Who's prime is more overrated Roy Jones's or Mike Tyson's ?

Please dont say neither, have the balls to choose one over the other and state reasons why.

Probably Tyson's cos it was so comparatively short.

But both guys were extremely impressive in their primes even if the opposition wasn't.

Who's prime is more overrated Roy Jones's or Mike Tyson's ?

Please dont say neither, have the balls to choose one over the other and state reasons why.

That's the problem homey, neither is the correct answer. Cuz Tyson's prime was really good his overall career gets overrated, but he and RJ both deserve the hype they get for their prime runs. If I had to choose I'd say Tyson just cuz it was over after about 5 yrs.

Mike Tysons by FAR!

Who's prime is more overrated Roy Jones's or Mike Tyson's ?

Please dont say neither, have the balls to choose one over the other and state reasons why.

Tyson's.....because his rabid fans portray him as the GOAT because he got quickie KOs over Trever Berbick calibre fighters.....then when it occurs to them that Berbick was crap and a C class fighter at best they go through contortions to transform Berbick from a crap C class fighter into a credible opponent.

Poet

Tyson's.....because his rabid fans portray him as the GOAT because he got quickie KOs over Trever Berbick calibre fighters.....then when it occurs to them that Berbick was crap and a C class fighter at best they go through contortions to transform Berbick from a crap C class fighter into a credible opponent.

Poet


I gave up discussing Mike Tyson with his fans :sad:

I gave up discussing Mike Tyson with his fans :sad:

Yeah, Tyson definately attracts a disproportionate share of unthinking nuthuggers.....though they HAVE been quite the last few months. It's similar to drying to have a rational discussion with one of Fraud Gayweather's Track Stars: No intelligent life there when the subject of their idol is on the plate.

PS. I'm probably harder on the Tyson fan-bois than I am on most simply because they tend to be so obnoxious in their fawning worship of him.

Poet

I would say Mike Tyson. Doesn't mean he wasn't good. He was a beast.

Can't overrate their primes when the majority of their opponents in their primes weren't getting up. Overall career is something different.

Roy Jones' without a doubt, beat a shell of Toney and a very green B-Hop. Followed by postmen, garbage collectors and off duty cops. Then to top it off he beat a manufactured champ at heavyweight. Definitely the most overrated fighter of my lifetime.

How many top 10 M/W's do you see beating Jones prime for prime? on or two? maybe?

How many top 10-15 heavyweights beat Tyson prime for prime? probably all of them

Tyson sucks,Roy Jones sucks wah wah wah.What an original thread posted in the most original thread inhabited by posters of the most original and diversive opinions *cough cough*

All stupid threads like this does is attract the simple minded morons from NSB that pedopoet is always moaning about


How many top 10-15 heavyweights beat Tyson prime for prime? probably all of them

You just have a twitch in your arse because tyson gets rated over lewis in prime for prime matchups

get over it,loser

How many top 10 M/W's do you see beating Jones prime for prime? on or two? maybe?

Well, I tend to see Jones at Light-Heavy since he was a true Middleweight only VERY early in his career. I would say Jones would be competetive with the bottom half of the Light-Heavy ATGs. Ezzard Charles, Gene Tunney, Archie Moore, and Bob Foster would probably be too tall an order. I would favor Michael Spinks over Roy but I think that's a very competetive fight that Jones could possibly even win: Call it Spinks 6 out of 10 fights.

How many top 10-15 heavyweights beat Tyson prime for prime? probably all of them

Most of them. I tend to think that against Marciano and Frazier it's even-odds.....maybe even Dempsey though I would personally favor Jack.

Poet

Tyson, many think he was unbeatable, but like most fighters he was beatable imo.

Jones was pretty much unbeatable in his prime however...I'd pick very few against him.

Both had very good primes, I think Tyson's was overrated though due to the level of competition in his prime era.

He looked like an unstoppable machine but he was only fights C+ fighters.

How many top 10 M/W's do you see beating Jones prime for prime? on or two? maybe?

How many top 10-15 heavyweights beat Tyson prime for prime? probably all of them

heavyweight is a total different story, a lot of heavyweights could get beat, heavyweights are known for having one hitta quittas. Tyson on his day could of beaten all of them...Jack Dempsey,Jack Johnson, Joe Louis, Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Norton, etc etc....dont you remember the Mccall and Rahman beat down of the man in your pic...Lewis is a good fighter but is very ovverated....and anyone with any boxing sense knows that a prime tyson knocks a prime Lewis out.

Hagler,Leonard,Robinson,Prime Hopkins,Blown up Hearns,Blown up Duran, Monzon...lots of people have a chance against the on a world scale chinny jones.....

All in all, i think the correct answer is Neither, thats not sitting on the fence or w.e, but if you had to pick one...it would probably be Tyson's as prev. mentioned his prime was short, and roy's was longer.... having said that, when roy was turning pro, tyson was undisputed heavyweight champion.if Tyson had Rooney,Cus,Jacobs around him instead of Don King stepping in, he would of had a lot better legacy (and thats saying something because his legacy is great as it is)

Also...Jones was more of a Light heavy then a middleweight, and if you are going into that weight division, Ezzarld Charles, Archie Moore, Bob Foster, Dwight Muhammad Quawi all would get the better of jones.

Tyson's because he was completely one dimensional and fought worse competition. And when that prime ended he was not able to give a gut it out last hurrah win. Roy did that in the first Tarver fight, while also during his prime absolutely destroying three different divisions. People will say he didn't fight great competition but I think that is untrue, many of the light heavyweights he dominated were very good fighters that would have been remembered differently if not for Roy. He easily beat both Bernard Hopkins and James Toney as well, and of course finished off his prime by winning a heavyweight belt and gutting out that win over Tarver.

heavyweight is a total different story, a lot of heavyweights could get beat, heavyweights are known for having one hitta quittas. Tyson on his day could of beaten all of them...Jack Dempsey,Jack Johnson, Joe Louis, Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Norton, etc etc....dont you remember the Mccall and Rahman beat down of the man in your pic...Lewis is a good fighter but is very ovverated....and anyone with any boxing sense knows that a prime tyson knocks a prime Lewis out.

Hagler,Leonard,Robinson,Prime Hopkins,Blown up Hearns,Blown up Duran, Monzon...lots of people have a chance against the on a world scale chinny jones.....

All in all, i think the correct answer is Neither, thats not sitting on the fence or w.e, but if you had to pick one...it would probably be Tyson's as prev. mentioned his prime was short, and roy's was longer.... having said that, when roy was turning pro, tyson was undisputed heavyweight champion.if Tyson had Rooney,Cus,Jacobs around him instead of Don King stepping in, he would of had a lot better legacy (and thats saying something because his legacy is great as it is)


No, only Tyson die hards see it like that.

.if Tyson had Rooney,Cus,Jacobs around him instead of Don King stepping in, he would of had a lot better legacy

Change the record.......zzzz.

Tyson's.....because his rabid fans portray him as the GOAT because he got quickie KOs over Trever Berbick calibre fighters.....then when it occurs to them that Berbick was crap and a C class fighter at best they go through contortions to transform Berbick from a crap C class fighter into a credible opponent.

Poet

Berbick was far from C class. Doesn't speak highly of the way Larry Holmes, who had one of his tougher fights with Berbick, by calling him C class. His resume is decent, and he was Champion in a much better era than we got today.

As to answering the question at hand, Jones was more over rated. Tyson had a higher level of quality opposition.

Berbick was far from C class. Doesn't speak highly of the way Larry Holmes, who had one of his tougher fights with Berbick, by calling him C class. His resume is decent, and he was Champion in a much better era than we got today.

As to answering the question at hand, Jones was more over rated. Tyson had a higher level of quality opposition.


Berbick was not a tough fight for Holmes though, Berbick just has a really awkward style and whilst Holmes did not look his best he still won clearly.

Holmes's tougher fights were Weaver 1,Shavers 2, Snipes, Carl Williams, Norton. Those guys either dropped Larry or forced him to dig deep to win, i cant recall Berbick pushing him that hard.

Berbick was far from C class. His resume is decent, and he was Champion in a much better era than we got today.

Berbick was damn near D class: Beating a completely wahed up Ali who was already suffering from Parkinson's does not contitute a "decent" resume. As for the era being "much" better than today? Better, yes. Much better? NO. Both the current era and the 80s blew dead bear for Heavyweights.....today's just happens to be marginally worse.

Doesn't speak highly of the way Larry Holmes, who had one of his tougher fights with Berbick, by calling him C class.

Since when is winning by 15, 7, and 6 points on the cards a "tough" fight? Sounds more like Berbick got beaten pretty decisively to me.

Poet

Berbick was damn near D class: Beating a completely wahed up Ali who was already suffering from Parkinson's does not contitute a "decent" resume. As for the era being "much" better than today? Better, yes. Much better? NO. Both the current era and the 80s blew dead bear for Heavyweights.....today's just happens to be marginally worse.



Since when is winning by 15, 7, and 6 points on the cards a "tough" fight? Sounds more like Berbick got beaten pretty decisively to me.

Poet

you are exaggerating everything when it comes to the 80's. Berbick was not a d class opponent, you can't channel your hate for him because he beat Ali when he was old. He was just an average contender who managed to get a belt.

I don't think the Holmes/Berbick fight was competitive either, but only because Holmes was A class. When Tyson took Holmes out he was B class. It only took him 4 rounds though so you can't fault him their.

The 80's was not terrible. Right beside the 70's it looks bad, but so does pretty much every other HW era. The 60's was solid, but the 40's and 50's IMO was just like the 80's..average.

There is nothing D class about Witherspoon, Holmes, Spinks, Tucker, Thomas, Tubbs and Bruno.

not amazing, but not terrible either.

Also, what does this say about Holmes record? most of his best wins were from the 80's category.

sorry if my post seemed a little hostile in regards to your opinion, but I think you know what i'm trying to say.:boxing::boxing:

See post below.

Berbick was damn near D class: Beating a completely wahed up Ali who was already suffering from Parkinson's does not contitute a "decent" resume. As for the era being "much" better than today? Better, yes. Much better? NO. Both the current era and the 80s blew dead bear for Heavyweights.....today's just happens to be marginally worse.



Since when is winning by 15, 7, and 6 points on the cards a "tough" fight? Sounds more like Berbick got beaten pretty decisively to me.

Poet

Berbick also beat:

Pink
Undefeated Mitch Green
David Bey
Greg Page
John Tate

You can hate on what Green and Bey went on to do after their fight with Berbick, but AT THE TIME, they were promising fighters.

-----

Also, you can win every round of a fight and have a tough fight. Holmes did not beat Berbick with ease. Berbick is roughly in the top 10 best names in the win column on Larry's resume, give or take.

you are exaggerating everything when it comes to the 80's. Berbick was not a d class opponent, you can't channel your hate for him because he beat Ali when he was old. He was just an average contender who managed to get a belt.

The only problem with that is I'm not an Ali fan and the beatings he took from Holmes and Berbick where his own damn fault for trying to come back after it was clear he was shot.....He has no one to blame but himself!

I don't think the Holmes/Berbick fight was competitive either, but only because Holmes was A class. When Tyson took Holmes out he was B class. It only took him 4 rounds though so you can't fault him their.

I expect B class fighters to be at least semi-competetive with A class fighters.

A class - A near great or ATG
B class - Someone who'd be a consistant top-10 contender during a solid era
C class - Jouneyman or fringer contender at best during a solid era
D class - Tomato can, club fighter, ect.

The 80's was not terrible. Right beside the 70's it looks bad, but so does pretty much every other HW era. The 60's was solid, but the 40's and 50's IMO was just like the 80's..average.

While I agree the '60s were solid I would regard the '40s and '50s as sub-par on the whole, though still better than the '80s.

