "better" fighters, as much as the old guys will fail agree with. 1998+ and up is full of big slow dumb fighters that seem to rely on size more than skill.

Fighters from the 40's-50's still wouldn't have a chance leaving their heads open and all, its not like they would have magically hard chins or anything, they are still human. Also, nobody had one hit knockout power until the 80's-90's, which I would think comes from the intensive athlete oriented training. (Marciano slowly beat guys down, never with one punch), he also only weighed (186-189lbs?). People will automatically say "thats just because the old fighters were tougher, which would be completely wrong -- but alas its inevitable.

I'm not bashing the old guys ether, they put up a good show for there time, but saying 180 lb slow white guys can hang with Prime fighters such as what I listed is just BS.

First off, Holyfield and Lewis may have been spawned in the 80s but they didn't come of age until the 90s.

Second off, you're dead wrong if you think fighters in the 40s and 50s didn't practice defense.

Third off, what the living HELL are you smoking? No one had one punch power until the 80s? Joe Louis, 1940s. Rocky Marciano, 1950s (If you don't believe he had one punch power watch the Walcott fight). Sonny Liston, 1960s. Joe Frazier, George Foreman, Earnie Shavers (hardest hitting Heavyweight ever), 1970s. You're living in a dreamland dude. This is the kind of attitude I mentioned earlier about believing everything that happend before you were born automatically must have sucked.

Fourth off, fighters today train little differently from the way they trained at the turn of the century. Evander Holyfield is a noticable exception to this. They do roadwork, shadowbox, hit the bags, and spar: Just like they did back then. Weight lifting was off limits then just as it's off limits now. Why? Because it kills your reflexes, something a fighter depends on to be successful. There is no magical formula that was discovered in the 1980s that turned fighters from being pathetic jokes into some kind of super-athlete. It didn't happen. In fact, if you look at the Heavyweights of the past ten years you'll see that if anything they are fatter and less conditioned then ever before.

Poet

poet682006

09-07-2007, 06:56 PM

PS. One punch power does NOT come from intensive athletic training. You're born with it: Either you have it or you don't. You can't go out and get it. It can't be developed you have to have it naturally.

Poet

them_apples

09-07-2007, 07:04 PM

Third off, what the living HELL are you smoking? No one had one punch power until the 80s? Joe Louis, 1940s. Rocky Marciano, 1950s (If you don't believe he had one punch power watch the Walcott fight). Sonny Liston, 1960s. Joe Frazier, George Foreman, Earnie Shavers (hardest hitting Heavyweight ever), 1970s. You're living in a dreamland dude. This is the kind of attitude I mentioned earlier about believing everything that happend before you were born automatically must have sucked.

yikes calm down and stay civilized, tell me one fight that knocks a guy down with one punch, and I mean the first knockdown to..not so beat up bum getting up staggering and then gets hammered to the ground. For example..Tua vs Ruiz,
Mercer vs morrison, Tyson vs Eddie Richardson or Carl Williams..

Show me a fight where this happens and I will gladly apologize.

You keep thinking as if I haven't ever watched older fights, but that's not true, your glorifying the older fighters just as much as I glorify newer ones, its all based on opinion at this point, and as far as performance goes later fighter's were better. IMO

poet682006

09-07-2007, 07:10 PM

yikes calm down and stay civilized, tell me one fight that knocks a guy down with one punch, and I mean the first knockdown to..not so beat up bum getting up staggering and then gets hammered to the ground. For example..Tua vs Ruiz,
Mercer vs morrison, Tyson vs Eddie Richardson or Carl Williams..

Show me a fight where this happens and I will gladly apologize.

Joe Louis - Paulino Uzcaden
Rocky Marciano - Joe Walcott I
Sonny Liston - Wayne Bethea
Sonny Liston - Floyd Patterson I
Sonny Liston - Floyd Patterson II
George Foreman - Ken Norton
Earnie Shavers - Ken Norton

These are just off the top of my head: Given time to do some real thinking I would undoubtably come up with a bunch more.

Poet

The Noose

09-07-2007, 08:06 PM

Wiley Hyena

09-07-2007, 08:43 PM

James J. "The Boilermaker" Jeffries knocked a guy out in the 55th second of the first round...the all time heavyweight championship record. But, then again, none of the modern fighters could have contended with Jeffries who often went over 25 rounds with 3 ounce gloves. In his prime, he was never beaten, or even knocked down, and retired as undefeated undisputed heavyweight champion. Tyson was not, in any sense "the greatest of all time." lol Not even close.

them_apples

09-07-2007, 08:48 PM

Hey poet, I appreciate you posting videos but not to be an *******, many of those videos (the ones I could find, or have already seen) weren't one hit knockdowns/outs like the ones I suggested, in particular the Patterson vs Liston, where Patterson takes multiple grazing shots to the head before being staggered and then dropped. Its a big difference in comparison to what Ray mercer did to Tommy Morrison, smashing him in the face the first few seconds of the fight and knocking him cold. In Norton vs Foreman, he gets hammered by foreman repeatedly before he finally takes a shot and goes down. these are typical knockouts, they aren't one hit bangers like I was saying. I'm talking about one huge shot out of nowhere -- knocking a guy senseless, and I haven't seen it yet prior to the 80's+

55th second of the first round...the all time heavyweight championship record.

Tyson has repeatedly knocked guys out in the 40 second range, so has tua.

Yaman

09-07-2007, 08:54 PM

Marciano vs Louis and Walcott l
Patterson vs Johansson ll
Walcott vs Charles lll
Louis vs Braddock
Shavers vs Ellis

There are many classics. them apples, i'm not trying to be rude mentioning these to you, but you should really check them out. They're some of the sweetest 1 pounch knockouts before the 80s. And again, there are many many more.

poet682006

09-07-2007, 08:56 PM

Hey poet, I appreciate you posting videos but not to be an *******, many of those videos (the ones I could find, or have already seen) weren't one hit knockdowns/outs like the ones I suggested, in particular the Patterson vs Liston, where Patterson takes multiple grazing shots to the head before being staggered and then dropped. Its a big difference in comparison to what Ray mercer did to Tommy Morrison, smashing him in the face the first few seconds of the fight and knocking him cold. In Norton vs Foreman, he gets hammered by foreman repeatedly before he finally takes a shot and goes down. these are typical knockouts, they aren't one hit bangers like I was saying. I'm talking about one huge shot out of nowhere -- knocking a guy senseless, and I haven't seen it yet prior to the 80's+

Tyson has repeatedly knocked guys out in the 40 second range, so has tua.

Dude, Mercer knocked out Morrison in the 4th round. Also, you said one punch KOs you didn't specify how many rounds. Further more, grazing blows hardly count in the scoring let alone causing any damage.

Poet

sleazyfellow

09-07-2007, 08:58 PM

I'm talking about one huge shot out of nowhere -- knocking a guy senseless, and I haven't seen it yet prior to the 80's+

Tyson has repeatedly knocked guys out in the 40 second range, so has tua.

what the hell? do you even know what a one punch knockout is? and to think that nobody did it since the 80s is just ignorant. Robinson fulmer 2 springs to mind..but let me guess, robinson hit him thru out the fight so it doesnt count? what about dick tiger/bob foster?

Wiley Hyena

09-07-2007, 08:59 PM

Jeffries' famous knockout remained the record at least through the 1970s, regarding championship fights. Tua was never champ so the record could not have been broken by Tua. If Tyson broke it, then I thank you for the correction, but I'm still not sure that is the case.

them_apples

09-07-2007, 09:01 PM

my bad poet it was a 5th round knockout I think (I googled it quickly) but Morrison was knocked out with one punch, his eyes are closed for the rest of the beating.

Tyson vs richardson, one hit knockdown
Tua vs ruiz

you know what I'm getting at, in the meantime I'm still going through the barrage of videos people are posting.

what the hell? do you even know what a one punch knockout is? and to think that nobody did it since the 80s is just ignorant. Robinson fulmer 2 springs to mind..but let me guess, robinson hit him thru out the fight so it doesnt count? what about dick tiger/bob foster?

yea we are talking about heavy weights ray of sunshine, so calm the hell down. If people want to argue or prove me wrong they can at least do it sensibly.

effries' famous knockout remained the record at least through the 1970s, regarding championship fights. Tua was never champ so the record could not have been broken by Tua. If Tyson broke it, then I thank you for the correction, but I'm still not sure that is the case.

For a title fight then yea I wouldn't know, I was just saying there were quicker knockouts. I don't think Tyson has knocked out a guy quicker than 90 seconds for a championship fight.

poet682006

09-07-2007, 09:03 PM

what the hell? do you even know what a one punch knockout is? and to think that nobody did it since the 80s is just ignorant. Robinson fulmer 2 springs to mind..but let me guess, robinson hit him thru out the fight so it doesnt count? what about dick tiger/bob foster?

Bob Foster vs Mike Quarry

Poet

Wiley Hyena

09-07-2007, 09:06 PM

sleazyfellow

09-07-2007, 09:11 PM

yea we are talking about heavy weights ray of sunshine, so calm the hell down. If people want to argue or prove me wrong they can at least do it sensibly.

cant prove anyone wrong if they think they are know it alls.

them_apples

09-07-2007, 09:17 PM

cant prove anyone wrong if they think they are know it alls.

Well, you could read the past few posts....
I know there have been one hit knockouts in other divisions, in fact the record is held by some guy, knocked a guy cold in 10 seconds of the first round I believe. Not a title fight though.

anyways, I watched the Foster vs Quarry video, good fight. I'm surprised Quarry went down to a buffed up light heavy, but yea its a valid one hit KO IMO.

Yaman

09-07-2007, 09:19 PM

Oh, Tyson had his share of one punch knockouts, no doubt. I will not take that away from him. But, then again most of them occurred against helpless punching bags that were served up to him, because the masses would actually pay to see that nonsense.

I'd say he had a good amount of 1 punch ko's over decent fighters, doing that to a good fighter is already a very hard thing to do and most of the time it is the result of a lucky punch. Some extremely impressive ones in Carl Williams, Frans Botha, Tony Tubbs, Michael Spinks etc. And these were all counter punches, or ones where he set them up. No lucky punches imo. some of them he faked a left to throw the right bomb, or ducked a jab to count with a merciless left hook.

Yaman

09-07-2007, 09:21 PM

Check this out them apples

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/T4bDdjgVtAc"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/T4bDdjgVtAc" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Some of the classics I mentioned are in it.

poet682006

09-07-2007, 09:23 PM

Well, you could read the past few posts....
I know there have been one hit knockouts in other divisions, in fact the record is held by some guy, knocked a guy cold in 10 seconds of the first round I believe. Not a title fight though.

anyways, I watched the Foster vs Quarry video, good fight. I'm surprised Quarry went down to a buffed up light heavy, but yea its a valid one hit KO IMO.

Mike Quarry WAS a Light-Heavyweight. His brother JERRY was the Heavyweight.

Poet

them_apples

09-07-2007, 09:26 PM

@ yaman, thats a pretty sick video, lots of good KO's.

Mike Quarry WAS a Light-Heavyweight. His brother JERRY was the Heavyweight.