There is nothing D class about Witherspoon, Holmes, Spinks, Tucker, Thomas, Tubbs and Bruno.

You mean when they were in-shape and not on drugs. Which wasn't very often.

Also, what does this say about Holmes record? most of his best wins were from the 80's category.

Actually, outside of the Cooney fight, in my view Holmes' best wins were in the late '70s

Poet

Some ignorant post in this thread. I stopped reading when someone said Tyson was one dimensional lol. Tyson had all the physical attributes to be the greatest of all time. Some of the fastest hands I have ever seen. Great foot work, great head movement, power in both hands. Only thing he lacked was mental attributes. Original Team Tyson instilled a lot of confidence in Mike. This is what he needed his whole career. With that said, I don't think I can really answer this question. Both were phenomenal in their primes.

Berbick also beat:

Pink
Undefeated Mitch Green
David Bey
Greg Page
John Tate

You can hate on what Green and Bey went on to do after their fight with Berbick, but AT THE TIME, they were promising fighters.

-----

Also, you can win every round of a fight and have a tough fight. Holmes did not beat Berbick with ease. Berbick is roughly in the top 10 best names in the win column on Larry's resume, give or take.

Pink - A druggie who squandered his talent
Undefeated Mitch Green - See the undefeated Peter McNeeley
David Bey - Out of shape club fighter
Greg Page - Out of shape most of the time
John Tate - An over-hyped never-was

"Promising" doesn't feed the bulldog: You don't get points for potential (or misplaced perception of potential). You get points more making something of that potential. As for the Berbick fight, I've HAVE watched it and at no time was Larry in any kind of trouble. He could have won that fight on cruise-control.....which he practically did.

Poet

Some ignorant post in this thread. I stopped reading when someone said Tyson was one dimensional lol. Tyson had all the physical attributes to be the greatest of all time. Some of the fastest hands I have ever seen. Great foot work, great head movement, power in both hands. Only thing he lacked was mental attributes. Original Team Tyson instilled a lot of confidence in Mike. This is what he needed his whole career. With that said, I don't think I can really answer this question. Both were phenomenal in their primes.

Get off the crack and actually watch some fights Junior. Tyson was no danger at anytime of being the GOAT.

Poet

Pink - A druggie who squandered his talent
Undefeated Mitch Green - See the undefeated Peter McNeeley
David Bey - Out of shape club fighter
Greg Page - Out of shape most of the time
John Tate - An over-hyped never-was

"Promising" doesn't feed the bulldog: You don't get points for potential (or misplaced perception of potential). You get points more making something of that potential. As for the Berbick fight, I've HAVE watched it and at no time was Larry in any kind of trouble. He could have won that fight on cruise-control.....which he practically did.

Poet

You seriously have issues with not giving fighters credit. And I never said Berbick had Larry in trouble. You don't need to have someone in trouble for it to be a competitive fight. Larry started off in cruise control, but **** changed in the second half of the fight.

You seriously have issues with not giving fighters credit. And I never said Berbick had Larry in trouble. You don't need to have someone in trouble for it to be a competitive fight. Larry started off in cruise control, but **** changed in the second half of the fight.

I don't give anyone credit when it isn't deserved. Accolades from me have to be earned. The real world isn't an egalitarian utopia where you get credit for "trying".

Poet

Pink - A druggie who squandered his talent
Undefeated Mitch Green - See the undefeated Peter McNeeley
David Bey - Out of shape club fighter
Greg Page - Out of shape most of the time
John Tate - An over-hyped never-was

"Promising" doesn't feed the bulldog: You don't get points for potential (or misplaced perception of potential). You get points more making something of that potential. As for the Berbick fight, I've HAVE watched it and at no time was Larry in any kind of trouble. He could have won that fight on cruise-control.....which he practically did.

Poet


You don't get points for misplaced perception of potential)

I love that Poet :boxing:

I will have to remember that one when someone brings up where a fighter was ranked before getting his ass beat down.

lots of hypocrisy in this thread from Poet, and lots of people here kissing his ass afraid to hurt his little feelings. the guy *****es about tyson's fans overating his competition, yet he babbles on about the 'greats' Louis beat.

he bashes Mike for winning his first belt from Berbick, yet he never mentions Louis winning it from Braddock, a guy who got his own belt from the biggest clown in boxing. But because there's a movie about Braddock that automatically makes him an all time great, so it's all right.

many people who are eating Poet's bull**** on a solver plate should read what he had to say on Galento. I mean the guy has the nerve to say anything about tyson fans overating their man, please.

Poets the biggest Internet warrior if i ever saw one. He says he has no time for nuthuggers yet he's the one who comes into threads and begins flaming everyone with his jokes about 'ass' and '****'.

how people respect him is beyong me.

Get off the crack and actually watch some fights Junior. Tyson was no danger at anytime of being the GOAT.

Poet

Meant to say the greatest heavyweight of all time. Are you going to sit here and tell me that while you watched Tyson during his prime you weren't thinking that he could possibly be the greatest heavyweight ever? I did, and know plenty of others that feel the same way. And for the record, I have studied boxing for a long time. obviously not as long as you though, you are pretty damn old lol. no offense

You seriously have issues with not giving fighters credit. And I never said Berbick had Larry in trouble. You don't need to have someone in trouble for it to be a competitive fight. Larry started off in cruise control, but **** changed in the second half of the fight.forget it it's a lost cause. the most biased piece of **** on this entire site.

lots of hypocrisy in this thread from Poet, and lots of people here kissing his ass afraid to hurt his little feelings. the guy *****es about tyson's fans overating his competition, yet he babbles on about the 'greats' Louis beat.

he bashes Mike for winning his first belt from Berbick, yet he never mentions Louis winning it from Braddock, a guy who got his own belt from the biggest clown in boxing. But because there's a movie about Braddock that automatically makes him an all time great, so it's all right.

many people who are eating Poet's bull**** on a solver plate should read what he had to say on Galento. I mean the guy has the nerve to say anything about tyson fans overating their man, please.

Poets the biggest Internet warrior if i ever saw one. He says he has no time for nuthuggers yet he's the one who comes into threads and begins flaming everyone with his jokes about 'ass' and '****'.

how people respect him is beyong me.


Poet is being a bit harsh on Mike's competition i must admit, but by the same token i get the feeling he is doing it because Mike Tyson fans are so deluded and infuriatingly biased.

There is an excuses for everything Mike Tyson did or did not do, its ridiculous!

People have these ideals about Tyson that reality does not support.

Meant to say the greatest heavyweight of all time. Are you going to sit here and tell me that while you watched Tyson during his prime you weren't thinking that he could possibly be the greatest heavyweight ever? I did, and know plenty of others that feel the same way. And for the record, I have studied boxing for a long time. obviously not as long as you though, you are pretty damn old lol. no offense

Heavyweight was what I was referring to. I have every Tyson fight except for the Sims fight and I've watched them all multiple times and no at NO time did I think he could be the best ever. He may have been entertaining but the last time I checked the "entertainment factor" isn't a component of greatness as a fighter. People are too easily swayed by emotional reactions based on how well they're being entertained.

Poet

Poet is being a bit harsh on Mike's competition i must admit, but by the same token i get the feeling he is doing it because Mike Tyson fans are so deluded and infuriatingly biased.

There is an excuses for everything Mike Tyson did or did not do, its ridiculous!people should have their own clear head on their shoulders and not let everybody else's opinion effect their thinking. This guy Poet comes on this site to let off steam and it seems to me he's got a lot of issues.

what Mike did ultimately reflects on him and his actions, he lost the title he went to prison, he lost the money, nobody did that for him. A lot of the scum he was associated with might have influenced him into some things, but it's on him.

as far as his competiton goes, they guy is a top 10 all time great heavyweight. for any average guy who sits behind the TV screen with their belly full of beer and has never taken a slap to their face, it's easy for them to call another guy a bum.

Originally Posted by Boogie Nights
lots of hypocrisy in this thread from Poet, and lots of people here kissing his ass afraid to hurt his little feelings. the guy *****es about tyson's fans overating his competition, yet he babbles on about the 'greats' Louis beat.

he bashes Mike for winning his first belt from Berbick, yet he never mentions Louis winning it from Braddock, a guy who got his own belt from the biggest clown in boxing. But because there's a movie about Braddock that automatically makes him an all time great, so it's all right.

many people who are eating Poet's bull**** on a solver plate should read what he had to say on Galento. I mean the guy has the nerve to say anything about tyson fans overating their man, please.

Poets the biggest Internet warrior if i ever saw one. He says he has no time for nuthuggers yet he's the one who comes into threads and begins flaming everyone with his jokes about 'ass' and '****'.

how people respect him is beyong me.

Awwww, Boogie Nights wants his binkie :bottle: Got to love the way he obsesses over me so much he has to make posts about me despite the fact that I ignored the tranny long ago :rofl:

Poet

Awwww, Boogie Nights wants his binkie :bottle: Got to love the way he obsesses over me so much he has to make posts about me despite the fact that I ignored the tranny long ago :rofl:

Poet
typical response from an idiot.

Heavyweight was what I was referring to. I have every Tyson fight except for the Sims fight and I've watched them all multiple times and no at NO time did I think he could be the best ever. He may have been entertaining but the last time I checked the "entertainment factor" isn't a component of greatness as a fighter. People are too easily swayed by emotional reactions based on how well they're being entertained.

Poet

It wasn't his excitement factor that swayed me into saying that. It was his incredible head movement, power in both hands, speed of his punches, his ability to go to the body with vicious combinations. That is what I am getting at. Mike in his prime was about as close to being perfect as I have ever seen in a heavyweight fighter.

It isn't his excitement factor that swayed me into saying that. It was his incredible head movement, power in both hands, speed of his punches, his ability to go to the body with vicious combinations. That is what I am getting at.

His head movement never impressed me any more than say Joe Frazier's did and Mike was NEVER a consistant body-puncher like Frazier was. As for his power and hand speed it wasn't anything that Louis didn't have.

Mike in his prime was about as close to being perfect as I have ever seen in a heavyweight fighter.

Then you need to see more Heavyweight fighters.

Poet

people should have their own clear head on their shoulders and not let everybody else's opinion effect their thinking. This guy Poet comes on this site to let off steam and it seems to me he's got a lot of issues.

what Mike did ultimately reflects on him and his actions, he lost the title he went to prison, he lost the money, nobody did that for him. A lot of the scum he was associated with might have influenced him into some things, but it's on him.

as far as his competiton goes, they guy is a top 10 all time great heavyweight. for any average guy who sits behind the TV screen with their belly full of beer and has never taken a slap to their face, it's easy for them to call another guy a bum.


they guy is a top 10 all time great heavyweight

Yeah right!!!!:wtf1:

[QUOTE=vandiar;5802540]It isn't his excitement factor that swayed me into saying that. It was his incredible head movement, power in both hands, speed of his punches, his ability to go to the body with vicious combinations. That is what I am getting at.[/COLOR]

His head movement never impressed me any more than say Joe Frazier's did and Mike was NEVER a consistant body-puncher like Frazier was. As for his power and hand speed it wasn't anything that Louis didn't have.



Then you need to see more Heavyweight fighters.

Poet

Right Frazier had great head movement and good body punching, Joe had good hand speed and power (Mike was bigger, stronger, and faster than Louis ), but Mike had the best of BOTH worlds! That is what i am saying. And I have watched many heavyweight fights.

Mike was bigger, stronger, and faster than Louis

Let me guess: You're one of those posters who can't get past size? :wtf1:

Tyson gets embarrassed by Ali; crushed by Foreman, Liston, and Louis; has already been beaten convincingly by Holyfield; gets decisioned by a PRIME Holmes (not the past it Holmes who hadn't fought in two years); and is even money with Frazier, Dempsey, and Marciano. Who the hell is he going to be favored over? No one in the top-10.