**** I'm making so many mistakes, so it's a light heavyweight fight?

Franko

09-14-2007, 09:53 AM

No, you need more than great physical attributes.

I'd pick prime versions of: Liston, Ali, Foreman and Holmes to all beat Tyson.

Stick Tyson in the 60's or 70's and he would be a top 5, maybe top 3 Heavyweight. He would be a force but he wouldn't dominate like he did in the worst Heavyweight division of all time.

The worst Heavyweight division of all time??? Check your history... try most recent for starters. Tyson beat some very good fighters at the height of his dominance... Trevor Berbick, Mitch Green, Tony Tucker, Tony Tubbs, James Smith to name but a few... These fighters would've made todays Heavyweight division a damn sight more interesting... Even Frank Bruno would've been one of the biggest noises if he was competing in today's Heavyweight division, therefore, you can see where i'm going with this... Todays Heavyweight division is much much worse than the Heavyweight division at the time of Mike Tyson's dominance.
I wouldn't say that Tyson is the greatest of all time, and indeed, i think he'd have went off the rails at some point no matter who was guiding his career. Cus D'Amato developed the majority of his time creating the next great Heavyweight champion, and it is pretty much common knowledge that he neglected teaching his pupil some social skills along the way.

taws6

09-15-2007, 09:26 PM

yeah if some how he stayed out of trouble i dont think he never would have lost, but still id have to say ali would still be number one no matter what.

poet682006

09-16-2007, 12:03 AM

Dude. Tyson's a fighter not a god. He would have lost at somepoint trouble or no. Probably to Holyfield in 91' if he somehow managed to beat Douglas (no sure thing as Tyson discovered).

Poet

VERSATILE2K12

09-16-2007, 12:23 AM

The love-hate of Tyson will always be there.Reason why he will always be remembered.

poet682006

09-16-2007, 12:26 AM

The love-hate of Tyson will always be there.Reason why he will always be remembered.

Yeah Versi, it just drives me batty though when I see people acting like he was some kind of perfect fighting god. He wasn't. People need to watch his fights without stars in their eyes.

Poet

VERSATILE2K12

09-16-2007, 12:48 AM

Yeah Versi, it just drives me batty though when I see people acting like he was some kind of perfect fighting god. He wasn't. People need to watch his fights without stars in their eyes.

Poet

I watch him daily,he was something really special.No one is perfect as a fighter,but in his prime his PHYSICAL skills were damn close.I havnt see a heavyweight since Tyson to have that kind of speed he had,nor defensive moves.He would get in the pocket of fighters and still rarely get hit.He was explosive as **** for a heavyweight.

Ive analyzed Tyson's fights for almost 4 years,as I fight the peek-a-boo like him.So I analyze everything he did around 85-88 very closely.When you study a fighter as much as Ive studied Tyson,you see things that the normal person that has only seen lets say Tyson-Biggs fight 3 times in their life.Well Ive seen that fight well over 100 times,literally,and thats only that fight.

The thing I cant stand is when ppl that really havnt seen alot of Tyson's fights always got something negative to say. Example:He fought bums,in his early years he fought ppl that had better records then he did.Im saying the 85' Tyson.Most ppl starting off would fight someone that has about the same record as them.I mean how many fighters starting out fight guys that are 20-0? When they're only 6-0?He also was in the Heavyweight belt Tournament,in which he didnt choose who he fought.He fought Gold Medalist,2 of them.He fought 2 legends,#1 contenders,title holders.How is a title holder a bum? Another thing is they say he didnt fight ppl that fought back,then who the hell is Razor Ruddock? They say he had no heart,you dont get beat down by Lewis and Douglas for over 8 rounds and not have heart to still try to win.You dont continue fighting when you hurt your knee and try to continue fighting. Those are the ones I cant stand.The ones that really dont have knowledge of Tyson to really comment on what he's done besides an ear biting and other recent fights or hearsay from other ppl. You cant judge a man on what he's done during the tail end of his career.

sterling

09-16-2007, 01:02 AM

poet682006

09-16-2007, 01:34 AM

The love-hate of Tyson will always be there.Reason why he will always be remembered.

I watch him daily,he was something really special.No one is perfect as a fighter,but in his prime his PHYSICAL skills were damn close.I havnt see a heavyweight since Tyson to have that kind of speed he had,nor defensive moves.He would get in the pocket of fighters and still rarely get hit.He was explosive as **** for a heavyweight.

Ive analyzed Tyson's fights for almost 4 years,as I fight the peek-a-boo like him.So I analyze everything he did around 85-88 very closely.When you study a fighter as much as Ive studied Tyson,you see things that the normal person that has only seen lets say Tyson-Biggs fight 3 times in their life.Well Ive seen that fight well over 100 times,literally,and thats only that fight.

The thing I cant stand is when ppl that really havnt seen alot of Tyson's fights always got something negative to say. Example:He fought bums,in his early years he fought ppl that had better records then he did.Im saying the 85' Tyson.Most ppl starting off would fight someone that has about the same record as them.I mean how many fighters starting out fight guys that are 20-0? When they're only 6-0?He also was in the Heavyweight belt Tournament,in which he didnt choose who he fought.He fought Gold Medalist,2 of them.He fought 2 legends,#1 contenders,title holders.How is a title holder a bum? Another thing is they say he didnt fight ppl that fought back,then who the hell is Razor Ruddock? They say he had no heart,you dont get beat down by Lewis and Douglas for over 8 rounds and not have heart to still try to win.You dont continue fighting when you hurt your knee and try to continue fighting. Those are the ones I cant stand.The ones that really dont have knowledge of Tyson to really comment on what he's done besides an ear biting and other recent fights or hearsay from other ppl. You cant judge a man on what he's done during the tail end of his career.

Well, you know me Versi and you KNOW I've watched the fights. I personally feel the two Ruddock fights were Tyson's finest efforts, despite the bad stoppage in the first fight. I hold that against Richard Steele NOT Tyson: It wasn't Mike's fault.

It's too late now to write anything long tonight but we've got to have a long Tyson discussion as you're one of the few people I can hold a good, non- nasty discussion about him.

Poet

them_apples

09-16-2007, 03:22 AM

A young Tyson walked through the best of the best, as his career swelled he stopped training, he partied more, he got ****y..and he even got knocked down by his sparring partner, its only fitting that he loses to Holyfield. A lot of people seem to think Tyson just fought bums, and as soon as anyone good comes around he loses. WRONG, they would have said the same thing if Spinks knocked him out. The point is, nobody has ever wiped the entire division out like he did, and for that he needs some credit.

When Tyson was training his ass off in the 80's, he could probably be the closest thing to a "perfect" fighter. However, he lacked the mental capabilities and got caught up in the extravagant life style, thus screwing him over.

Yaman

09-16-2007, 07:14 AM

Dude. Tyson's a fighter not a god. He would have lost at somepoint trouble or no. Probably to Holyfield in 91' if he somehow managed to beat Douglas (no sure thing as Tyson discovered).

Poet

Believe it or not, the young Holyfield would fare much worse than the one Tyson fought. If you see prime Evander fight big puncher, you will always notice, with the exception of George Foreman, that at one point he will start slugging with the guy. Many times this would result in a knockdown for him. He was a great skilled fighter, but without discipline. He would stand right in front of the man, completely abandon the jab, and just trade with him. Bert Cooper, Riddick Bowe and others made him pay for that(Although he could overcome Cooper).
If he did that to Tyson(The slugging warrior Tyson, the one that went toe to toe with Ruddock) he wouldn't last very long against the faster, more powerfull and overall better puncher.
If anyone would have eventually beat Tyson it would've been Lewis, a taller, stronger and disciplined fighter with all the right tools to handle and beat Tyson. Not a smaller, filled with slugging instincts in Evander Holyfield. Except for maybe the older version.

taws6

09-16-2007, 06:34 PM

VERSATILE2K12

09-16-2007, 06:39 PM

Lewis or Bowe would be the two guys to worry about, i highly doubt that evander could have beaten tyson in the early 1990's. Tyson wasnt a god.. lol there just wasnt much competition thats why he probably could have gone undefeated. Also dont forget about big george...

The same Bowe that was getting his ass kicked in both Golota fights? Golota doesnt have half of anything that a Prime Tyson had. The only think that saved Bowe was the lowblows from Golota.

taws6

09-16-2007, 10:54 PM

true true but tyson did have trouble with taller guys such as mitch green, tony tucker, and douglas. If the two fought in the early 90s tyson would have probably koed him within 7 rounds. i was just showing the competition level at the time.

poet682006

09-17-2007, 12:01 AM

Isn't it funny how little respect Holyfield gets when most boxing historians place him higher than Tyson on the ATG lists if they even place Tyson there at all?

Poet

them_apples

09-17-2007, 12:15 AM

Isn't it funny how little respect Holyfield gets when most boxing historians place him higher than Tyson on the ATG lists if they even place Tyson there at all?

A lot of boxing historians are on cloud 9, they think Jack Johnson is better than holyfield, so they shouldn't really talk. I would respect a boxing historian under the age of 30, but over that its all dream world.

VERSATILE2K12

09-17-2007, 12:15 AM

Isn't it funny how little respect Holyfield gets when most boxing historians place him higher than Tyson on the ATG lists if they even place Tyson there at all?

Poet

I give Holyfield the upmost respect. I even did a thread on him some time ago.http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=96721&highlight=holyfield

poet682006

09-17-2007, 08:41 AM

I give Holyfield the upmost respect. I even did a thread on him some time ago.http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=96721&highlight=holyfield

That's because you're one of the good guys Versi. Most of the time what I hear from posters is contempt for Holyfield and they aren't talking about his pathetic comeback either: They're talking about the prime of his career.

Poet

Yaman

09-17-2007, 08:52 AM

Isn't it funny how little respect Holyfield gets when most boxing historians place him higher than Tyson on the ATG lists if they even place Tyson there at all?

Poet

He's my second favorite and I made like 15 minutes of highlight reels of the guy. Just so you know you're talking to a sane guy here as well.

poet682006

09-17-2007, 08:56 AM

I give Holyfield the upmost respect. I even did a thread on him some time ago.http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=96721&highlight=holyfield

He's my second favorite and I made like 15 minutes of highlight reels of the guy. Just so you know you're talking to a sane guy here as well.

Amen brother!

PS. There are a certain number of guys I rely on to make great, intellient threads. You and Versi are two of them :)

Poet

Franko

09-17-2007, 11:49 AM

I watch him daily,he was something really special.No one is perfect as a fighter,but in his prime his PHYSICAL skills were damn close.I havnt see a heavyweight since Tyson to have that kind of speed he had,nor defensive moves.He would get in the pocket of fighters and still rarely get hit.He was explosive as **** for a heavyweight.

Ive analyzed Tyson's fights for almost 4 years,as I fight the peek-a-boo like him.So I analyze everything he did around 85-88 very closely.When you study a fighter as much as Ive studied Tyson,you see things that the normal person that has only seen lets say Tyson-Biggs fight 3 times in their life.Well Ive seen that fight well over 100 times,literally,and thats only that fight.

The thing I cant stand is when ppl that really havnt seen alot of Tyson's fights always got something negative to say. Example:He fought bums,in his early years he fought ppl that had better records then he did.Im saying the 85' Tyson.Most ppl starting off would fight someone that has about the same record as them.I mean how many fighters starting out fight guys that are 20-0? When they're only 6-0?He also was in the Heavyweight belt Tournament,in which he didnt choose who he fought.He fought Gold Medalist,2 of them.He fought 2 legends,#1 contenders,title holders.How is a title holder a bum? Another thing is they say he didnt fight ppl that fought back,then who the hell is Razor Ruddock? They say he had no heart,you dont get beat down by Lewis and Douglas for over 8 rounds and not have heart to still try to win.You dont continue fighting when you hurt your knee and try to continue fighting. Those are the ones I cant stand.The ones that really dont have knowledge of Tyson to really comment on what he's done besides an ear biting and other recent fights or hearsay from other ppl. You cant judge a man on what he's done during the tail end of his career.

I agree with much of what you say, and indeed, Mike Tyson would have been a test for any fighter in heavyweight history prime for prime, but regardless of whether he had stayed under the guidance of Kevin Rooney, and regardless of how his life turned out, i wouldn't say he would have been unbeatable, and IMO he would have lost eventually even had he stayed with Kevin Rooney. As i've mentioned in my other post, Tyson fought some very good fighters at the peak of his powers, some of whom were not given enough credit due to the fact that they were in the same division as the ferocious Tyson, but IMO the likes of Holyfield, Bowe, and Lewis were an obvious step up in calibre from the fighters that Tyson fought at his very best (Larry Holmes was far past his prime). It's just a shame that Tyson only fought two of them when not at his best, and of course, Lennox Lewis came along too late for that. Although Tyson was pretty much a clear winner over Mitch Green, Tony Tucker, and James Smith, i seem to remember each of them causing Tyson some problems e.g. Green had fast hands and that troubled Tyson, Smith was too cautious but hurt Tyson in the final round, and Tucker staggered Tyson. This is in no way meant to be a negative attitude towards Tyson as there is nothing much negative about Tyson the fighter at the peak of his powers, and i'm a big fan of Tyson... but i'm honest too.

poet682006

09-17-2007, 11:58 AM

VERSATILE2K12

09-17-2007, 12:01 PM

I agree with much of what you say, and indeed, Mike Tyson would have been a test for any fighter in heavyweight history prime for prime, but regardless of whether he had stayed under the guidance of Kevin Rooney, and regardless of how his life turned out, i wouldn't say he would have been unbeatable, and IMO he would have lost eventually even had he stayed with Kevin Rooney. As i've mentioned in my other post, Tyson fought some very good fighters at the peak of his powers, some of whom were not given enough credit due to the fact that they were in the same division as the ferocious Tyson, but IMO the likes of Holyfield, Bowe, and Lewis were an obvious step up in calibre from the fighters that Tyson fought at his very best (Larry Holmes was far past his prime). It's just a shame that Tyson only fought two of them when not at his best, and of course, Lennox Lewis came along too late for that. Although Tyson was pretty much a clear winner over Mitch Green, Tony Tucker, and James Smith, i seem to remember each of them causing Tyson some problems e.g. Green had fast hands and that troubled Tyson, Smith was too cautious but hurt Tyson in the final round, and Tucker staggered Tyson. This is in no way meant to be a negative attitude towards Tyson as there is nothing much negative about Tyson the fighter at the peak of his powers, and i'm a big fan of Tyson... but i'm honest too.

In the Green fight is seemed as if Tyson was playing with Green,he had a smile on his face for the quarter of the fight. He came in that fight with a game plan to fight like Frazier.What other fight has he ever came out like that?Its not like he didnt know of Green's speed,he was well aware and prepared himself for it. As for the Smith fight,even the commentators said you cant make a fight if the other participant isnt willing to fight.In which Smith wasnt,all he did was walk away or tie up. Tyson was very active in that fight,but you can only do so much. As for the Tucker fight.I still think he got staggered because he was off balance,his feet were side to side.More of an off balanced shot then staggered. View it for yourself.<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zEV1SMJvCFU"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zEV1SMJvCFU" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Franko

09-17-2007, 12:01 PM

look we could agru all bloody day the fact is he didnt have the most important factor in boxing intelligence so he would not of beat quite a few fighters he was just relaying on speeed and power.
I love tyson great fighter defo one of my favs but he lacked in the one thing that counted being smart so he lost everything he only now realises what he threw away and he just wants to be left alone now its sad that even after all that hes stil depressed he had everything i mean kids starv in africa and they can stil put on a smile just for being alive.
Tyson hasnt sorted anything out and i dont think he never will he is without a doubt the most tragic and wasted talent ever in boxing i think hes next to kirklang but tyson is more lucky then kirklang.

Tyson was a very intelligent fighter at the peak of his powers!!! That is only overlooked by some who don't really know his history... The overall movement, and how he picked his shots required intelligence... There is a thought process behind picking those shots. Of course, i am referring to intelligence as a fighter and not in his private and social life, but admittedly he was over reliant on his power in the latter part of his career when his talent had eroded.

VERSATILE2K12

09-17-2007, 12:02 PM

And Frank Bruno wobbled him like three times.

Poet

I remember only his being hurt in the first,explain the other ones and in what round.

Franko

09-17-2007, 12:09 PM

And Frank Bruno wobbled him like three times.

Poet

True, Bruno did wobble him, certainly in the first fight, but that IMO was when Mike was beginning the downward spiral so to speak.

-CANE-

09-17-2007, 12:11 PM

A lot of boxing historians are on cloud 9, they think Jack Johnson is better than holyfield, so they shouldn't really talk. I would respect a boxing historian under the age of 30, but over that its all dream world.

So what your'e saying is that anyone that doesn't agree with you should shut up because your'e always right, and no-one else is allowed an opinion. Why wouldn't you respect a boxing historian over the age of 30, but you would if they were younger. So what happens when you turn 31, you ain't gonna respect yourself and opinion. You ****in muppet. It's geeky nuthuggers like you that think their always right that piss alot of people off.
Just because someone has a different opinion or are older doesn't make them wrong or not respectable in the knowledge of boxing. Get a life, I've seen more fights than you've had hot dinners, and IMO it's you that's in dream world little boy.

poet682006

09-17-2007, 12:14 PM

True, but that IMO was when Mike was beginning the downward spiral so to speak.

Also, in fairness to Mike, Bruno could seriously punch and there's no shame in being wobbled by him.

Poet

poet682006

09-17-2007, 12:19 PM

So what your'e saying is that anyone that doesn't agree with you should shut up because your'e always right, and no-one else is allowed an opinion. Why wouldn't you respect a boxing historian over the age of 30, but you would if they were younger. So what happens when you turn 31, you ain't gonna respect yourself and opinion. You ****in muppet. It's geeky nuthuggers like you that think their always right that piss alot of people off.
Just because someone has a different opinion or are older doesn't make them wrong or not respectable in the knowledge of boxing. Get a life, I've seen more fights than you've had hot dinners, and IMO it's you that's in dream world little boy.

Hurri, I had that same go around with him until I finally got sick of him and put him on my ignore list. Don't trust anyone over thirty! (Hmmm, that's from the 1960s) I've probably watched more fights in the last six months than he has in his entire life! (Don't you just love video technology?) So right on Hurri!

Poet

Franko

09-17-2007, 12:29 PM

In the Green fight is seemed as if Tyson was playing with Green,he had a smile on his face for the quarter of the fight. He came in that fight with a game plan to fight like Frazier.What other fight has he ever came out like that?Its not like he didnt know of Green's speed,he was well aware and prepared himself for it. As for the Smith fight,even the commentators said you cant make a fight if the other participant isnt willing to fight.In which Smith wasnt,all he did was walk away or tie up. Tyson was very active in that fight,but you can only do so much. As for the Tucker fight.I still think he got staggered because he was off balance,his feet were side to side.More of an off balanced shot then staggered. View it for yourself.<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zEV1SMJvCFU"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zEV1SMJvCFU" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

There was definitely an animosity between Green and Tyson as emphasised by their street brawl, and i'd agree that Tyson was probably playing with Green, and indeed, 10 times out of 10, Mike Tyson would've beat Mitch Green but that's not to say that Green didn't pose problems.
I agree that James Smith didn't take the fight to Tyson, and i did touch on his cautious approach, but he hurt Tyson in the last round. In hindsight, Tyson may have been getting frustrated with Smith's tactics, and was caught in the last round due to this.
I agree again with your comments on the Tony Tucker fight, but i thought Tucker posed Tyson problems. Obviously, i realise that Tyson was the clear winner in each of those fights, but fighters did ask questions of him during his peak.

VERSATILE2K12

09-17-2007, 01:06 PM

There was definitely an animosity between Green and Tyson as emphasised by their street brawl, and i'd agree that Tyson was probably playing with Green, and indeed, 10 times out of 10, Mike Tyson would've beat Mitch Green but that's not to say that Green didn't pose problems.
I agree that James Smith didn't take the fight to Tyson, and i did touch on his cautious approach, but he hurt Tyson in the last round. In hindsight, Tyson may have been getting frustrated with Smith's tactics, and was caught in the last round due to this.
I agree again with your comments on the Tony Tucker fight, but i thought Tucker posed Tyson problems. Obviously, i realise that Tyson was the clear winner in each of those fights, but fighters did ask questions of him during his peak.

When you're that good that always will be questions.It comes with the territory.

Brassangel

09-17-2007, 01:59 PM

Mike did a good job on Mitch Green's body during the first half of that fight as well. That's a tactic he should have carried with him more often. Even if it wouldn't have knocked out as many opponents, he could have avoided the frustration of "swing-and-a-miss" to the dome, while still taking a lot of decisions. Besides, the elbows of an opponent will eventually drop when they take enough shots to the ribs, which would have given Mike more selective opportunities to bust some melons.

Thunder Lips

09-17-2007, 10:33 PM

Believe it or not, the young Holyfield would fare much worse than the one Tyson fought. If you see prime Evander fight big puncher, you will always notice, with the exception of George Foreman, that at one point he will start slugging with the guy. Many times this would result in a knockdown for him. He was a great skilled fighter, but without discipline. He would stand right in front of the man, completely abandon the jab, and just trade with him. Bert Cooper, Riddick Bowe and others made him pay for that(Although he could overcome Cooper).
If he did that to Tyson(The slugging warrior Tyson, the one that went toe to toe with Ruddock) he wouldn't last very long against the faster, more powerfull and overall better puncher.
If anyone would have eventually beat Tyson it would've been Lewis, a taller, stronger and disciplined fighter with all the right tools to handle and beat Tyson. Not a smaller, filled with slugging instincts in Evander Holyfield. Except for maybe the older version.