Poet

they guy is a top 10 all time great heavyweight

Yeah right!!!!:wtf1:
dont give me that 'wtf' bs. if you wanna debate, go ahead, but dont post these childish remarks.

thomas, tucker, ruddock, tubbs, holmes, spinks, bruno, williams, are all solid wins. any fighter's resume can be picked apart, even Alis. if you pick on any little thing just for the benefit of proving your point, there's no need to do rankings in the first place.

prime tyson, exceptional speed, best combination punching since Joe Louis, one punch take out power, good head movement, quick on his toes. all these factors cant be ignored.

you really wanna tell me that guys who are rated above him, like foreman, louis, marciano, dempsey, you wanna tell me that he wouldnt go through their resumes undefeated?

dont give me that 'wtf' bs. if you wanna debate, go ahead, but dont post these childish remarks.

thomas, tucker, ruddock, tubbs, holmes, spinks, bruno, williams, are all solid wins. any fighter's resume can be picked apart, even Alis. if you pick on any little thing just for the benefit of proving your point, there's no need to do rankings in the first place.

prime tyson, exceptional speed, best combination punching since Joe Louis, one punch take out power, good head movement, quick on his toes. all these factors cant be ignored.

you really wanna tell me that guys who are rated above him, like foreman, louis, marciano, dempsey, you wanna tell me that he wouldnt go through their resumes undefeated?



Why would i want to debate with a Tyson fan when all you ever get is excuses after excuse ? there is a reason why so many people dont have in their top 10.

He got waxed by Douglas and lost to Holyfield and his best win came against blown up LHW.



Could of did not = not an ATG.

Let me guess: You're one of those posters who can't get past size? :wtf1:

Tyson gets embarrassed by Ali; crushed by Foreman, Liston, and Louis; has already been beaten convincingly by Holyfield; gets decisioned by a PRIME Holmes (not the past it Holmes who hadn't fought in two years); and is even money with Frazier, Dempsey, and Marciano. Who the hell is he going to be favored over? No one in the top-10.

Poet
http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo108/rafaeldelagetto/GIFs/2cia7m0.gif

Why would i want to debate with a Tyson fan when all you ever get is excuses after excuse ? there is a reason why so many people dont have in their top 10.

He got waxed by Douglas and lost to Holyfield and his best win came against blown up LHW.



Could of did not = not an ATG.
what excuses did i come up with?

ah, forget it, all the same, im outta here, do me a favor and add me to your ignore

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/2466/589y.gif

what excuses did i come up with?

ah, forget it, all the same, im outta here, do me a favor and add me to your ignore

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/2466/589y.gif


I think its best because i dont have the energy to go through another!! Tyson debate.

I wont put you on ignore though.:boxing:

I think its best because i dont have the energy to go through another!! Tyson debate.

I wont put you on ignore though.:boxing:

Got to love Tyson's demented fan-bois, especially the tranny ones like Boogie Nights :rofl:

Poet

His head movement never impressed me any more than say Joe Frazier's did and Mike was NEVER a consistant body-puncher like Frazier was. As for his power and hand speed it wasn't anything that Louis didn't have.



Then you need to see more Heavyweight fighters.

Poet

hahahaha you serious?! check out a prime tyson, the man hardly got hit! joe frazier on the other hand, in the words of ali..."got angry when you missed him"...so how did they have comparable headmovement? tyson actually moved his head to get out of the way, yet frazier just moved his head up and down in a rhythmitic fashion which could easily be timed for the uppercut...

Im a big fan of Joe louis, but no way did he have the same speed as Tyson, maybe punching power, but defintly not speed.

"Alex."

as far as his competiton goes, they guy is a top 10 all time great heavyweight. for any average guy who sits behind the TV screen with their belly full of beer and has never taken a slap to their face, it's easy for them to call another guy a bum.

I agree, the man has a great Heavyweight resume. Better than Frazier's, better than Marciano's, better than Liston's, etc.

<meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><title></title><meta name="GENERATOR" content="OpenOffice.org 3.0 (Win32)"><style type="text/css"> <!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } --> </style> Mike Tyson
Notable Wins:
Jesse Ferguson
Marvis Frazier
Jose Ribalta
Alonzo Ratliff
Trevor Berbick
James 'Bonecrusher' Smith
Pinklon Thomas
Tony Tucker <Undefeated>
Tyrell Biggs <Undefeated>
Larry Holmes <Over the hill>
Tony Tubbs
Michael Spinks <Undefeated> <Over the hill>
Frank Bruno (x2)
Carl 'The Truth' Williams
Alex Stewart
Donovan 'Razor' Ruddock (x2)
Buster Mathis Jr. <Undefeated>
Bruce Seldon
Francois Botha
Lou Savarese
Brian Nielsen
Clifford Etienne
Notable NCs:
Orlin Norris
Andrew Golota
Notable Losses:
James 'Buster' Douglas [TKO 10] <Tyson undertrained, distracted, and too heavily favored to win>
Evander Holyfield (x2) [TKO 11] [DQ 3] <Tyson no longer the same fighter after prison>
Questionable Losses:
Buster Douglas (Long 10 count) <His mother who died the night before arranged this from Heaven>


Elite wins:
None
Semi-Elite wins:
Tony Tucker, Larry Holmes, Michael Spinks, Frank Bruno (x2), Donovan 'Razor' Ruddock (x2)
Good wins:
Marvis Frazier, Trevor Berbick, James 'Bonecrusher' Smith, Pinklon Thomas, Tony Tubbs, Carl Williams, Alex Stewart, Bruce Seldon, Brian Nielsen, Andrew Golota
OK wins:
Jesse Ferguson, Jose Ribalta, Alonzo Ratliff, Tyrell Biggs, Buster Mathis Jr., Francois Botha, Lou Savarese, Clifford Etienne (half credit), Orlin Norris (half credit)

hahahaha you serious?! check out a prime tyson, the man hardly got hit! joe frazier on the other hand, in the words of ali..."got angry when you missed him"...so how did they have comparable headmovement? tyson actually moved his head to get out of the way, yet frazier just moved his head up and down in a rhythmitic fashion which could easily be timed for the uppercut...

Im a big fan of Joe louis, but no way did he have the same speed as Tyson, maybe punching power, but defintly not speed.

"Alex."


Joe got him more because he put more pressure on. Joe Frazier was a pressure fighter.

hahahaha you serious?! check out a prime tyson, the man hardly got hit! joe frazier on the other hand, in the words of ali..."got angry when you missed him"...so how did they have comparable headmovement? tyson actually moved his head to get out of the way, yet frazier just moved his head up and down in a rhythmitic fashion which could easily be timed for the uppercut...

He hardly ever got hit because his frightend opponents were to busy running in reverse to punch with any conviction. Against a steady steam of journeymen I would imagine even YOUR head movement would look good. Look what happend when fighters actually stood their ground and fired at him: Tucker lands a monster uppercut, Bruno wobbles him, Douglas kicked the sh1t out of him, and Ruddock landed plenty of bombs.

Im a big fan of Joe louis, but no way did he have the same speed as Tyson, maybe punching power, but defintly not speed.

"Alex."

If you don't think Louis had fast hands than you obviously ARE on crack.

Poet

ok so tyson won the heavy weight title and defended it 11 times or so lost it then he gets it again defends it twice and loses it....

roy jones gets super middle weight/middle weight defending 13 times moves up to leight heavy loses it then wins it and defends it 15 times......


id say the fact that theirs people out their willing to argue this just shows how overly rated the general populus's take on tyson is

I agree, the man has a great Heavyweight resume. Better than Frazier's, better than Marciano's, better than Liston's, etc.

Liston's two wins over Cleveland Williams are superior to Tyson's entire resume combined. You spew as much crap as your Marxist namesake.

Poet

Joe got him more because he put more pressure on. Joe Frazier was a pressure fighter.

Well firstly i clearly didn't mention the comparison between Tyson and Frazier pressure wise, maybe if you learn how to read, one day you can realise i was comparing their headmovement. As far as pressure goes, i think Tyson puts just as much pressure on people as Frazier did....just in an educated hit and not get hit manner....joe frazier-"bob up, bob down, bob up, bob down, with that cross armed defence, and throw a massive wild left hook(which was one of the best left hooks in the business i grant you, but this is 80% of what he did)

Well firstly i clearly didn't mention the comparison between Tyson and Frazier pressure wise, maybe if you learn how to read, one day you can realise i was comparing their headmovement. As far as pressure goes, i think Tyson puts just as much pressure on people as Frazier did....just in an educated hit and not get hit manner....joe frazier-"bob up, bob down, bob up, bob down, with that cross armed defence, and throw a massive wild left hook(which was one of the best left hooks in the business i grant you, but this is 80% of what he did)

Ah yes, another teenager who thinks he knows everything but doesn't know fvck all. Come back and talk to me when you get your GED.....assuming, of course, you're even capable THAT.

Poet

-"bob up, bob down, bob up, bob down, with that cross armed defence, and throw a massive wild left hook(which was one of the best left hooks in the business i grant you, but this is 80% of what he did)

tyson or fraizer? didnt they both do that? whats your point?

He hardly ever got hit because his frightend opponents were to busy running in reverse to punch with any conviction. Against a steady steam of journeymen I would imagine even YOUR head movement would look good. Look what happend when fighters actually stood their ground and fired at him: Tucker lands a monster uppercut, Bruno wobbles him, Douglas kicked the sh1t out of him, and Ruddock landed plenty of bombs.



If you don't think Louis had fast hands than you obviously ARE on crack.

Poet

"even YOUR headmovement"...have you seen me fight? im actually a fighter....not some armchair fight fan who CLEARLY is on crack as he has to reassure himself with his name after every point he makes, why dont you change your name from poet to ******? would be much more relevant. Joe louis had fastish hands...but tyson had probably the fastest hands of any heavyweight. You obviously have something against tyson, did he not give you his autograph when you were a kid?...awwwww or is it because he is an apparnt homophobic and you take great insult to that?

ok so tyson won the heavy weight title and defended it 11 times or so lost it then he gets it again defends it twice and loses it....

roy jones gets super middle weight/middle weight defending 13 times moves up to leight heavy loses it then wins it and defends it 15 times......


id say the fact that theirs people out their willing to argue this just shows how overly rated the general populus's take on tyson is

I think you need to learn how to count.

Ah yes, another teenager who thinks he knows everything but doesn't know fvck all. Come back and talk to me when you get your GED.....assuming, of course, you're even capable THAT.

Poet

trying to bring age into this? if age is a major factor...isnt there like a 137 year old man in china? that dude must be a walking talking boxing enclopedia!!!

trying to bring age into this? if age is a major factor...isnt there like a 137 year old man in china? that dude must be a walking talking boxing enclopedia!!!

Ignore it, he's mentally still a teenager just like you.

tyson or fraizer? didnt they both do that? whats your point?

Tyson clearly had a lot more in his arsnal then bobbing in the same rhythm and same direction, plus he had more than a left hook. like previously mentioned only weak part of his game was the mental aspect. As for my point, isnt it self explan.?

"even YOUR headmovement"...have you seen me fight? im actually a fighter....

Yeah, you get into cat fights with your boyfriend over what drag to wear to the prom.....Junior.

Joe louis had fastish hands...but tyson had probably the fastest hands of any heavyweight.

Sorry Junior, you just proved (yet again) your abject ignorance. Tyson's hands weren't in the same league as Ali's in terms of speed and probably weren't any faster than Patterson's if that.


You obviously have something against tyson, did he not give you his autograph when you were a kid

Never met the convicted felon. Nor do I collect autographs and even if I did it certainly wouldn't be those of dumb jocks.

Personally, I'm not even sure why I'm giving you the time of day since you're obviously a dumb, ignorant kid who's too stupid to figure things out. What's the matter? Mommy and Daddy smack ya cuz they didn't want you carrying that pink purse to school?

Poet

Ignore it, he's mentally still a teenager just like you.

:bottle: :bottle: :bottle: :bottle:

:bottle: :bottle: :bottle: :bottle:

Thank you for proving my point.

Thank you for proving my point.

Hey, I have NO problems making fun of idiots and nut hugging fan-bois: The village idiots of the world need to be laughed at and told to shut up, sit down, and know their role.

Poet

Tyson clearly had a lot more in his arsnal then bobbing in the same rhythm and same direction, plus he had more than a left hook. like previously mentioned only weak part of his game was the mental aspect. As for my point, isnt it self explan.?

nah not really i dont see how this explains why you think roy jones is more over rated.

Yeah, you get into cat fights with your boyfriend over what drag to wear to the prom.....Junior.



Sorry Junior, you just proved (yet again) your abject ignorance. Tyson's hands weren't in the same league as Ali's in terms of speed and probably weren't any faster than Patterson's if that.




Never met the convicted felon. Nor do I collect autographs and even if I did it certainly wouldn't be those of dumb jocks.

Personally, I'm not even sure why I'm giving you the time of day since you're obviously a dumb, ignorant kid who's too stupid to figure things out. What's the matter? Mommy and Daddy smack ya cuz they didn't want you carrying that pink purse to school?

Poet


wow you clearly are one of these guys who dont get out much.

I find it ironic you are mocking my age yet you are doing the childish humour technique of "someone calls you a homo joke"...you have to do the homo joke back too....orginial...old man.

YOU clearly dont kno your boxing...i agree with patterson, but Alis speed was more agility and straight punches, Tyson threw hayemakers, every punch with bad intentions fast...ali through graceful straights. Joe louis DEFINTLY did not have the same speed as Tyson....and if you want to criticise Tyson all the time, how about i criticise your beloved Joe louis...who had very slow foot movement, little headmovement, and was getting beaten up by a blown up LH Billy Conn, Conn felt so confident he even opted to trade with Louis...however stupid his tactics were, he still had the confidence in his ability and the lack in Louis'....hmmm lets compare this with a great light heavyweight who tyson fought....who was also proven at heavyweight.....ohhhh i know!...Michael Spinks....what was the result again? was it 1 or 2 minutes he got koed?

nah not really i dont see how this explains why you think roy jones is more over rated.

a off spin conversation between the poet and i, read the posts man.

wow you clearly are one of these guys who dont get out much.

Fine comment from someone who still needs Mommy's permission to be out after 9.

I find it ironic you are mocking my age yet you are doing the childish humour technique of "someone calls you a homo joke"...you have to do the homo joke back too....orginial...old man.

Since most nuthuggers spend half their time having homo-erotic fantasies about their hero it's appropriate.

YOU clearly dont kno your boxing...i agree with patterson, but Alis speed was more agility and straight punches, Tyson threw hayemakers, every punch with bad intentions fast...ali through graceful straights.

I've been watching boxing since LONG before you were born Junior and I know more about the subject than you're ever likely to. Just about every boxing expert rate Ali as the fastest Heavyweight they've ever seen and that's foot speed as well as hand speed. Tyson doesn't come close. Saying Tyson threw haymakers is a point against Tyson as straight punches beat looping punches everyday of the week.

Joe louis DEFINTLY did not have the same speed as Tyson....and if you want to criticise Tyson all the time, how about i criticise your beloved Joe louis...who had very slow foot movement, little headmovement

I do believe we were talking about HAND speed.....I know it's hard pre-pubescent types to stay on focus with your gerbil like attention spans but please at least TRY to stay on focus?

and was getting beaten up by a blown up LH Billy Conn, Conn felt so confident he even opted to trade with Louis...however stupid his tactics were, he still had the confidence in his ability and the lack in Louis'....hmmm lets compare this with a great light heavyweight who tyson fought....who was also proven at heavyweight.....ohhhh i know!...Michael Spinks....what was the result again? was it 1 or 2 minutes he got koed

The difference? Spinks was wetting his pants while he was climbing in the ring and looking for a soft spot to lay down while they were playing the National Anthem. Conn, on the other hand, wasn't afraid of anybody. Don't slobber praise all over Leg-Iron Mike because Spinks was a scared little rabbit.

Poet

Fine comment from someone who still needs Mommy's permission to be out after 9.



Since most nuthuggers spend half their time having homo-erotic fantasies about their hero it's appropriate.



I've been watching boxing since LONG before you were born Junior and I know more about the subject than you're ever likely to. Just about every boxing expert rate Ali as the fastest Heavyweight they've ever seen and that's foot speed as well as hand speed. Tyson doesn't come close. Saying Tyson threw haymakers is a point against Tyson as straight punches beat looping punches everyday of the week.





I do believe we were talking about HAND speed.....I know it's hard pre-pubescent types to stay on focus with your gerbil like attention spans but please at least TRY to stay on focus?



The difference? Spinks was wetting his pants while he was climbing in the ring and looking for a soft spot to lay down while they were playing the National Anthem. Conn, on the other hand, wasn't afraid of anybody. Don't slobber praise all over Leg-Iron Mike because Spinks was a scared little rabbit.

Poet



Firstly Tyson isn't even my favourite fighter of all time, the man in my pic-Roberto Duran(just in case you have never heard of him) is.

Not allowed out after 9?-idk about your cotton life but i was allowed out to whenever when i was from 11...and im just 19 now so big difference....you are probably like 60 and still not allowed out...through choice (rather sit at home on your computer)...through not being allowed (by your mum who still lives with you)...or through fear(of being mugged).

What do you mean I do believe we were talking about HAND speed.....I know it's hard pre-pubescent types to stay on focus with your gerbil like attention spans but please at least TRY to stay on focus? i was talking about handspeed :S maybe you should go back to your opticians old man and get another thicker layer of lens.

Just because you watched boxing before me doesn't mean you know more about it than me, i live boxing, you just talk boxing, infact, thats all you seem good at...sitting down and talking, typical armchair fight fan. So don't bother playing the "im older than you therefore i know more than you" how come theres 20 year olds working at nasa and you arn't?....didn't you start education before them?...but whos more intelligent?-exactly. YOU ARE A FOOL, whos mad at tyson coz you wanna have your homo ways with him

Fine comment from someone who still needs Mommy's permission to be out after 9.



Since most nuthuggers spend half their time having homo-erotic fantasies about their hero it's appropriate.



I've been watching boxing since LONG before you were born Junior and I know more about the subject than you're ever likely to. Just about every boxing expert rate Ali as the fastest Heavyweight they've ever seen and that's foot speed as well as hand speed. Tyson doesn't come close. Saying Tyson threw haymakers is a point against Tyson as straight punches beat looping punches everyday of the week.



I do believe we were talking about HAND speed.....I know it's hard pre-pubescent types to stay on focus with your gerbil like attention spans but please at least TRY to stay on focus?



The difference? Spinks was wetting his pants while he was climbing in the ring and looking for a soft spot to lay down while they were playing the National Anthem. Conn, on the other hand, wasn't afraid of anybody. Don't slobber praise all over Leg-Iron Mike because Spinks was a scared little rabbit.

Poet


Also, i find it ironic that the "chicks" in your pic look all squared jawed n s hit....proves my theory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRs5budNvxg

Tell me Tyson's hand speed wasn't phenomenal.

Hey, I have NO problems making fun of idiots and nut hugging fan-bois: The village idiots of the world need to be laughed at and told to shut up, sit down, and know their role.

Poet

Your perception of reality and right and wrong is juvenile.

And if you can't understand that displaying multiple images of baby bottles in response to me pointing out your immaturity is illogical, then god help you.

Then to top that all off, your anger is not necessarily taken out on people who are idiots or nut hugging "fan-bois". You've gotten carried away to a point where anyone who vastly disagrees with you becomes an idiot or a fanboy. And if you can't find the flaw in that logic, once again, god help you.

Firstly Tyson isn't even my favourite fighter of all time, the man in my pic-Roberto Duran(just in case you have never heard of him) is.

Not allowed out after 9?-idk about your cotton life but i was allowed out to whenever when i was from 11...and im just 19 now so big difference....you are probably like 60 and still not allowed out...through choice (rather sit at home on your computer)...through not being allowed (by your mum who still lives with you)...or through fear(of being mugged).

What do you mean I do believe we were talking about HAND speed.....I know it's hard pre-pubescent types to stay on focus with your gerbil like attention spans but please at least TRY to stay on focus? i was talking about handspeed :S maybe you should go back to your opticians old man and get another thicker layer of lens.

Just because you watched boxing before me doesn't mean you know more about it than me, i live boxing, you just talk boxing, infact, thats all you seem good at...sitting down and talking, typical armchair fight fan. So don't bother playing the "im older than you therefore i know more than you" how come theres 20 year olds working at nasa and you arn't?....didn't you start education before them?...but whos more intelligent?-exactly. YOU ARE A FOOL, whos mad at tyson coz you wanna have your homo ways with him

Ah! The little boy's too unhinged to make a coherent post now......excellent! The little boy Marshmellow Alex is crying cuz he knows the best he can look forward to is flipping burgers at Mickey-Ds the rest of his life while he tells his buddies at the bath house how he "coulda been a contenda" :rofl:

Poet

a off spin conversation between the poet and i, read the posts man.

so you agree that tyson is more overrated due to his short carrer.

what are you argueing then? tyson vs louis? make a thread or is it tyson vs any decent heavy weight that poet can come up with? or do you just want poet to admit that tyson ewasnt a bum?

and for those 5 seconds yeah his hands speed was good how about his parrying and deflecting skills? how good is he at moving both hands at once blocking and attacking at the same time? sure louis couldnt punch as quickly but he could do alot of other things all at the same time his hands flowed together like a river. theres more then just punching when you consider hand speed

Ah! The little boy's too unhinged to make a coherent post now......excellent! The little boy Marshmellow Alex is crying cuz he knows the best he can look forward to is flipping burgers at Mickey-Ds the rest of his life while he tells his buddies at the bath house how he "coulda been a contenda" :rofl:

Poet

haha wow....a long time and you come up with that pathetic reply? "marshmellow Alex"....and as for "flipping burgers" hah...ive got contract wit one of the best promoters in europe and tipped by a lot of people,what have you achieved in boxing?-nothing. In life?-nothing, you can think what you want to think your life is past, ive got a lot to look forward too one of the great things about youth ey?.. ive done dealin wit this ***.

Your perception of reality and right and wrong is juvenile.

And if you can't understand that displaying multiple images of baby bottles in response to me pointing out your immaturity is illogical, then god help you.

Then to top that all off, your anger is not necessarily taken out on people who are idiots or nut hugging "fan-bois". You've gotten carried away to a point where anyone who vastly disagrees with you becomes an idiot or a fanboy. And if you can't find the flaw in that logic, once again, god help you.

Who's angry? I'm laughing my ass off at mental lightweights like you and Junior! :fest30: I'm having a grand ol' time because making fun of morons is one of the simple pleasures in life. I LIKE slapping down nuthuggers. And hey! Anyone who thinks Tyson could have been "the best Heavyweight ever" (a position so laughable it shouldn't have to be explained) IS a nuthugging fan-boi who can't distinguish between their wistful fantasy and reality. Stifle the hero worship and get real.....dude.