I'm going to have to disagree here though I can see the logic. However, I would point out that you can't count Holyfield out against Tyson based on how he was performing or fighting at the time. Going into their first fight, the last we saw of Holyfield was the Bowe, Mercer, and Moorer fights were he looked to be tail spinning into a shot punch drunk slugger. Which is nobody gave him a chance against the returned, surging Tyson. I've always looked at it as Holyfield simply raising his game against Tyson and having studied him for so long knew how to handle anything Mike could throw at him. Even after the Tyson series, Holyfield quickly started to detoriate and look sloppy again. The Mike that fought Holfyield was really sharp and dangerous; throwing crafty combinations that would have probably caught anybody less prepared and schooled.

I would even go so far as to say that the Tyson that fought Holyfield was better than the one that fought Ruddock. I know Mike showed his toughness in the Ruddock in the fights, but really, they were disappointing performances at the time. Ruddock was tough but he was slow handed and had no jab and it was expected that Mike could walk right through him..and instead we had grueling, sloppy, wars as Tyson had trouble connecting the dots so to speak. Great fights but really ****ing ugly. Meanwhile, Holyfield was peaking as a Heavyweight. I can't even see Tyson beating the Holyfield that lost to Bowe in the first fight(on the one night, Bowe was actually well conditioned, well prepared, and fought to his potentional.) Even, Holyfield admits he didn't think Bowe would show up in good enough shape to duke it out for 12 rounds. He wouldn't underestimate any version of Tyson.

VERSATILE2K12

09-17-2007, 10:54 PM

Yaman

09-18-2007, 06:10 AM

I'm going to have to disagree here though I can see the logic. However, I would point out that you can't count Holyfield out against Tyson based on how he was performing or fighting at the time. Going into their first fight, the last we saw of Holyfield was the Bowe, Mercer, and Moorer fights were he looked to be tail spinning into a shot punch drunk slugger. Which is nobody gave him a chance against the returned, surging Tyson. I've always looked at it as Holyfield simply raising his game against Tyson and having studied him for so long knew how to handle anything Mike could throw at him. Even after the Tyson series, Holyfield quickly started to detoriate and look sloppy again. The Mike that fought Holfyield was really sharp and dangerous; throwing crafty combinations that would have probably caught anybody less prepared and schooled.

I would even go so far as to say that the Tyson that fought Holyfield was better than the one that fought Ruddock. I know Mike showed his toughness in the Ruddock in the fights, but really, they were disappointing performances at the time. Ruddock was tough but he was slow handed and had no jab and it was expected that Mike could walk right through him..and instead we had grueling, sloppy, wars as Tyson had trouble connecting the dots so to speak. Great fights but really ****ing ugly. Meanwhile, Holyfield was peaking as a Heavyweight. I can't even see Tyson beating the Holyfield that lost to Bowe in the first fight(on the one night, Bowe was actually well conditioned, well prepared, and fought to his potentional.) Even, Holyfield admits he didn't think Bowe would show up in good enough shape to duke it out for 12 rounds. He wouldn't underestimate any version of Tyson.

I would never count Holyfield out against anyone. But from a logical boxing point of view it becomes clear that Holyfield would screw himself. Everytime he tasted the power of a puncher, he threw the jab in the garbage can, forgot the lateral movement as well as covering himself up thinking his head could take the shots, and went to war. Even against Foreman, at a few times he starting slugging away, he was lucky that old Foreman was too slow to fire back. The second Bowe fight, the one where he was supposedly a Boxer again, he still had tendencies to trade. Holyfield's discipline(in the ring) was terrible, despite this being the reason he had so many exciting fights. But there's no way he could just go toe to toe with Tyson, and become sloppy on the inside, go to war every time his instincts kicked in. And I don't think Holyfield would push him back as easily at his lighter weight. Also, the jab was an important factor, it kept Tyson from setting up. I remember the 6th round of their first fight, once Holyfield tasted that right uppercut he didn't follow trough and was visibly hurt. It was always remarkable when holyfield was hurt, you never knew what was gonna happen. He would either crumble, or suddenly fire back. I never saw him fire back when Tyson hurt him, people say he went toe to toe with Tyson, but that's when Tyson couldn't connect himself. It was never a slugfest. But a fight in 91..it would be much more diffirent.

The Tyson in the second holyfield fight resembles the prime 90s Tyson much more than the first fight. He was in much better shape and as we can see in the second round his combinations were much more accurate. But you still can't look past a 4 year lay off and the age for a swarmer like him.

Now Bert Cooper, and even Mercer are good and great punchers with a lot of power, but none of them compare to Tyson, a young one at that. Yes Ruddock fights were ugly and gruel, but that was a guy with a lot of heart, and a big size advantage over Tyson- not a much smaller man in Holyfield.

Holyfield's showings against Moorer and the last Bowe fights were flukes. Maybe not the the outcome, but Holyfield had all sorts of problems regarding his health. I don't remember the exact things right now, but he didn't have heart problems or any of that. The people around him screwed him up at the time giving him too much of this or that. So simple put, Holyfield was well healed by the time he got to fight Tyson. The man has been injury prone at times, but we can see, even today(Compare the Donald fight to his latest fight), that he can overcome it when he is treated properly.

Franko

09-18-2007, 06:20 AM

When you're that good that always will be questions.It comes with the territory.

Which is exactly the point!

The Iron Man

09-18-2007, 12:48 PM

Just wanna say a few things after reading the last few pages, Number one, tyson was an intelligent fighter and a knowlageble person on Boxing. He just lost the dicipline once Rooney left, he resorts to slugging in times of dismay as he knows he can knock them out in one punch, but this didnt always work. As for being rocked, why does it matter everyone his hit hard in their life time, i mean Bruno has one of the best KO records there is no shame in being rocked by him. What shows heart is fighting on, which is what he done against Bruno and Smith to eventually win.

Thunder Lips

09-18-2007, 09:51 PM

"Even against Foreman, at a few times he starting slugging away, he was lucky that old Foreman was too slow to fire back."

Holyfield was not wreckless at all in this fight and was never in any real danger; of course when he had the opportunity, he opened up in controlled bursts of combinations that were of little risk to him and went unanswered. Holyfield knew what he was doing and it's a testament to George's shocking conditioning and durability that he never went down though he was clearly out on his feet in several instances and ready to go in the 9th; afterwards Holyfiled visibly backed off and coasted. When smart old George did get lucky enough to catch him, the shots were mostly blocked, deflected, or quickly recovered from.

The Bowe fights are a completely different animal from anything else Holyfield fought and probably would ever fight against any version of Tyson. Holyfield got caught napping against Cooper after he dropped him so easily in the first, having been preparing for and wanting Tyson on that date he overlooked a dangerous opponent. After he got his bell rang, he did recover and dominated.

"But there's no way he could just go toe to toe with Tyson, and become sloppy on the inside, go to war every time his instincts kicked in. And I don't think Holyfield would push him back as easily at his lighter weight. Also, the jab was an important factor, it kept Tyson from setting up. "

You have to look at the flipside as well. Ruddock survived two inside wars with Tyson despite being slower, bad on his feet, lacking any real jab to speak of, and though he was a big puncher, he was never as accurate, diverse, or busy as a Holyfield. Ruddock is also notoriously easy to hit and not exactly the most durable big man. Not only did he survive but he gave Mike total hell. The reason being that Tyson was already becoming a lunging, one punch at a time head hunter with lazy defense. Tyson proved he was tough in those fights but technically he was quite bad. Hell, the Bowe that fought Holyfield in the first fight would have messed that version of Tyson up to as he is a much better, active puncher than Ruddock, could avoid getting hit better, and at least fought tall sometimes.

Seriously compare Holyfield/Bowe I to Tyson/Ruddock. Two different leagues my friend, and I'm a huge Tyson fan and I loath lazy ass Bowe to no end.

"The Tyson in the second holyfield fight resembles the prime 90s Tyson much more than the first fight. He was in much better shape and as we can see in the second round his combinations were much more accurate. But you still can't look past a 4 year lay off and the age for a swarmer like him."

Tyson would have probably won the second fight if he didn't go ****ing nuts over a little cut. IIRC, I had him winning that damn round before he got hungry and took off Evander's ear.

"Holyfield's showings against Moorer and the last Bowe fights were flukes. Maybe not the the outcome, but Holyfield had all sorts of problems regarding his health. I don't remember the exact things right now, but he didn't have heart problems or any of that. The people around him screwed him up at the time giving him too much of this or that. So simple put, Holyfield was well healed by the time he got to fight Tyson. The man has been injury prone at times, but we can see, even today(Compare the Donald fight to his latest fight), that he can overcome it when he is treated properly."

Right after the last Tyson fight, a pathetic looking Vaugh Bean took Holyfield to the distance. Holyfield wouldn't ko another contender convincingly outside of a fat ass Moorer. There is something truly special and unique about the way Holyfield turned it up against Mike.

Thunder Lips

09-18-2007, 10:03 PM

Anyways, if the fight was to happen, I can't see the easily frustrated, low blow throwing, sloppy head hunting Mike of the Ruddock fights doing much against 91 Holyfield. He would get his licks in of course, but Holyfield can take a few shots from anybody, anybody. The busier and more accurate Evander would probably out work him on the inside and out, bust him up with vicious combinations but probably not knock him out on his way to a decision.

Yaman

09-19-2007, 04:27 AM

Holyfield was not wreckless at all in this fight and was never in any real danger; of course when he had the opportunity, he opened up in controlled bursts of combinations that were of little risk to him and went unanswered. Holyfield knew what he was doing and it's a testament to George's shocking conditioning and durability that he never went down though he was clearly out on his feet in several instances and ready to go in the 9th; afterwards Holyfiled visibly backed off and coasted. When smart old George did get lucky enough to catch him, the shots were mostly blocked, deflected, or quickly recovered from.

He wasn't because he didn't do what he did against the other hard hitters he fought. But he still had a few tendencies to get Foreman out, and yeah you're right he wasn't really in danger doing that since George was totally out on his feet. But when Foreman did hit Holyfield it was effective. Remember the jabs that snapped Holyfield's head back on a few occations, as well as the right hands that got in, Holyfield was back into his "hurt mode", when he's just bouncing on his toes freezing like he does when he's hurt.

The Bowe fights are a completely different animal from anything else Holyfield fought and probably would ever fight against any version of Tyson. Holyfield got caught napping against Cooper after he dropped him so easily in the first, having been preparing for and wanting Tyson on that date he overlooked a dangerous opponent. After he got his bell rang, he did recover and dominated.

Sorry, I didn't quite catch what you meant with your first sentence. You mind telling me again buddy.
And I think you haven't looked clearly in the Cooper fight. First off, Holyfield dropped Cooper with a vicious left to the body that landed on the sweet spot. That can happen to anybody. And Holyfield surtainly wasn't napping. He was doing what he does worst, slugging like a puncher with no discipline, that's no way for a blown up Cruiserweight to fight. The knockdown started when they were trading in the ropes, and he left himself open for a huge counter right hand from Cooper, then went into the ropes. Even after that, he was still getting clocked himself and could have finished Cooper off without going trough that much hell. No jab at all, no lateral movements, nothing that makes Evander a Holyfield.