Poet

so you agree that tyson is more overrated due to his short carrer.

what are you argueing then? tyson vs louis? make a thread or is it tyson vs any decent heavy weight that poet can come up with? or do you just want poet to admit that tyson ewasnt a bum?

and for those 5 seconds yeah his hands speed was good how about his parrying and deflecting skills? how good is he at moving both hands at once blocking and attacking at the same time? sure louis couldnt punch as quickly but he could do alot of other things all at the same time his hands flowed together like a river. theres more then just punching when you consider hand speed

i orginally argued that neither of jones' and tysons' careers were ovverated, if would of taken my prev. advice which was "read". if you would of read properly, then i never said louis was better than tyson etc. "poet" said louis had faster hands, which i disagreed with. he also compared frazier saying he had similar headmovement, which i also disagreed with. in discussions generally people deviate off of topic. so stfu, and get off my d!k.

Who's angry? I'm laughing my ass off at mental lightweights like you and Junior! :fest30: I'm having a grand ol' time because making fun of morons is one of the simple pleasures in life. I LIKE slapping down nuthuggers. And hey! Anyone who thinks Tyson could have been "the best Heavyweight ever" (a position so laughable it shouldn't have to be explained) IS a nuthugging fan-boi who can't distinguish between their wistful fantasy and reality. Stifle the hero worship and get real.....dude.

Poet

You continue to contradict yourself. You call me a mental lightweight, yet anyone sane reading this thread would consider you the mental lightweight between us.

And where did hero worship come from? Ad hominems are yet another sign of cognitive incapacities.

And where did hero worship come from? Ad hominems are yet another sign of cognitive incapacities.

Trying to defend an outrageous postion regarding a fighter is a sign of hero worshipping and first class nuthuggery.

Running around named after a Marxist is a clear sign of intellectual incapacitation. Try again Gilligan.

Poet

stfu, and get off my d!k.

Assuming he can find it. Prehaps a magnifying glass and tweezers might help? Assuming you actually HAVE one of course :)

Poet

21 year old Joe Louis compared to 21 year old Mike Tyson:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/C5zkE4BkMgg&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/C5zkE4BkMgg&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nXBchqUdZo8&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nXBchqUdZo8&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

21 year old Patterson:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wCUkqyfUjTU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wCUkqyfUjTU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

22 year old Ali/Clay:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sEip4mxnhMY&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sEip4mxnhMY&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Trying to defend an outrageous postion regarding a fighter is a sign of hero worshipping and first class nuthuggery.

Running around named after a Marxist is a clear sign of intellectual incapacitation. Try again Gilligan.

Poet

If you up your vocabulary and actually comprehend things, and I might entertain our useless debates for my own personal enjoyment. At the moment however, you prove to be at an inferior intellectual level. So we're done here.

If you up your vocabulary and actually comprehend things, and I might entertain our useless debates for my own personal enjoyment. At the moment however, you prove to be at an inferior intellectual level. So we're done here.

:haha: Dude, you couldn't carry my intellectual jockstrap :rofl: Now go ahead and ignore me before you hurt yourself Einstein :boxing:

Poet

Assuming he can find it. Prehaps a magnifying glass and tweezers might help? Assuming you actually HAVE one of course :)

Poet

i aint gonna lie...i find it str8 up creepy that an old man is conversing about my d ick....dont you old men have enough problems with your own? like for example the incapability of getting a hard on....i dont need no viagra....and for the record, my size more than satisfies every WOMAN (not no man, coz i dont have homo tendicies like you of course)

i aint gonna lie...i find it str8 up creepy that an old man is conversing about my d ick....dont you old men have enough problems with your own? like for example the incapability of getting a hard on....i dont need no viagra....and for the record, my size more than satisfies every WOMAN (not no man, coz i dont have homo tendicies like you of course)

I find it more than a little bit creepy that a snot nosed 19 year old brought up his d1ck in the first place on a BOXING forum of all all places. Don't wan't your lack of endowment laughed at? Then don't bring your genatalia into the convo in the first place :rofl:

Poet

All in all, i think the correct answer is Neither, thats not sitting on the fence or w.e, but if you had to pick one...it would probably be Tyson's as prev. mentioned his prime was short, and roy's was longer

Sure you said neither but then you grew some balls and say tyson was more overrated.

now to the current point.

sure joe fraizer isnt as good as tyson but can you think of some one better that you would make a head movement comparison? I think joe was a very good choice.

hand speed im gonna still have to go with louis. very fast combos agreed not as fast as tyson but i think his jab was much faster as with his deflecting skills tyson had to move his head because he couldnt anything to parry or deflect punches with his hands. I think louis's ability to not have to move his head much because he could use his hands so well gives him the one up on tysons combos i mean louis's combos were still pretty quick.

cant wait to watch the vids the great a

Sure you said neither but then you grew some balls and say tyson was more overrated.

now to the current point.

sure joe fraizer isnt as good as tyson but can you think of some one better that you would make a head movement comparison? I think joe was a very good choice.

hand speed im gonna still have to go with louis. very fast combos agreed not as fast as tyson but i think his jab was much faster as with his deflecting skills tyson had to move his head because he couldnt anything to parry or deflect punches with his hands. I think louis's ability to not have to move his head much because he could use his hands so well gives him the one up on tysons combos i mean louis's combos were still pretty quick.

cant wait to watch the vids the great a

Here's a couple of videos of Frazier:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KcmMPBT8NAY&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KcmMPBT8NAY&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1Kn9pAav-Rc&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1Kn9pAav-Rc&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Sure you said neither but then you grew some balls and say tyson was more overrated.

now to the current point.

sure joe fraizer isnt as good as tyson but can you think of some one better that you would make a head movement comparison? I think joe was a very good choice.

hand speed im gonna still have to go with louis. very fast combos agreed not as fast as tyson but i think his jab was much faster as with his deflecting skills tyson had to move his head because he couldnt anything to parry or deflect punches with his hands. I think louis's ability to not have to move his head much because he could use his hands so well gives him the one up on tysons combos i mean louis's combos were still pretty quick.

cant wait to watch the vids the great a

Henry Armstrong. im done talking on this thread.

a off spin conversation between the poet and i, read the posts man.

don't worry about it man. nearly everyone can't stand that fat pice of turd poet. here he is behind a keyboard, never had the balls or heart to box, but yet sits behind a keyboard and call's real men fit to burn.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8ER0C3GGfPU&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8ER0C3GGfPU&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

look at his ****ing belly and teeth! and his poetry is ****ing turd!

Henry Armstrong. im done talking on this thread.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way back to NSB Junior :boxing:

Poet

Henry Armstrong. im done talking on this thread.

I think he meant at heavyweight. The only other one that comes to mind is Jack Dempsey:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ckGTEYKggww&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ckGTEYKggww&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way back to NSB Junior :boxing:

Poet

why do you treat this damn forum like real life. you take it so serious, get a life!

don't worry about it man. nearly everyone can't stand that fat pice of turd poet. here he is behind a keyboard, never had the balls or heart to box, but yet sits behind a keyboard and call's real men fit to burn.

:bottle: Awwww, is the fan of that phony balony pro-wrestler still butt hurt? If you're going to go ga-ga over one of the WWE's manufactured "stars" at least pick one that's semi-entertaining :bottle:

Poet

why do you treat this damn forum like real life. you take it so serious, get a life!

Real life from someone who used to have a phony pro-wrestler in his avatar :rofl:

PS. Your bar is still red I see: It's true.....oh it's DAMN true!

Poet

why do you treat this damn forum like real life. you take it so serious, get a life!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/I9ekqzr0Zxw&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/I9ekqzr0Zxw&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

:haha: :rofl: :gay:

Who's angry? I'm laughing my ass off at mental lightweights like you and Junior! :fest30: I'm having a grand ol' time because making fun of morons is one of the simple pleasures in life. I LIKE slapping down nuthuggers. And hey! Anyone who thinks Tyson could have been "the best Heavyweight ever" (a position so laughable it shouldn't have to be explained) IS a nuthugging fan-boi who can't distinguish between their wistful fantasy and reality. Stifle the hero worship and get real.....dude.

Poet

So, saying Tyson had the POTENTIAL to be the greatest heavyweight of all time is nuthugging? lmfao. your ridiculous dude. There are many people, including boxing experts, that also think this COULD have been possible. Just because he had the POTENTIAL doesn't mean I think he IS the greatest. He ranks on my top 10 ATG HW somewhere between 8-10. You obviously have an agenda against fans of Tyson.

So, saying Tyson had the POTENTIAL to be the greatest heavyweight of all time is nuthugging? lmfao. your ridiculous dude. There are many people, including boxing experts, that also think this COULD have been possible. Just because he had the POTENTIAL doesn't mean I think he IS the greatest. He ranks on my top 10 ATG HW somewhere between 8-10. You obviously have an agenda against fans of Tyson.

Hardly. He's was too flawed a fighter to ever crack the top-5. Period. End of story. Tyson would never have been better than Ali. He still would have been crushed by Foreman for stylistic reasons alone. Live with it. That's reality: Something Tyson fan-bois are seriously out of touch with.

Poet

Hardly. He's was too flawed a fighter to ever crack the top-5. Period. End of story. Tyson would never have been better than Ali. He still would have been crushed by Foreman for stylistic reasons alone. Live with it. That's reality: Something Tyson fan-bois are seriously out of touch with.

Poet
Which is your opinion. I respect that. There are many others that disagree with what you are saying, people way more credible than you. Even Ali had flaws obviously.

Cus D'Amato on Tyson
“Many people who have been around boxing all those years never had a champion, certainly a heavyweight champion….For that to happen in one’s lifetime is so improbable. I got Floyd Patterson, then, here, at the age of 76, I was fortunate to come in contact with this young man who has, in my opinion, all the requirements to be a champion that I believe he’s going to be, maybe the best that ever lived.”

dempsey seems to be a bit lighter on his feet then tyson and fraizer seems to stick a bit closer to the opponet.

i still stick with tyson being more overrated personally i dont find his ability to hit other people to be the most skill full or atleast it looks like he only spared 5 rounds his boxing carrer but at the same time spent an all together like 4 years non stop on the heavy bag. then there also the keeping his life on track though atleast he kept boxing into 05 it seems like he just didnt care any more. he could have had the same record as the likes of roy jones but he gave up a real boxer would have just tried harder.

all these what ifs well what if it was never there to begin with.

Which is your opinion. I respect that. There are many others that disagree with what you are saying, people way more credible than you. Even Ali had flaws obviously.

Cus D'Amato on Tyson
“Many people who have been around boxing all those years never had a champion, certainly a heavyweight champion….For that to happen in one’s lifetime is so improbable. I got Floyd Patterson, then, here, at the age of 76, I was fortunate to come in contact with this young man who has, in my opinion, all the requirements to be a champion that I believe he’s going to be, maybe the best that ever lived.”

Oh like D'Amato wasn't going to hype up his boy. Like any trainer Cuss was a bullsh1t artist when it came to his own fighters. What the hell did you think he'd say? "Oh yeah, this new kid I got's going to be crap"? BTW, nuthuggers in NSB do NOT count as credible about anything. In Boxing History you'll find it's very rare to run into a regular who nuthugs Tyson. There are some Tyson fans in here but just about all of them are realistic about Tyson and good he was. By and large you won't find regulars hyping him as "potentially the greatest Heavyweight ever": They leave that tripe to the NSB fan-bois who slink into this section periodically.

Poet

Oh like D'Amato wasn't going to hype up his boy. Like any trainer Cuss was a bullsh1t artist when it came to his own fighters. What the hell did you think he'd say? "Oh yeah, this new kid I got's going to be crap"? BTW, nuthuggers in NSB do NOT count as credible about anything. In Boxing History you'll find it's very rare to run into a regular who nuthugs Tyson. There are some Tyson fans in here but just about all of them are realistic about Tyson and good he was. By and large you won't find regulars hyping him as "potentially the greatest Heavyweight ever": They leave that tripe to the NSB fan-bois who slink into this section periodically.