You have to look at the flipside as well. Ruddock survived two inside wars with Tyson despite being slower, bad on his feet, lacking any real jab to speak of, and though he was a big puncher, he was never as accurate, diverse, or busy as a Holyfield. Ruddock is also notoriously easy to hit and not exactly the most durable big man. Not only did he survive but he gave Mike total hell. The reason being that Tyson was already becoming a lunging, one punch at a time head hunter with lazy defense. Tyson proved he was tough in those fights but technically he was quite bad. Hell, the Bowe that fought Holyfield in the first fight would have messed that version of Tyson up to as he is a much better, active puncher than Ruddock, could avoid getting hit better, and at least fought tall sometimes.

Seriously compare Holyfield/Bowe I to Tyson/Ruddock. Two different leagues my friend, and I'm a huge Tyson fan and I loath lazy ass Bowe to no end.

It also had to do with styles. Tyson, as always, was fighting with a much bigger man than himself. Ruddock's best punch was landing nicely on the short crouching Tyson and it was easy for him to lean on him too. Tyson wouldn't face any of these problems that Ruddock gave him, just diffirent ones.
I'm not saying Ruddock is better or anything like Holyfield and I surtainly don't think this is so significant. Tyson would fight Holyfield, not another Ruddock. Talking about Ruddock's jab or speed won't change the fact that Holyfield would screw himself with his wreckless slugging ways.
My point is very clear if you look at the first 2 Bowe fights. You'd think he would learn from his first fight and not slug again, giving the bigger Bowe a chance(heck, he might have never lost to Bowe if he never started a WW3) but he was still going at it, though not as much, it could be a big enough mistake against a puncher like Tyson(one that is in a diffirent league than Bowe or any puncher Holyfield fought).

Tyson would have probably won the second fight if he didn't go ****ing nuts over a little cut. IIRC, I had him winning that damn round before he got hungry and took off Evander's ear.

That's not the point. And that little cut was preventing Tyson from seeing with his eye.

Right after the last Tyson fight, a pathetic looking Vaugh Bean took Holyfield to the distance. Holyfield wouldn't ko another contender convincingly outside of a fat ass Moorer. There is something truly special and unique about the way Holyfield turned it up against Mike

Holyfield was never an impressive knockout machine. As long as he didn't have health problems, he would be the best he could be for his age. I might have misunderstood you, but i'm trying to say that Tyson wasn't fighting the Holyfield from the Moorer fight and others.
But yes, it was truly a great performance for Holyfield.

Anyways, if the fight was to happen, I can't see the easily frustrated, low blow throwing, sloppy head hunting Mike of the Ruddock fights doing much against 91 Holyfield. He would get his licks in of course, but Holyfield can take a few shots from anybody, anybody. The busier and more accurate Evander would probably out work him on the inside and out, bust him up with vicious combinations but probably not knock him out on his way to a decision.

And I can't see the headbut skull cracking low blow throwing blown up Cruiserweight maintaining his calm and Boxing Tyson all the way to a UD.
Holyfield can take shots from anybody, but not for a very long time. He had never faced a puncher or finisher like Tyson. As soon as he would get rocked a few times, the warrior would come out and he'd throw his skills all the way back to Atlanta Georgia. Then it would get ugly for him.

StackMo

09-19-2007, 01:11 PM

Tyson was always grossly overrated by fanboys and still is. His prime was relatively short for a 'reason'.

Brassangel

09-19-2007, 02:02 PM

In the 5th round of their first fight, Tyson landed a clean combination on Holyfield (hook to the body, right uppercut to the chin), that caused Holyfield to stagger back a few steps. On the slow motion replay, it's visible that Evander's brow is a little furrowed, if almost concerned about whether Mike was starting to get comfortable. Shortly after, Evander tried to get in close and eventually, the head-butt occurred, cutting Tyson's eye. From that point on, he kept rubbing noggins right on the sore spot visibly irritating Tyson.

In the 2nd round of the second fight, Tyson starting pushing Holyfield in the clinches, something that even the commentators make note of. When Evander would throw a punch in close, Mike would return fire, and started to throw punches on the way into a clinch. Once this happened, Evander kept trying to force the action inside, and whoops! We get another head-butt, again cutting Mike's eye. He continued to rub his noggin on Tyson's whenever they got in close, again irritating the cut and the boxer. As we all witnessed, Tyson came out furiously in the 3rd round, actually scoring heavily, and once more Holyfield's face looked concerned; the crowd even starts to chant "Tyson! Tyson!" That is, of course, until Mike decided he was hungry...

The first loss to Evander actually taught Mike a few things about him, and he could very well have won the rematch, securing a much better place in the history books. Bert Sugar is a retard who thinks that Tyson just gave up in the 2nd fight because he couldn't beat Holyfield. We all know that this wasn't the case, and that Mike was simply a nutjob.

Both fights prove that when facing the kind of power that Mike presented, even when throwing one punch at a time, in lunging fashion, Evander tried to turn the fight into a rough-and-tumble war that, were it not for a few choice head-butts, could have gone severely wrong.

In 1991, it would have been a much more entertaining bout, as Tyson would have been hungry to regain the title with the Douglas experience to learn from. He and Ruddock had a little bad blood, thus creating the slugfest they became.

Thunder Lips

09-20-2007, 12:08 AM

"Sorry, I didn't quite catch what you meant with your first sentence. You mind telling me again buddy."

I think Holyfield fought smart in the first Bowe fight. He needed to be on the inside of the bigger man, where he could smother Bowe and get his shots off. He got the worst of it when he got caught trying to work his way on the in. Holyfield was using good movement and countering well but Bowe was just on that night and was incredibly active and accurate. See, this wouldn't be the case in a Tyson fight, the Cooper comparison works much better I think but even that's not completely fair.

Hell, the usual opinion of the fight is that it was a stupid one by Bowe who despite winning didn't make things easy on himself by exchanging with Holyfield on the inside so much. He gave Holyfield the chance to steal it it, not the other way around.

The other fights were just too weird really. The second had the fan man, crappy Bowe conditioning, the delay ****ing things up, and the third fight was a war between what looked like two guys on their last legs.

"And I think you haven't looked clearly in the Cooper fight. First off, Holyfield dropped Cooper with a vicious left to the body that landed on the sweet spot. That can happen to anybody. And Holyfield surtainly wasn't napping. He was doing what he does worst, slugging like a puncher with no discipline, that's no way for a blown up Cruiserweight to fight. The knockdown started when they were trading in the ropes, and he left himself open for a huge counter right hand from Cooper, then went into the ropes. Even after that, he was still getting clocked himself and could have finished Cooper off without going trough that much hell. No jab at all, no lateral movements, nothing that makes Evander a Holyfield."

Once, he got his legs mostly under him; Holyfield boxed near perfectly in the last four rounds and took Cooper apart. Even when he wasn't jabbing and moving in the fourth, he was smothering Cooper and making him miss while ripping him with nasty shots. Cooper didn't really land anything of consequence after the big shot. Holyfield was terribly lazy in the third when he got caught, barely commiting to the clinches and what not...somehow I don't think he would do that against Tyson. Holyfield also had his training schedule messed up as he was originally training to face Tyson and took the fight on short notice, not much of an excuse but he did appear to be having fatigue and other issues. It is a miracle the fight wasn't a complete disaster for him and for a lesser heavyweight it would have been.

And truthfully I can't see 91 Tyson doing any better than Cooper did in that round. That shot was one the hardest Holyfield ever got caught with in his entire career(including the Tyson fights), yet he recovered quickly and made Cooper pay when he foolishly tried to overwhelm him.

"It also had to do with styles. Tyson, as always, was fighting with a much bigger man than himself. Ruddock's best punch was landing nicely on the short crouching Tyson and it was easy for him to lean on him too. Tyson wouldn't face any of these problems that Ruddock gave him, just diffirent ones. I'm not saying Ruddock is better or anything like Holyfield and I surtainly don't think this is so significant. Tyson would fight Holyfield, not another Ruddock. Talking about Ruddock's jab or speed won't change the fact that Holyfield would screw himself with his wreckless slugging ways."

If Tyson couldn't stop Ruddock, I don't think he could stop Holyfield. Sorry, I don't see it happening. Ruddock is slightly bigger than Evander but he was not nearly as great at avoiding shots or taking them. He was stronger but he wasn't as skillful or active as puncher yet he found Tyson coming in everytime. Ruddock is longer than Evander, but both have big reach advantages over Mike. Evander would score at will with combinations as Mike tried to close the distance.

And again, I don't think Evander was as wreckless as your making him out to be. Even in the infamous close Bowe exchanges of the first fight, he was making him miss and finding his own spots. He took the most punishment when he was trying to push forward, something he wouldn't have to do against Mike.

"Holyfield was never an impressive knockout machine. As long as he didn't have health problems, he would be the best he could be for his age. I might have misunderstood you, but i'm trying to say that Tyson wasn't fighting the Holyfield from the Moorer fight and others.
But yes, it was truly a great performance for Holyfield."

Holyfield clearly stepped up his game in the Tyson fights. That's what I'm saying. Even when he seemingly had his health from that timeframe he was never that impressive again.

"And I can't see the headbut skull cracking low blow throwing blown up Cruiserweight maintaining his calm and Boxing Tyson all the way to a UD.
Holyfield can take shots from anybody, but not for a very long time. He had never faced a puncher or finisher like Tyson. As soon as he would get rocked a few times, the warrior would come out and he'd throw his skills all the way back to Atlanta Georgia. Then it would get ugly for him."

Holyfield was deceptively skillful, even as a brawler. He could slip and take punches well and was a monsterous counter puncher. Tyson had his power but that is all he had left as he wasn't a crisp dynamic combo puncher at this point anymore. He was a sloppy lunger. At least Cooper was working the body, actually looking more like old Tyson than Mike himself ever did in the early 90s. Yeah, the only chance this version of Tyson has is for Holyfield to completely **** up and eat a sit load of clean shots and I don't like those odds. Thankfully, Tyson got some of skills back when they actually did meet.

leff

09-20-2007, 08:43 PM

Tyson was always grossly overrated by fanboys and still is. His prime was relatively short for a 'reason'.

totally agree

tyson had the talent but badly lacked heart and disiplin

StackMo

09-20-2007, 08:45 PM

And mental and emotional stability.

Yaman

09-21-2007, 08:01 AM

I think Holyfield fought smart in the first Bowe fight. He needed to be on the inside of the bigger man, where he could smother Bowe and get his shots off. He got the worst of it when he got caught trying to work his way on the in. Holyfield was using good movement and countering well but Bowe was just on that night and was incredibly active and accurate. See, this wouldn't be the case in a Tyson fight, the Cooper comparison works much better I think but even that's not completely fair.

He should not have been on the inside at all, Bowe was a master of inside fighting. That was HIS game, and Holyfield gave the fight to him that way. In the second fight he was much smarter, staying on the outside jabbing and turning him around, making him miss and great countering as well.
One other thing, the young Tyson was much more agile than the post prison Tyson. He was better on the inside because of this, Mike lost some of his foot quickness. He used to step side to side to throw a hook to the body. Also in the 90s against Ruddock, he was still doing this at times. It would be useful against Holyfield because he was hurt by Tyson's body punches in their fights.

Hell, the usual opinion of the fight is that it was a stupid one by Bowe who despite winning didn't make things easy on himself by exchanging with Holyfield on the inside so much. He gave Holyfield the chance to steal it it, not the other way around.