Poet

Well since you seem to know it all, and consider me a Tyson "nuthugger" despite the fact that I said Tyson ranks somewhere between 8-10 ATG heavyweights... with team catskills in the corner of Prime Tyson.. what are these flaws that you speak of? Exactly what made you sit back and watch Mike Tyson and go "hey I know how to beat this guy". Tell me. I would love to hear.

Well since you seem to know it all, and consider me a Tyson "nuthugger" despite the fact that I said Tyson ranks somewhere between 8-10 ATG heavyweights... with team catskills in the corner of Prime Tyson.. what are these flaws that you speak of? Exactly what made you sit back and watch Mike Tyson and go "hey I know how to beat this guy". Tell me. I would love to hear.

For starters Tyson was limited by his body type. Having a short reach he was locked into fighting one way which left him with no "plan B" if things didn't go right (this is the same reason Marciano and Frazier would never be number one). His stocky build and non-existent neck also played against him as it left him unable to turn his upper body adequetly to deal with someone giving him angles. This left him with the choice of either turning his entire body to position himself or punching ineffectively from a poor postition. Later, as he muscled up more, he was also unable to punch while turning (a key argument against weight lifting for fighters). Short-armed pressure fighters have a serious vulnerability against fighters like George Foreman and Sonny Liston and that in and of itself would preclude them from being the Heavyweight GOAT. Fighters like Tyson, Marciano, and Frazier could fight Foreman 100 times and they would LOSE the vast majority of them. The limitations of their bodies make it a nightmare stylistic matchup for them. Cuss himself told Tyson repeatedly he could never hope to beat Foreman: Someone a past-prime Ali defeated with relative ease.

While Tyson had quick feet straight ahead he was relatively clumsy and slow-afoot laterally. This was trouble against a mover with more in mind than mere survival (ie. someone using movement offensively as opposed to running for their lives).

As is apparent from watching any of Tyson's fights where the opponent wasn't focusing solely on survival Mike was NOT that difficult to hit. The idea Tyson was some kind of defensive wiz was a myth started by Hank Kaplan for whom Tyson could do no wrong. Even members of the D'Amato/Rooney team said that was a myth, that Tyson's offense was his defense and fighters running like hell simply aren't going to score with any regularity. Those chickens came home to roost in the Douglas fight.

Additionally, Tyson was not a good inside fighter as someone with his body type is normally expected to be. Tyson wanted to fight at mid-range where he could leap into his punches for maximum leverage. Them Apples is something of an expert on Tyson and his style (and, I might add, a Tyson FAN rather than a nuthugger) and can confirm this. Watching film of his fights with a critical eye will also confirm this. Tyson would tie up on the inside to provoke the ref into breaking the fighters and putting Tyson back out at the range he was comfortable at (this is partly a point in Tyson's favor as he conserved energy by allowing the referee to force the break rather than working his way back out). This is one of the reasons why Tyson was not a consistant body-puncher: Fighting from mid-range practically begs a fighter to head-hunt.....which was what Tyson wanted in any case.

Finally, Tyson's endurance was not that good. Like a young Foreman Tyson consistantly gassed around the 6th or 7th round in those fights that went that far. He slowed down rapidly after that point and relied on his early points lead and the fact that his opponent was usually in survival mode to secure the decision (at that point, against an opponent content to merely survive, Tyson could pick off some of the late rounds without actually doing anything other than being aggressive). Against a fighter who could absorb or deflect Tyson's early aggression AND hit him back was would simply take over after the mid-point of the fight.

Now. You wanted an analysis of Tyson's flaws and you now have it. Next?

Poet

For starters Tyson was limited by his body type. Having a short reach he was locked into fighting one way which left him with no "plan B" if things didn't go right (this is the same reason Marciano and Frazier would never be number one). His stocky build and non-existent neck also played against him as it left him unable to turn his upper body adequetly to deal with someone giving him angles. This left him with the choice of either turning his entire body to position himself or punching ineffectively from a poor postition. Later, as he muscled up more, he was also unable to punch while turning (a key argument against weight lifting for fighters). Short-armed pressure fighters have a serious vulnerability against fighters like George Foreman and Sonny Liston and that in and of itself would preclude them from being the Heavyweight GOAT. Fighters like Tyson, Marciano, and Frazier could fight Foreman 100 times and they would LOSE the vast majority of them. The limitations of their bodies make it a nightmare stylistic matchup for them. Cuss himself told Tyson repeatedly he could never hope to beat Foreman: Someone a past-prime Ali defeated with relative ease.

While Tyson had quick feet straight ahead he was relatively clumsy and slow-afoot laterally. This was trouble against a mover with more in mind than mere survival (ie. someone using movement offensively as opposed to running for their lives).

As is apparent from watching any of Tyson's fights where the opponent wasn't focusing solely on survival Mike was NOT that difficult to hit. The idea Tyson was some kind of defensive wiz was a myth started by Hank Kaplan for whom Tyson could do no wrong. Even members of the D'Amato/Rooney team said that was a myth, that Tyson's offense was his defense and fighters running like hell simply aren't going to score with any regularity. Those chickens came home to roost in the Douglas fight.

Additionally, Tyson was not a good inside fighter as someone with his body type is normally expected to be. Tyson wanted to fight at mid-range where he could leap into his punches for maximum leverage. Them Apples is something of an expert on Tyson and his style (and, I might add, a Tyson FAN rather than a nuthugger) and can confirm this. Watching film of his fights with a critical eye will also confirm this. Tyson would tie up on the inside to provoke the ref into breaking the fighters and putting Tyson back out at the range he was comfortable at (this is partly a point in Tyson's favor as he conserved energy by allowing the referee to force the break rather than working his way back out). This is one of the reasons why Tyson was not a consistant body-puncher: Fighting from mid-range practically begs a fighter to head-hunt.....which was what Tyson wanted in any case.

Finally, Tyson's endurance was not that good. Like a young Foreman Tyson consistantly gassed around the 6th or 7th round in those fights that went that far. He slowed down rapidly after that point and relied on his early points lead and the fact that his opponent was usually in survival mode to secure the decision (at that point, against an opponent content to merely survive, Tyson could pick off some of the late rounds without actually doing anything other than being aggressive). Against a fighter who could absorb or deflect Tyson's early aggression AND hit him back was would simply take over after the mid-point of the fight.

Now. You wanted an analysis of Tyson's flaws and you now have it. Next?

Poet

That shut some people up :boxing:

Poet

LOL well it was pretty spot on, re potential I was always amazed at how poor he was inside had he have worked on that he would have gone up a few spots on my list. Mental toughness you either have or not.

Well since you seem to know it all, and consider me a Tyson "nuthugger" despite the fact that I said Tyson ranks somewhere between 8-10 ATG heavyweights... with team catskills in the corner of Prime Tyson.. what are these flaws that you speak of? Exactly what made you sit back and watch Mike Tyson and go "hey I know how to beat this guy". Tell me. I would love to hear.


For starters Tyson was limited by his body type. Having a short reach he was locked into fighting one way which left him with no "plan B" if things didn't go right (this is the same reason Marciano and Frazier would never be number one). His stocky build and non-existent neck also played against him as it left him unable to turn his upper body adequetly to deal with someone giving him angles. This left him with the choice of either turning his entire body to position himself or punching ineffectively from a poor postition. Later, as he muscled up more, he was also unable to punch while turning (a key argument against weight lifting for fighters). Short-armed pressure fighters have a serious vulnerability against fighters like George Foreman and Sonny Liston and that in and of itself would preclude them from being the Heavyweight GOAT. Fighters like Tyson, Marciano, and Frazier could fight Foreman 100 times and they would LOSE the vast majority of them. The limitations of their bodies make it a nightmare stylistic matchup for them. Cuss himself told Tyson repeatedly he could never hope to beat Foreman: Someone a past-prime Ali defeated with relative ease.

While Tyson had quick feet straight ahead he was relatively clumsy and slow-afoot laterally. This was trouble against a mover with more in mind than mere survival (ie. someone using movement offensively as opposed to running for their lives).

As is apparent from watching any of Tyson's fights where the opponent wasn't focusing solely on survival Mike was NOT that difficult to hit. The idea Tyson was some kind of defensive wiz was a myth started by Hank Kaplan for whom Tyson could do no wrong. Even members of the D'Amato/Rooney team said that was a myth, that Tyson's offense was his defense and fighters running like hell simply aren't going to score with any regularity. Those chickens came home to roost in the Douglas fight.

Additionally, Tyson was not a good inside fighter as someone with his body type is normally expected to be. Tyson wanted to fight at mid-range where he could leap into his punches for maximum leverage. Them Apples is something of an expert on Tyson and his style (and, I might add, a Tyson FAN rather than a nuthugger) and can confirm this. Watching film of his fights with a critical eye will also confirm this. Tyson would tie up on the inside to provoke the ref into breaking the fighters and putting Tyson back out at the range he was comfortable at (this is partly a point in Tyson's favor as he conserved energy by allowing the referee to force the break rather than working his way back out). This is one of the reasons why Tyson was not a consistant body-puncher: Fighting from mid-range practically begs a fighter to head-hunt.....which was what Tyson wanted in any case.

Finally, Tyson's endurance was not that good. Like a young Foreman Tyson consistantly gassed around the 6th or 7th round in those fights that went that far. He slowed down rapidly after that point and relied on his early points lead and the fact that his opponent was usually in survival mode to secure the decision (at that point, against an opponent content to merely survive, Tyson could pick off some of the late rounds without actually doing anything other than being aggressive). Against a fighter who could absorb or deflect Tyson's early aggression AND hit him back was would simply take over after the mid-point of the fight.

Now. You wanted an analysis of Tyson's flaws and you now have it. Next?

Poet


That shut some people up :boxing:

Poet


LOL well it was pretty spot on, re potential I was always amazed at how poor he was inside had he have worked on that he would have gone up a few spots on my list. Mental toughness you either have or not.


The problem is people make all sorts of claims about their favorite fighters: Glib sound-bytes that require a disertation to respond to properly. I personally can't be arsed to write an essay everytime a fan-boi wants to make said claims and only did on this occasion because he directly challenged me. It's not like the above should be any real revalation.....if one watches the fights as an analyst and not as a fan (for the record I do both: The first time live as a fan then the second time on replay as an analyst.

Poet

For starters Tyson was limited by his body type. Having a short reach he was locked into fighting one way which left him with no "plan B" if things didn't go right (this is the same reason Marciano and Frazier would never be number one). His stocky build and non-existent neck also played against him as it left him unable to turn his upper body adequetly to deal with someone giving him angles. This left him with the choice of either turning his entire body to position himself or punching ineffectively from a poor postition. Later, as he muscled up more, he was also unable to punch while turning (a key argument against weight lifting for fighters). Short-armed pressure fighters have a serious vulnerability against fighters like George Foreman and Sonny Liston and that in and of itself would preclude them from being the Heavyweight GOAT. Fighters like Tyson, Marciano, and Frazier could fight Foreman 100 times and they would LOSE the vast majority of them. The limitations of their bodies make it a nightmare stylistic matchup for them. Cuss himself told Tyson repeatedly he could never hope to beat Foreman: Someone a past-prime Ali defeated with relative ease.


While Tyson had quick feet straight ahead he was relatively clumsy and slow-afoot laterally. This was trouble against a mover with more in mind than mere survival (ie. someone using movement offensively as opposed to running for their lives).