He beat Evander on the inside and outslugged him, wich was exactly Bowe's game plan and worked the best for him and his abilities.

The other fights were just too weird really. The second had the fan man, crappy Bowe conditioning, the delay ****ing things up, and the third fight was a war between what looked like two guys on their last legs.

That's true, though I look at the first half of the second fight with more significance.

Once, he got his legs mostly under him; Holyfield boxed near perfectly in the last four rounds and took Cooper apart. Even when he wasn't jabbing and moving in the fourth, he was smothering Cooper and making him miss while ripping him with nasty shots. Cooper didn't really land anything of consequence after the big shot. Holyfield was terribly lazy in the third when he got caught, barely commiting to the clinches and what not...somehow I don't think he would do that against Tyson. Holyfield also had his training schedule messed up as he was originally training to face Tyson and took the fight on short notice, not much of an excuse but he did appear to be having fatigue and other issues. It is a miracle the fight wasn't a complete disaster for him and for a lesser heavyweight it would have been.

It's true because Cooper was hurt badly by Evander(showed great heart once again) at one point, it went downhill from there on. He didn't get his legs back again and was a punch bag at the end of the fight, like Lampley said "TARGET PRACTISE!!!!" LOL.
I don't see how you think Holyfield was lazy in the third. Fact is, he chose to trade with Cooper and hook with a hooker, sooner or later he would get countered by a bomb and that's exactly what happened against a much less dangerous opponent in Cooper. Holyfield did not fight a perfect fight, later on as well he did not jab at all, even the commentators noticed. Against Tyson, a guy with a better chin, better overall punching power and ability, speed etc. Superior to Bert Cooper in every way. Holyfield would pay for a mistake, so much in fact he would be in debth.

And truthfully I can't see 91 Tyson doing any better than Cooper did in that round. That shot was one the hardest Holyfield ever got caught with in his entire career(including the Tyson fights), yet he recovered quickly and made Cooper pay when he foolishly tried to overwhelm him.

Tyson was one of the best finishers of all time and I don't see holyfield's jelly legs and open defence lasting a barrage of left hooks, right crosses, uppercuts..every one of these punches by Tyson were dynamite. I can't see Evander survive that in my opinion. Maybe he would, but I don't think the ref would allow it to continue.

If Tyson couldn't stop Ruddock, I don't think he could stop Holyfield. Sorry, I don't see it happening. Ruddock is slightly bigger than Evander but he was not nearly as great at avoiding shots or taking them. He was stronger but he wasn't as skillful or active as puncher yet he found Tyson coming in everytime. Ruddock is longer than Evander, but both have big reach advantages over Mike. Evander would score at will with combinations as Mike tried to close the distance.
And again, I don't think Evander was as wreckless as your making him out to be. Even in the infamous close Bowe exchanges of the first fight, he was making him miss and finding his own spots. He took the most punishment when he was trying to push forward, something he wouldn't have to do against Mike.

Tyson did stop Ruddock, and one of the things preventing him from doing it again or quicker, was Ruddock's size. He would lean on Tyson, Tyson had to push him back many times etc. This took a lot out of him, and I could see the same kind of thing happen if he fought Riddick Bowe. With 1991 Evander Holyfield, mass wouldn't be a factor, Holyfield would be the smaller man.
And like I said, Ruddock found Tyson in every time because of his uppercuts, wich landed perfectly on Tyson every time, and his reach and accurate punching.

Holyfield clearly stepped up his game in the Tyson fights. That's what I'm saying. Even when he seemingly had his health from that timeframe he was never that impressive again.

It's true.

Holyfield was deceptively skillful, even as a brawler. He could slip and take punches well and was a monsterous counter puncher. Tyson had his power but that is all he had left as he wasn't a crisp dynamic combo puncher at this point anymore. He was a sloppy lunger. At least Cooper was working the body, actually looking more like old Tyson than Mike himself ever did in the early 90s. Yeah, the only chance this version of Tyson has is for Holyfield to completely **** up and eat a sit load of clean shots and I don't like those odds. Thankfully, Tyson got some of skills back when they actually did meet.

Tyson still had some key elements, crucial ones that he really needed to beat Holyfield.
Heart
Combinations
Body punching
foot and overall quickness
These are some of the things he lacked in his fights against Holyfield. And it would be enough to beat mister Holyfield and his wreckless tactics if he had enough momentums going his way.

poet682006

09-21-2007, 09:53 AM

He should not have been on the inside at all, Bowe was a master of inside fighting. That was HIS game, and Holyfield gave the fight to him that way. In the second fight he was much smarter, staying on the outside jabbing and turning him around, making him miss and great countering as well.
One other thing, the young Tyson was much more agile than the post prison Tyson. He was better on the inside because of this, Mike lost some of his foot quickness. He used to step side to side to throw a hook to the body. Also in the 90s against Ruddock, he was still doing this at times. It would be useful against Holyfield because he was hurt by Tyson's body punches in their fights.

He beat Evander on the inside and outslugged him, wich was exactly Bowe's game plan and worked the best for him and his abilities.

That's true, though I look at the first half of the second fight with more significance.

It's true because Cooper was hurt badly by Evander(showed great heart once again) at one point, it went downhill from there on. He didn't get his legs back again and was a punch bag at the end of the fight, like Lampley said "TARGET PRACTISE!!!!" LOL.
I don't see how you think Holyfield was lazy in the third. Fact is, he chose to trade with Cooper and hook with a hooker, sooner or later he would get countered by a bomb and that's exactly what happened against a much less dangerous opponent in Cooper. Holyfield did not fight a perfect fight, later on as well he did not jab at all, even the commentators noticed. Against Tyson, a guy with a better chin, better overall punching power and ability, speed etc. Superior to Bert Cooper in every way. Holyfield would pay for a mistake, so much in fact he would be in debth.

Tyson was one of the best finishers of all time and I don't see holyfield's jelly legs and open defence lasting a barrage of left hooks, right crosses, uppercuts..every one of these punches by Tyson were dynamite. I can't see Evander survive that in my opinion. Maybe he would, but I don't think the ref would allow it to continue.

Tyson did stop Ruddock, and one of the things preventing him from doing it again or quicker, was Ruddock's size. He would lean on Tyson, Tyson had to push him back many times etc. This took a lot out of him, and I could see the same kind of thing happen if he fought Riddick Bowe. With 1991 Evander Holyfield, mass wouldn't be a factor, Holyfield would be the smaller man.
And like I said, Ruddock found Tyson in every time because of his uppercuts, wich landed perfectly on Tyson every time, and his reach and accurate punching.

It's true.

Tyson still had some key elements, crucial ones that he really needed to beat Holyfield.
Heart
Combinations
Body punching
foot and overall quickness
These are some of the things he lacked in his fights against Holyfield. And it would be enough to beat mister Holyfield and his wreckless tactics if he had enough momentums going his way.

Good, well reasoned post as I've come to expect from you Yaman :) One quibble I'll make is his body-punching. He never liked body-punching and would never sustain a consistant body attack in any of his prime fights: He could never resist the urge to go back to head-hunting.

Poet

Mike Tyson77

09-21-2007, 01:20 PM

totally agree

tyson had the talent but badly lacked heart and disiplin

Watch the the two Razer Ruddock fights, espically the 6th round of the first.

Yaman

09-21-2007, 02:47 PM

Good, well reasoned post as I've come to expect from you Yaman :) One quibble I'll make is his body-punching. He never liked body-punching and would never sustain a consistant body attack in any of his prime fights: He could never resist the urge to go back to head-hunting.

Poet

Thanks bro. And yes I agree. It was frustrating to watch him sometimes because you know he could have been a great body puncher, and although he has showed a good amount of this(The Green and Ruddock fights for example) he never applied this kind of pressure in every fight. It would have worked wonders for him.
His head hunting ways were part of his mental mindset, that is what I think. Rooney had helped him get trough it sometimes, and without him on his side he would not be able to overcome his frustrations to Box again.

The Iron Man

09-21-2007, 03:25 PM

I think tyson was a good body puncher and he focused on that aspect alot. He would punish the body, much more than other big hitters such as Foreman,Lewis and Liston

leff

09-21-2007, 05:33 PM

Watch the the two Razer Ruddock fights, espically the 6th round of the first.

havent seen em in a while and cant get them hereso......whats your point?

poet682006

09-21-2007, 07:23 PM

Thanks bro. And yes I agree. It was frustrating to watch him sometimes because you know he could have been a great body puncher, and although he has showed a good amount of this(The Green and Ruddock fights for example) he never applied this kind of pressure in every fight. It would have worked wonders for him.
His head hunting ways were part of his mental mindset, that is what I think. Rooney had helped him get trough it sometimes, and without him on his side he would not be able to overcome his frustrations to Box again.

To tell you the truth if I was training him I'd tell him not to throw a sing effing head shot until he'd pounded the dudes ribcage for four or five rounds and the guy drops his guard. And make him watch film of Mike McCallum every God damn day LOL!

Poet

Thunder Lips

09-22-2007, 12:45 AM

"One other thing, the young Tyson was much more agile than the post prison Tyson. He was better on the inside because of this, Mike lost some of his foot quickness. He used to step side to side to throw a hook to the body. Also in the 90s against Ruddock, he was still doing this at times. It would be useful against Holyfield because he was hurt by Tyson's body punches in their fights."

Well, pre-Bruno Tyson would be a different story. I think he would have a much better chance at any version of Holyfield. I just don't don't see the 91Tyson that fought Ruddock getting the job done.

"He beat Evander on the inside and outslugged him, wich was exactly Bowe's game plan and worked the best for him and his abilities."

I never really got the impression that Bowe outslugged him in the fight, Holyfield's worse moments were when he get caught coming in not when he was inside.

Holyfied was able to stick and move better in the second fight because Bowe was out of shape and couldn't catch a cold.

" Holyfield did not fight a perfect fight, later on as well he did not jab at all, even the commentators noticed. "

Holyfield does use the jab effectively in the last several rounds and the first before the knockdown, I just watched the fight recently. After the predicted recovery round, he starts catching Cooper with the jab, using movement, and digging in combinations. The commentary misses it as they were often very unfair to Holyfield back then but eh....

"Tyson was one of the best finishers of all time and I don't see holyfield's jelly legs and open defence lasting a barrage of left hooks, right crosses, uppercuts..every one of these punches by Tyson were dynamite. I can't see Evander survive that in my opinion. Maybe he would, but I don't think the ref would allow it to continue."

Holyfield avoids most of Cooper's flurry and finds his legs pretty quickly. I know Holyfield has heart and all, but watch the way he sets up the comeback in the round by making Cooper miss and counter punching him into trouble. Again, I stress how deceptively sharp and skillful he was.

"Tyson did stop Ruddock, and one of the things preventing him from doing it again or quicker, was Ruddock's size. He would lean on Tyson, Tyson had to push him back many times etc."

Tyson wasn't putting anything together in those fights, he would walk through tough shots, fire one or two of his own, and get caught in a grapple with the bigger man(which didn't help). A really hard fight for Mike and while Ruddock's size certainly helped, Tyson's sloppy offense is what hindered him the most. Obviously, he wasn't the Mike of the Douglas fights but he wasn't the weaving combination puncher he once was or even the prison comeback. The Tyson that fought Holyfield in the first fight, was throwing slick combinations and even going to the body more. I believe he would have knocked Ruddock out without much trouble.

" And like I said, Ruddock found Tyson in every time because of his uppercuts, wich landed perfectly on Tyson every time, and his reach and accurate punching."

Holyfield could do the same, perhaps even more effectively with his less poweful but still damaging, busier, punching.

"Tyson still had some key elements, crucial ones that he really needed to beat Holyfield.
Heart
Combinations
Body punching
foot and overall quickness
These are some of the things he lacked in his fights against Holyfield. And it would be enough to beat mister Holyfield and his wreckless tactics if he had enough momentums going his way"

I disagree with all actually. Tyson wasn't that much quicker in the Ruddock fights, he wasn't working the body or throwing that many combos, and he was already having frustration mental problems with all the low blow and what not. Again, Tyson was going to the body and throwing combs in the first Holyfield fight; where was that sneaky straight right hand lead and slip in the Ruddock fight? That would have come in handy.

The Noose

09-22-2007, 11:44 AM

Tyson was very poor in the 2nd Ruddock fight. IMO he actually looked similar to the way he did when he came out of prison. He seemed slower like he had been injected with led.

I think Holyfield vs Tyson in 1991 would have been very close. Tyson still threw decent combinations which might have been to key to hurting Holyfield (in their 1st fight he only threw combos in the 5th, which he won).
Yet Holyfield had the durabilty and desire to beat Tyson the way he did in 1996.

Prime vs prime, i say Tyson. But Holyfeild would always have severly tested Tysons heart. More so than Lewis.

The Iron Man

09-22-2007, 01:57 PM

A 1991 fight would have probably gone down as one of the best fights in History, the poster for it is my background haha. As for the 2nd ruddock fight it was basically a slugfest they went to knock each other out, jabs were irrelevent all they wanted was to kick the **** out of each other, if tyson went in that fight with the plan he took into other fights pre-prison we would of had another tko/ko

Mike Tyson77

09-22-2007, 02:38 PM

havent seen em in a while and cant get them hereso......whats your point?

In the 6th round of the first fight, Ruddock started nailing Tyson with hooks and uppercuts snapping Tyson's head back. It looked like a round out of the Douglas fight. But then Tyson put his glove up to his chin with a "HIT ME AGAIN!". And Ruddock did! Then Tyson came right back with a combonation. The round ended and Tyson came out for 7th throwing bombs at Ruddock forcing the ref to stop it when Ruddock got wobbled.

Tyson had heart, you can't become a two time champion and not have heart. Anyone who steps into the ring has heart, and so did Tyson.

SkillspayBills

09-22-2007, 04:00 PM

You can't say tyson doesn't ave heart, I mean if you get in the ring with someone wants to rip your head off you have some sort of heart.

The Iron Man

09-22-2007, 04:09 PM

Also to fight on untill u cant physically get up that shows heart. Prime Examples are against Lewis and Douglas.

Yaman

09-22-2007, 07:31 PM

I never really got the impression that Bowe outslugged him in the fight, Holyfield's worse moments were when he get caught coming in not when he was inside.
Holyfied was able to stick and move better in the second fight because Bowe was out of shape and couldn't catch a cold.

You might have gotten the wrong impression because of the immense applause and respect Holyfield has gotten from the 10th round where he was firing back after a beating. But in reality, he didn't capatilize as much as people have been glorifying(Mostly missed shots, and a tired Bowe, not hurt Bowe), and Bowe did the most damage, having Holyfield on his last legs a few times as well as knocking him down once.
Holyfield's worse moments were definitely when he was caught on the inside. One word, uppercut. First Bowe landed a flush uppercut in the tenth that started one of the greatest HW rounds of all time. Then in the 11th another hellacious uppercut that started the knockdown.

Holyfield does use the jab effectively in the last several rounds and the first before the knockdown, I just watched the fight recently. After the predicted recovery round, he starts catching Cooper with the jab, using movement, and digging in combinations. The commentary misses it as they were often very unfair to Holyfield back then but eh....

In my opinion he still didn't use it as much as he should have but hey, doesn't really matter since he won in the end, wich is all that matter at the end of the day.

Holyfield avoids most of Cooper's flurry and finds his legs pretty quickly. I know Holyfield has heart and all, but watch the way he sets up the comeback in the round by making Cooper miss and counter punching him into trouble. Again, I stress how deceptively sharp and skillful he was.

It's true. But sooner or later he will be worn out by this because it's not healthy or smart slugging, wether it's the way he went to war with Bowe, or how he was accurately slicing Stewart and Cooper apart.

Tyson wasn't putting anything together in those fights, he would walk through tough shots, fire one or two of his own, and get caught in a grapple with the bigger man(which didn't help). A really hard fight for Mike and while Ruddock's size certainly helped, Tyson's sloppy offense is what hindered him the most. Obviously, he wasn't the Mike of the Douglas fights but he wasn't the weaving combination puncher he once was or even the prison comeback. The Tyson that fought Holyfield in the first fight, was throwing slick combinations and even going to the body more. I believe he would have knocked Ruddock out without much trouble.

Actually, Tyson was loading up big 1 punch ko's all night(And getting countered all night by Evander) against Holyfield, except for 1 round where he was throwing effective combinations, one of the few rounds he won, and of cource the 3rd round of the second fight wich he also easily won because of combinations and body attacks. Tyson's body punching in the Ruddock fights was the best volume body attack he ever displayed, and his combinations weren't prime like, but much better than his awful hail mary haymakers he was throwing in the first Holyfield fight.

Holyfield could do the same, perhaps even more effectively with his less poweful but still damaging, busier, punching.

Sure, but it would be employed diffirently because he wasn't a big man like Ruddock that would land the "Smash" many times. Holyfield was effective(effective as in hurting Tyson) with his hooks in their fights.

I disagree with all actually. Tyson wasn't that much quicker in the Ruddock fights, he wasn't working the body or throwing that many combos, and he was already having frustration mental problems with all the low blow and what not. Again, Tyson was going to the body and throwing combs in the first Holyfield fight; where was that sneaky straight right hand lead and slip in the Ruddock fight? That would have come in handy.

Tyson never got rid of his ring rust after prison and for a swarmer to have a 4 year lay off and fight a warrior at 30+ is not the same.
You're wrong about Tyson's body work in the Ruddock fights, and IMO he was never as frustrated as the Holyfield fights(Lets not forget about the headbutts that pissed him off).

Thunder Lips

09-24-2007, 12:02 AM

"You might have gotten the wrong impression because of the immense applause and respect Holyfield has gotten from the 10th round where he was firing back after a beating"

Uh...no, not in the sense that Bowe just hammered him until he was tired and Evander just happened to still be standing because he has "heart." Outside of the big uppercut that, most of Bowe's flurry didn't get in there cleanly if at all. Holyfield blocked most of the punches, than crowded Bowe to the point that everything he threw was either smothered, blocked, or DOA. Bowe was tired because Evander avoided most of what should have been a match ending barrage. This is the underrated intelligence I'm talking about. Evander realized he was a sitting duck in the corner or tried to run again so he did the opposite and turned the course of the round. Yeah, he's got heart blahblah but lets not pretend Evander willed his way through these matches through this magical "heart" thing. The man was tough, but he was also a brilliant fighter that survived wars with much naturally stronger men; wars he wouldn't have survived if he mindlessly slugged and absorbed punishment as being implied.

"One word, uppercut. First Bowe landed a flush uppercut in the tenth that started one of the greatest HW rounds of all time. Then in the 11th another hellacious uppercut that started the knockdown."

And why did the uppercut catch Holyfield in the 10th? Bowe was jabbing the **** out of him everywhere he went on the outside and started dropping the right with accuracy. Evander rushed inside and held but after a long grapple, Bowe snuck a uppercut in out of nowhere. Evander really didn't have anywhere to run in this fight as Bowe fought the fight of his career. I thought it as borderline legal punch to the ear that dropped Evander after he got caught in the ropes in the 11th?

"It's true. But sooner or later he will be worn out by this because it's not healthy or smart slugging, wether it's the way he went to war with Bowe, or how he was accurately slicing Stewart and Cooper apart."

Holyfield is of average if not small size for a heavyweight and was not very quick on his feet. His jab was fine as a defensive or set up weapon but he couldn't control a fight with it if he wanted to as a heavy, not in 91 anyway. Inside counter punching was his best hope at winning these fights; where he could be in his range, beat guys to the punch, and crowd the bigger, longer man so they can't tee off from their range.

"Tyson never got rid of his ring rust after prison and for a swarmer to have a 4 year lay off and fight a warrior at 30+ is not the same."

The way he was spiraling mentally/physically and taking beatings, some time off might have been the best thing for him. Wasn't the initial Evander fight, cancelled because of a rib injury? And he did look better after prison, at least better than the lethargic mess that kept walking into clean haymakers in the last Ruddock fight. Talk about unnecessary wreckless wars, Tyson/Ruddock springs to mind. At that rate, Tyson may not have even made it to the first Holyfield fight in any kind of shape to do anything. This is just speculation on my part, but he was really looking bad before prison.

"You're wrong about Tyson's body work in the Ruddock fights, and IMO he was never as frustrated as the Holyfield fights(Lets not forget about the headbutts that pissed him off)."

What body work in the Ruddock fights? He gets a few in a spacious hooks inbetween head hunting but there is no body work to speak of. I'm talking one or two per round, and even fewer of any significance.

Brassangel

09-24-2007, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by Bobby Pazuzu
Tyson was very poor in the 2nd Ruddock fight. IMO he actually looked similar to the way he did when he came out of prison. He seemed slower like he had been injected with led.

I think Holyfield vs Tyson in 1991 would have been very close. Tyson still threw decent combinations which might have been to key to hurting Holyfield (in their 1st fight he only threw combos in the 5th, which he won).
Yet Holyfield had the durabilty and desire to beat Tyson the way he did in 1996.

Prime vs prime, i say Tyson. But Holyfeild would always have severly tested Tysons heart. More so than Lewis.

I completely agree with this assertion. Even in their (real life) second fight, it started to look as though Tyson was going to do something to take command, as he was a little more physical in the clinches, throwing punches on the way in, and he came out firing combinations that caught Holyfield considerably off-guard in the 3rd round. Had that fight finished out, and Tyson won, he would have had a much better legacy, even with the previous losses to Douglas and Holyfield. Of course, it would have gone to a third fight, and we'd be talking about one of the greatest rivalries of all-time, right next to Ali-Frazier. When watching that fight, it looked, for a moment, like we were going to witness something great when the crowd started chanting "Tyson! Tyson!" in the 3rd round...I hope he got full and felt like it was worth it.

In their prime, I see Tyson winning, though it's still a war.