As is apparent from watching any of Tyson's fights where the opponent wasn't focusing solely on survival Mike was NOT that difficult to hit. The idea Tyson was some kind of defensive wiz was a myth started by Hank Kaplan for whom Tyson could do no wrong. Even members of the D'Amato/Rooney team said that was a myth, that Tyson's offense was his defense and fighters running like hell simply aren't going to score with any regularity. Those chickens came home to roost in the Douglas fight.

Additionally, Tyson was not a good inside fighter as someone with his body type is normally expected to be. Tyson wanted to fight at mid-range where he could leap into his punches for maximum leverage. Them Apples is something of an expert on Tyson and his style (and, I might add, a Tyson FAN rather than a nuthugger) and can confirm this. Watching film of his fights with a critical eye will also confirm this. Tyson would tie up on the inside to provoke the ref into breaking the fighters and putting Tyson back out at the range he was comfortable at (this is partly a point in Tyson's favor as he conserved energy by allowing the referee to force the break rather than working his way back out). This is one of the reasons why Tyson was not a consistant body-puncher: Fighting from mid-range practically begs a fighter to head-hunt.....which was what Tyson wanted in any case.

Finally, Tyson's endurance was not that good. Like a young Foreman Tyson consistantly gassed around the 6th or 7th round in those fights that went that far. He slowed down rapidly after that point and relied on his early points lead and the fact that his opponent was usually in survival mode to secure the decision (at that point, against an opponent content to merely survive, Tyson could pick off some of the late rounds without actually doing anything other than being aggressive). Against a fighter who could absorb or deflect Tyson's early aggression AND hit him back was would simply take over after the mid-point of the fight.


Now. You wanted an analysis of Tyson's flaws and you now have it. Next?

Poet

You say tyson was a one trick pony, but when did Foreman ever fight in the inside? the stereotypical prime Ali never fought in the inside, does that limit and make him one dimensional too?...you say that tysons body limited him, i say it made him, it made him a more effective fighter as he knew how to use his height "disadadvantage" to his advantage, i agree his body shape does limit his options, but so does most fighters, Ali had long arms, and was tall and slender, he didnt have the body shape to stay in the inside? in fact mostly what he used to do was tie the guy up much like Tyson apparntly used to do. In fact only a few heavyweights are great inside fighters, normally its the lighter south american fighters who dominate that field.


slow laterally? not at all, quite the opposite actually, his side to side movement was phenemonial...i agree he found trouble with "runners" who are less afraid of him but this was due more to his mental weakness then his pyshical capabilities, not every fighter has the desire of a JCC. A prime example of a heavyweight with slow foot movement is Joe Louis, George Foreman etc, and they didnt do too bad did they?



Of course you are going to hit someone if you are throwing a 10 punch combo, one is bound to hit, the majority however WERE SLIPPED, and then brutally countered. Where are you getting this supposed "cus said this...cus said that" information from? source please?




He Inside fought when needed, the Tubbs fight etc, but yes mainly at mid range, however as prev. mentioned, Ali kept most fighters at distance and then tied up his oppenent, and didn't go to the body much, is that such an awful thing? using what you are best at, however you dont criticise other fighters the way you do Tyson...you must be a secret admirer or something.


Tyson had good endurance, not the best by no means, but "was not that good" is down playing his endurance. Many heavyweights have this problem as they run less then lighter fighters, Frazier is the only heavy i can think of who had superb conditioning, and yes, i know jack johnson, louis, dempsey etc had good conditioning but they fought in a different style to a 12 ROUND PACED FIGHTER...they were flat footed, expended very little energy, (which im not saying is a bad thing, was very good given the rounds they had to do)...Tyson on the other hand is agressive, side to side, moving his head constantly and throws punches with bad intentions which is bound to take a lot of steam out of you, for doing that, i think he has quite good endurance actually...Tyson wasnt the only succesful heavyweight without great endurance, Foreman, Liston etc


Alex.

dempsey seems to be a bit lighter on his feet then tyson and fraizer seems to stick a bit closer to the opponet.

i still stick with tyson being more overrated personally i dont find his ability to hit other people to be the most skill full or atleast it looks like he only spared 5 rounds his boxing carrer but at the same time spent an all together like 4 years non stop on the heavy bag. then there also the keeping his life on track though atleast he kept boxing into 05 it seems like he just didnt care any more. he could have had the same record as the likes of roy jones but he gave up a real boxer would have just tried harder.

all these what ifs well what if it was never there to begin with.


nonono, Tyson was known for sparring A LOT. rooney got him doing 15 rounds a day. Do you really think a guy with 20 odd amateur fights would be as good as Tyson with little sparring? lol.

You say tyson was a one trick pony, but when did Foreman ever fight in the inside? the stereotypical prime Ali never fought in the inside, does that limit and make him one dimensional too?...you say that tysons body limited him, i say it made him, it made him a more effective fighter as he knew how to use his height "disadadvantage" to his advantage, i agree his body shape does limit his options, but so does most fighters, Ali had long arms, and was tall and slender, he didnt have the body shape to stay in the inside? in fact mostly what he used to do was tie the guy up much like Tyson apparntly used to do. In fact only a few heavyweights are great inside fighters, normally its the lighter south american fighters who dominate that field.

Apparently you have difficulty with text comprehension. Foreman's reach and body type dictated that he be and outside fighter, which he was. Tyson's reach and body type dictate that he be an inside fighter, which he was NOT.


slow laterally? not at all, quite the opposite actually, his side to side movement was phenemonial....

Horsesh1t.....try watching Tyson's fights when you aren't stoned.

i agree he found trouble with "runners" who are less afraid of him but this was due more to his mental weakness then his pyshical capabilities, not every fighter has the desire of a JCC.

Apparently you have extreme difficulty differentiating between someone who MOVES and someone who RUNS. Tyson had no problems with someone who ran scared on him.


A prime example of a heavyweight with slow foot movement is Joe Louis, George Foreman etc, and they didnt do too bad did they?

This has nothing to do with what I posted. Text comprehension Junior.

Of course you are going to hit someone if you are throwing a 10 punch combo, one is bound to hit, the majority however WERE SLIPPED, and then brutally countered.

Punches thown by fighters running for their lives are notoriously inaccurate and hence easy to slip.....I imagine even YOU could do it.

Where are you getting this supposed "cus said this...cus said that" information from? source please?

Various articles in Ring Magazine and I'm not going to waste my time digging them out of storage to give you the exact issue. Try Google Junior.

He Inside fought when needed, the Tubbs fight etc, but yes mainly at mid range, however as prev. mentioned, Ali kept most fighters at distance and then tied up his oppenent, and didn't go to the body much, is that such an awful thing?

It is when your physical limitations dictate that you are going to be most effective on the inside. Ali fought where his body type dictated he would be most effective: On the outside.

however you dont criticise other fighters the way you do Tyson...you must be a secret admirer or something.

I can do this with a number of fighters, however, as I pointed out in a previous post, I can't be arsed to write an essay everytime I run into a snot-nosed kid who doesn't know what the fvck he's talking about.


Tyson had good endurance, not the best by no means, but "was not that good" is down playing his endurance.

Bullsh1t. Try that one on someone who's never watched Tyson's distance fights and maybe THEY will buy your disinformation.

Many heavyweights have this problem as they run less then lighter fighters, Frazier is the only heavy i can think of who had superb conditioning, and yes, i know jack johnson, louis, dempsey etc had good conditioning but they fought in a different style to a 12 ROUND PACED FIGHTER...they were flat footed, expended very little energy, (which im not saying is a bad thing, was very good given the rounds they had to do)

Again, more bullsh1t from someone who knows very little about boxing and has watched even less.

...Tyson on the other hand is agressive, side to side, moving his head constantly and throws punches with bad intentions which is bound to take a lot of steam out of you, for doing that, i think he has quite good endurance actually...

Now you're engaging in nuhugger agit/prop for your boy.

Tyson wasnt the only succesful heavyweight without great endurance, Foreman, Liston etc...

Yes, and it bit Foreman square on the ass when he fought Ali and Young. If you blow your wad early against a top-tier fighter and you don't get him out of there then it's YOU who are in trouble. Dumb tactics. If you can't sustain it the full fight you shouldn't be doing it. In other words if you have endurance issues then you BETTER pace yourself or you WILL lose against A class fighters.

Poet

His head movement never impressed me any more than say Joe Frazier's did and Mike was NEVER a consistant body-puncher like Frazier was. As for his power and hand speed it wasn't anything that Louis didn't have.



Then you need to see more Heavyweight fighters.

Poet

Tyson did a lot of head movement, more then Frazier? No, Fraziers defense was literally his offense so he did move a **** load more then Tyson. Tyson in '85 did a lot of body punches. I agree after that it started to go away, got too dependent on going for the early KO. Now for power and speed? Louis? HELL NO! hahaha. Well for power it could be up there but not for speed, no way in hell.

Tyson did a lot of head movement, more then Frazier? No, Fraziers defense was literally his offense so he did move a **** load more then Tyson. Tyson in '85 did a lot of body punches. I agree after that it started to go away, got too dependent on going for the early KO. Now for power and speed? Louis? HELL NO! hahaha. Well for power it could be up there but not for speed, no way in hell.

Come on Versi you ought to know better. Go back watch some of Louis' fights: He had sick handspeed and was about as explosive with his punches as anyone.

As for Tyson's body punches, on only one occasion did Mike ever make a consistant effort to sustain a body attack and that was against Biggs whom he wanted to punish for an extended period of time. Otherwise Tyson went to the body in spurts only and even then solely to open up his opponents for the head shots.

Poet

Come on Versi you ought to know better. Go back watch some of Louis' fights: He had sick handspeed and was about as explosive with his punches as anyone.

As for Tyson's body punches, on only one occasion did Mike ever make a consistant effort to sustain a body attack and that was against Biggs whom he wanted to punish for an extended period of time. Otherwise Tyson went to the body in spurts only and even then solely to open up his opponents for the head shots.

Poet

I agree Louis had speed but I don't agree it was quicker then Tyson's. What size were their gloves in Louis era? 6oz or 8oz? Louis was a very explosive fighter though. Also Tyson vs Furguson and Ribalta he put out a lot of body punches. But generally no. Would of made him a lot better if he did.

Gotta go to work, Poet, nice speaking with ya, always fun to have a conversation with someone with knowledge in boxing.:beerchug:

I agree Louis had speed but I don't agree it was quicker then Tyson's. What size were their gloves in Louis era? 6oz or 8oz? Louis was a very explosive fighter though.

6oz in the '40s up through the '60s I believe then 8oz in the '70s and '80s. Not like the oversized 10oz pillows they use now.

But generally no. Would of made him a lot better if he did.

I agree 100%: He COULD have been a top-5 body puncher all-time if he had done so. He had the right body type to make him a natural at it. I don't think he was tempermentally suited to it though. I don't think that particular issue was a matter of mental toughness: All fighters have their predelictions, there comfort zone if you will, and Tyson's was as a head hunter.

Poet

I do believe this thread was supposed to debate why one fighter is more over rated than the other. Yet all anyone can talk about is Tyson, RJJ is nearly completely forgotten. Just goes to show who made the bigger impression in history. Let's break down Jones best wins:

James Toney (Killed himself to make weight, given doctor's advice not to take the fight)
Antonio Tarver (Beat Jones ass in all 3 fights, but lost a questionable decision in the first go)
Montell Griffin (Was giving Jones all sorts of problems in the first fight, causing Jones to get frustrated and earn himself a DQ)
Bernard Hopkins (Was only 1/3rd the fighter he would later become)
Virgill Hill (Past his prime, and already lost his crown to Darius M, one of the many top fighters Roy never fought)

Now I'll just list some hall of famers Roy beat that didn't mean much:

Pazmanian Devil @ 168 (Over the hill blown up lightweight)
The Bodysnatcher @ 175 (Over the hill blown up junior middleweight)

--------

Roy never gave Hopkins or Toney a rematch, Roy never fought Steve Collins, Dariusz M, Nigel Benn, Chris Eubank, G-Man, Frankie Liles, Patrizio, and waited till Reggie Johnson and Mike McCallum were over the hill till he fought them. Toney on the other hand fought both in their prime.