Yaman

09-27-2007, 01:27 PM

Uh...no, not in the sense that Bowe just hammered him until he was tired and Evander just happened to still be standing because he has "heart." Outside of the big uppercut that, most of Bowe's flurry didn't get in there cleanly if at all. Holyfield blocked most of the punches, than crowded Bowe to the point that everything he threw was either smothered, blocked, or DOA. Bowe was tired because Evander avoided most of what should have been a match ending barrage. This is the underrated intelligence I'm talking about. Evander realized he was a sitting duck in the corner or tried to run again so he did the opposite and turned the course of the round. Yeah, he's got heart blahblah but lets not pretend Evander willed his way through these matches through this magical "heart" thing. The man was tough, but he was also a brilliant fighter that survived wars with much naturally stronger men; wars he wouldn't have survived if he mindlessly slugged and absorbed punishment as being implied.

I understand what you're saying. But what i'm saying is that despite the fact that he is skilled at slugging and dealing with adversity, there are some fighters he wouldn't be succesful against, and that would simply outmatch Holyfield in a slugfest. You mentioned how Bowe's punches were mostly blocked or missed, yet he had Evander out on his feet several times. Riddick Bowe was a good powerful puncher but not as good as Tyson, neither as good in finishing off an opponent. It's my opinion that Tyson would beat Holyfield and it's yours that he wouldn't. lets agree to disagree on this.

And why did the uppercut catch Holyfield in the 10th? Bowe was jabbing the **** out of him everywhere he went on the outside and started dropping the right with accuracy. Evander rushed inside and held but after a long grapple, Bowe snuck a uppercut in out of nowhere. Evander really didn't have anywhere to run in this fight as Bowe fought the fight of his career. I thought it as borderline legal punch to the ear that dropped Evander after he got caught in the ropes in the 11th?

So why did you say Bowe wasn't as succesful on the inside? You agree his best shots came from the inside wich strengthens my point that Holyfield fought the wrong fight many times.

Holyfield is of average if not small size for a heavyweight and was not very quick on his feet. His jab was fine as a defensive or set up weapon but he couldn't control a fight with it if he wanted to as a heavy, not in 91 anyway. Inside counter punching was his best hope at winning these fights; where he could be in his range, beat guys to the punch, and crowd the bigger, longer man so they can't tee off from their range.

Actually, I disagree with both statements. Holyfield was fast on his feet, he loved to bounce around and his footwork was great as well. His jab WAS effective, as seen in the second Bowe fight where he used it more frequently. His jab was good, but he just stopped using it many times because he was too hungry for a slugfest wich i've been telling you so many times already. I can recall times Duva and other trainers were yelling at him to throw the ****ing jab.

The way he was spiraling mentally/physically and taking beatings, some time off might have been the best thing for him. Wasn't the initial Evander fight, cancelled because of a rib injury? And he did look better after prison, at least better than the lethargic mess that kept walking into clean haymakers in the last Ruddock fight. Talk about unnecessary wreckless wars, Tyson/Ruddock springs to mind. At that rate, Tyson may not have even made it to the first Holyfield fight in any kind of shape to do anything. This is just speculation on my part, but he was really looking bad before prison.

On a technical standpoint he did look worse than before, but PHYSICALLY he was still fit. Like the things i've mentioned: Heart, foot and hand quickness, combinations and body attacks. All of these would be in tyson's ability again instead of the tired 1 punch KO looking ghost of 1996.
Don't be fooled by fairy tales of "Buster Douglass ended Tyson" because Mike was a strong man that could take beatings. Many didn't expect him to be able to throw a damn punch after Lewis destroyed him, yet he didn't look so good in many years in the Danny Williams fight before messing up his knee. Lets face it, Tyson could afford slugging with Razor Ruddock because quite frankly, Ruddock didn't use any skills either. Tyson wouldn't fight the same way against Holyfield in 91. ****, I doubt 96 Tyson could even go the distance anymore, he looked that terrible stamina wise. The younger Tyson would be ready for a long night, if he came in top shape.

What body work in the Ruddock fights? He gets a few in a spacious hooks inbetween head hunting but there is no body work to speak of. I'm talking one or two per round, and even fewer of any significance.

Watch the fights. I can't be bothered to recall everything.

Thunder Lips

09-28-2007, 12:50 AM

"You mentioned how Bowe's punches were mostly blocked or missed, yet he had Evander out on his feet several times."

Not from blocked or missed shots. :)

"So why did you say Bowe wasn't as succesful on the inside? You agree his best shots came from the inside wich strengthens my point that Holyfield fought the wrong fight many times."

Holyfield was ****ed wherever he went that night. Bowe may not be the one punch powerhouse that 91 Tyson was, but in that one fight, he was a much more complete and superior offensive fighter. Holyfield did try to move and jab against Bowe in the middle rounds and ended up getting tagged by the longer man who was unusually sharp and busy. And as said before, Bowe wasn't the same fighter in the rematch; his laziness and poor training leading up to the fight is evident and well documented.

"Lets face it, Tyson could afford slugging with Razor Ruddock because quite frankly, Ruddock didn't use any skills either. Tyson wouldn't fight the same way against Holyfield in 91."

Tyson couldn't afford it and he paid for it with two grueling fights that were much closer and costly than they had any right to be. So Tyson wouldn't try to and bang with Holyfield and get inside? That's the basis of your whole argument. I don't think his strategy would differ much. 96 Tyson's stamina looked fine, he took a beating up until the 11 th round and was still on his feet; obviously he was in great condition.

"Watch the fights. I can't be bothered to recall everything."

Uh...I did.

Franko

09-28-2007, 09:20 AM

Tyson was always grossly overrated by fanboys and still is. His prime was relatively short for a 'reason'.

His prime may have been short, but it was explosive enough to leave Tyson with the reputation as one of the greatest fighters in heavyweight history. During his prime he beat Trevor Berbick, James Smith, and Tony Tucker over a period of ten months to become the undisputed heavyweight champion. The heavyweight division is classed as poor at the time because it looked like there would be few fighters capable of 'testing' Tyson. Berbick, Smith, and Tucker beat Pinklon Thomas, Tim Witherspoon, and Buster Douglas to win the titles that Tyson took from them... Those names would make today's heavyweight division a damn sight better!
Also, those who say that Tyson lacked heart don't have a clue... First and foremost, you need heart to step into a boxing ring, but i suggest that those who believe that Tyson lacked heart should take a look at the Buster Douglas, Evander Holyfield 1, and Lennox Lewis fights... All fights that Tyson lost in a space of over ten years, but fights in which Tyson showed incredible 'heart.'

poet682006

09-28-2007, 10:50 AM

His prime may have been short, but it was explosive enough to leave Tyson with the reputation as one of the greatest fighters in heavyweight history. During his prime he beat Trevor Berbick, James Smith, and Tony Tucker over a period of ten months to become the undisputed heavyweight champion. The heavyweight division is classed as poor at the time because it looked like there would be few fighters capable of 'testing' Tyson. Berbick, Smith, and Tucker beat Pinklon Thomas, Tim Witherspoon, and Buster Douglas to win the titles that Tyson took from them... Those names would make today's heavyweight division a damn sight better!
Also, those who say that Tyson lacked heart don't have a clue... First and foremost, you need heart to step into a boxing ring, but i suggest that those who believe that Tyson lacked heart should take a look at the Buster Douglas, Evander Holyfield 1, and Lennox Lewis fights... All fights that Tyson lost in a space of over ten years, but fights in which Tyson showed incredible 'heart.'

Berbick may well have been the worst fighter ever to hold a Heavyweight belt, Smith was never that good, Thomas was a rehabbing druggie, and Tucker would have beaten Tyson if he hadn't broken his hand in the second round. Talk about Tyson's strengths all you want but strength of competition wasn't one of them. You're talking about what was probably the second worst period in Heavyweight history after only the present cesspool.

Poet

Franko

09-28-2007, 11:10 AM

Berbick may well have been the worst fighter ever to hold a Heavyweight belt, Smith was never that good, Thomas was a rehabbing druggie, and Tucker would have beaten Tyson if he hadn't broken his hand in the second round. Talk about Tyson's strengths all you want but strength of competition wasn't one of them. You're talking about what was probably the second worst period in Heavyweight history after only the present cesspool.

Poet

I seriously doubt that Berbick is the worst fighter 'ever' to hold a heavyweight title! And i honestly don't think that Tucker would've beat Tyson if he hadn't broken his hand, but those are just my opinions.

poet682006

09-28-2007, 11:18 AM

I seriously doubt that Berbick is the worst fighter 'ever' to hold a heavyweight title! And i honestly don't think that Tucker would've beat Tyson if he hadn't broken his hand, but those are just my opinions.

Name me some worse! Primo Carnera doesn't count because his whole reign was phony balony.

Poet

Franko

09-28-2007, 11:48 AM

Name me some worse! Primo Carnera doesn't count because his whole reign was phony balony.

Poet

Shame! I was going to throw his name into the mix...
I never claimed that Pinklon Thomas was anything special, but he'd have probably done well in today's heavyweight division...

Frank Bruno... Francois Botha... Leon Spinks... Bruce Seldon... Marvin Hart... and i personally think that James Braddock is over rated, but how you compare these guys to Trevor Berbick i don't know...

poet682006

09-28-2007, 12:00 PM

Shame! I was going to throw his name into the mix...
I never claimed that Pinklon Thomas was anything special, but he'd have probably done well in today's heavyweight division...

Frank Bruno... Francois Botha... Leon Spinks... Bruce Seldon... Marvin Hart... and i personally think that James Braddock is over rated, but how you compare these guys to Trevor Berbick i don't know...

First off, no one really knows how good Hart was so you really can't compare. Botha and Spinks were both close to Berbick in their patheticness but in my eyes were a tad bit better. Seldon's only problem was a glass jaw and Berbick was never known as a puncher: I see Seldon beating Berbick easily. Frank Bruno. Where on earth did you get the idea Bruno stunk? Bruno was a damn good fighter. His straight up style was all wrong for fighting Tyson but THAT'S not strike against him. Especially since he wobbled Tyson two or three times in their first fight. When he finally won a belt it was at the end of his career and he was pretty much done at that point so again that's not something you can hold against him.

Poet

Yaman

09-28-2007, 12:42 PM

Holyfield was ****ed wherever he went that night. Bowe may not be the one punch powerhouse that 91 Tyson was, but in that one fight, he was a much more complete and superior offensive fighter. Holyfield did try to move and jab against Bowe in the middle rounds and ended up getting tagged by the longer man who was unusually sharp and busy. And as said before, Bowe wasn't the same fighter in the rematch; his laziness and poor training leading up to the fight is evident and well documented.

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. Steward exploited Bowe's weaknesses and taught Holyfield the right strategy to beat him. Stay on the outside more, jab more, turn him around, do some slugging but not too much, and focus more on countering when you do so. What if he slugged as much as the first fight again? 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.

Tyson couldn't afford it and he paid for it with two grueling fights that were much closer and costly than they had any right to be. So Tyson wouldn't try to and bang with Holyfield and get inside? That's the basis of your whole argument. I don't think his strategy would differ much. 96 Tyson's stamina looked fine, he took a beating up until the 11 th round and was still on his feet; obviously he was in great condition.

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