Now say what you want about Tyson's performance against his best opponents, but you just don't run into the same kind of cherry picking Roy did. Not to mention:

Tyson's performance against Lewis is as meaningful as Roy's against Calzaghe
Tyson's performance against Holyfield is as meaningful as Roy's against Tarver and Johnson.

Gotta go to work, Poet, nice speaking with ya, always fun to have a conversation with someone with knowledge in boxing.:beerchug:

Anytime Versi: Always a pleasure! :beerchug:

Poet

Tyson had a pretty black and white skillset.

1. great physical attributes in terms of speed, power, and skill.

2. weak willed and could be broken if you had the tools and strength to do it.

He generally did well against guys that ran from him. He also generally did bad against guys that tried to rough him up (Holyfield, Douglas, Lewis) he never had these problems in his "prime" but then again he never fought Evander Holyfield in his prime ether.

so basically, break his will. Certain fighters can do this, some cannot.

1. you need to be able to throw punches in combinations (one punch won't do it, which was Holmes downfall)
2. toughness and strength is a must

a Jab won't and never will hold a guy like Tyson off. The Jab did nothing for Lewis or Holmes, 2 guys who had great jabs.

Ali and Foreman are my prime picks for beating Mike in his prime, Ali would throw vicious combinations back whilst yelling at him, Foreman would throw uppercuts ( a punch Tyson was caught with even in his prime).

Ali and Foreman are my prime picks for beating Mike in his prime, Ali would throw vicious combinations back whilst yelling at him, Foreman would throw uppercuts ( a punch Tyson was caught with even in his prime).

Dayum you're such a hater with an anti-Tyson agenda :rofl:

a Jab won't and never will hold a guy like Tyson off. The Jab did nothing for Lewis or Holmes, 2 guys who had great jabs.

I thought Lewis did pretty good with his jab but I really don't count that as Tyson was well past-prime and pretty close to being shot at that point. Douglas' jab was very effective against against Mike though I understand that people will argue that wasn't a prime Tyson either.

The problem with using the Holmes example is that while Larry could show the jab that he once had he really only could do it in flashes.....not enough in my book. Tyson never really faced a top-tier jab in his prime. The lazy jabs that '80s Heavyweights (and most Heavies of any era really) threw just weren't going to get it done: Mike just walks right through those. You have to have a jab that can either bang him (Liston and prime Holmes) or sting him (Ali) either way it has to be a jab that gets his attention and does it consistantly and accurately. Those pawing range-finders you typically seen thrown by the Biggses and Carl Williamses of the world Mike just eats up and counters over the top with a right.

Poet

Well firstly i clearly didn't mention the comparison between Tyson and Frazier pressure wise, maybe if you learn how to read, one day you can realise i was comparing their headmovement. As far as pressure goes, i think Tyson puts just as much pressure on people as Frazier did....just in an educated hit and not get hit manner....joe frazier-"bob up, bob down, bob up, bob down, with that cross armed defence, and throw a massive wild left hook(which was one of the best left hooks in the business i grant you, but this is 80% of what he did)


You are correct Mike did have a GREAT!! defence, against who though? did he have a great defence when he fought Holyfield, Douglas ? Oh thats right im sorry Mike got amnesia when he Cus died and he left Rooney.

Just another in long.................. long.......... long ..........long line of excuses for Mike eh!!

says the man with a picture of Mr glass chinned "amnesia" himself...

says the man with a picture of Mr glass chinned "amnesia" himself...



The problem you have though is.............i dont care what you say about Norris, where as you get all bent out of shape because you are not just a Tyson fan, but a Tyson fanboy.

Holyfield whooped your boy when they both had the same amount left in the tank because he was overrated.............the truth!!

He is not a top 10 ATG because you have to BEAT great fighters IN the ring to prove yourself not get yourself in there because your fanboys!! say you could of beat this guy that guy.

Tyson's best win is a blown up LHW who took advantage of an aged champion (Larry Holmes)........fact!!!

By the way he should of lost the second fight to Holmes to.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wP-ijDkL7BQ&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wP-ijDkL7BQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wP-ijDkL7BQ&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wP-ijDkL7BQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Good post as always Machine.



No doubt this will go straight over the heads of the Tyson clan.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wP-ijDkL7BQ&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wP-ijDkL7BQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

You know, this is the sort of thing I LIKE about Tyson: More than any other contempory fighter I can think of Mike was a top-notch insightful, analyst of fights. The kind of respect, appreciation, and admiration Tyson has traditionally had for prior greats is something that is lacking in so many of today's fighters.....and fans. I've said it before and I'll say it again: There is NO fighter I'd rather sit down over a cup of coffee and breakdown old fight films with.

Poet

You know, this is the sort of thing I LIKE about Tyson: More than any other contempory fighter I can think of Mike was a top-notch insightful, analyst of fights. The kind of respect, appreciation, and admiration Tyson has traditionally had for prior greats is something that is lacking in so many of today's fighters.....and fans. I've said it before and I'll say it again: There is NO fighter I'd rather sit down over a cup of coffee and breakdown old fight films with.

Poet
He was a lucky guy having access to Jim Jacobs collection

Even despite the fact that Tyson fought Douglass post Rooney wasn't enough for Douglass to win. Douglass was not going to win that fight if Tyson was focused and in shape. If there was an immediate rematch, Douglass would have been KOed in the first half of the fight.

Nonetheless, post Rooney Tyson stopped combination punching and just looked for 1 punch KOs.

Also, despite my efforts to bring this thread back to Jones vs Tyson in my last post, seems like it's just not meant to be. Tysons lovers and haters are simply too vocal.

He was a lucky guy having access to Jim Jacobs collection

No sh1t. I'd love to get my hands on THAT :boxing:

Poet

I do believe this thread was supposed to debate why one fighter is more over rated than the other. Yet all anyone can talk about is Tyson, RJJ is nearly completely forgotten. Just goes to show who made the bigger impression in history. Let's break down Jones best wins:

James Toney (Killed himself to make weight, given doctor's advice not to take the fight)
Antonio Tarver (Beat Jones ass in all 3 fights, but lost a questionable decision in the first go)
Montell Griffin (Was giving Jones all sorts of problems in the first fight, causing Jones to get frustrated and earn himself a DQ)
Bernard Hopkins (Was only 1/3rd the fighter he would later become)
Virgill Hill (Past his prime, and already lost his crown to Darius M, one of the many top fighters Roy never fought)

Now I'll just list some hall of famers Roy beat that didn't mean much:

Pazmanian Devil @ 168 (Over the hill blown up lightweight)
The Bodysnatcher @ 175 (Over the hill blown up junior middleweight)

--------

Roy never gave Hopkins or Toney a rematch, Roy never fought Steve Collins, Dariusz M, Nigel Benn, Chris Eubank, G-Man, Frankie Liles, Patrizio, and waited till Reggie Johnson and Mike McCallum were over the hill till he fought them. Toney on the other hand fought both in their prime.

Now say what you want about Tyson's performance against his best opponents, but you just don't run into the same kind of cherry picking Roy did. Not to mention:

Tyson's performance against Lewis is as meaningful as Roy's against Calzaghe
Tyson's performance against Holyfield is as meaningful as Roy's against Tarver and Johnson.

Also, despite my efforts to bring this thread back to Jones vs Tyson in my last post, seems like it's just not meant to be. Tysons lovers and haters are simply too vocal.

As are Jones haters :bryce:

Poet

You know, this is the sort of thing I LIKE about Tyson: More than any other contempory fighter I can think of Mike was a top-notch insightful, analyst of fights. The kind of respect, appreciation, and admiration Tyson has traditionally had for prior greats is something that is lacking in so many of today's fighters.....and fans. I've said it before and I'll say it again: There is NO fighter I'd rather sit down over a cup of coffee and breakdown old fight films with.

Poet

Yeah i like that to.


When ever there is a good fight on you can pretty much guarantee Mike is going to be there because he is a Boxing fan.

I remember him being at ringside for Hearns vs Hill and a few Chavez fights, although im not sure if he fought on the same night, so........

It really annoys me when i hear fighters say they are not Boxing fans, i dont like that at all.

The problem you have though is.............i dont care what you say about Norris, where as you get all bent out of shape because you are not just a Tyson fan, but a Tyson fanboy.

Holyfield whooped your boy when they both had the same amount left in the tank because he was overrated.............the truth!!

He is not a top 10 ATG because you have to BEAT great fighters IN the ring to prove yourself not get yourself in there because your fanboys!! say you could of beat this guy that guy.

Tyson's best win is a blown up LHW who took advantage of an aged champion (Larry Holmes)........fact!!!

By the way he should of lost the second fight to Holmes to.



because i think tyson is a great fighter i get hailed as a fan boy?...Roberto Duran is my hero not Tyson. You are a fool with no boxing knowledge whatsoever, you just d!ckride your oap friend poet all day long.

No sh1t. I'd love to get my hands on THAT :boxing:

Poet

awww did Tyson sign an autograph for you?...you happy now?

because i think tyson is a great fighter i get hailed as a fan boy?...Roberto Duran is my hero not Tyson. You are a fool with no boxing knowledge whatsoever, you just d!ckride your oap friend poet all day long.


Your a fan boy because you have to resort to calling people names and trying desperately to exact some revenge because you are butt hurt that your hero is not as good as you think he is..............and facts support that!! where as facts dont support your silly theory's.


Son seriously i know more about Boxing than you will ever know..........period!!!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/orxmkDJ_o3U&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/orxmkDJ_o3U&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1dGf4YdiNgQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1dGf4YdiNgQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/g1BwfSOuw_c&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/g1BwfSOuw_c&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RpS-gj2qU24&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RpS-gj2qU24&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ot7lbQYl4jA&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ot7lbQYl4jA&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TnRDdmKIVh4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TnRDdmKIVh4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Your a fan boy because you have to resort to calling people names and trying desperately to exact some revenge because you are butt hurt that your hero is not as good as you think he is..............and facts support that!! where as facts dont support your silly theory's.


Son seriously i know more about Boxing than you will ever know..........period!!!

really? think what you want to think, you probably think you kno more because of the age difference, but i have been surrounded by this sport from a young age, and doing this sport from a young age, you are a typical armchair fight fan who uses age as his passage to boxing knowledge. Im not going to start all this i kno more than you bs, but if there was a boxing quiz or w.e id ace it and you wont. All you do is cosign what poet says. I disagree with what poet says, but he knows what hes on about as far as boxing knowledge is concerned.

because i think tyson is a great fighter i get hailed as a fan boy?...Roberto Duran is my hero not Tyson. You are a fool with no boxing knowledge whatsoever, you just d!ckride your oap friend poet all day long.

Actually, Junior, you're a little boy who knows fvck all and is too dumb to figure out how little he knows.....now run home to Mommy and get your diapers changed :bottle:

PS. You're unworthy of being an El Cholo fan. You need a hero who's more appropriate: Maybe that tranny Hector Camacho would be a better fit for you :Flush:

Poet

really? think what you want to think, you probably think you kno more because of the age difference, but i have been surrounded by this sport from a young age, and doing this sport from a young age, you are a typical armchair fight fan who uses age as his passage to boxing knowledge.

Ah yes! The argument resorted to by troglodytes everywhere. Trying the substitute the mindless exertion muscle for for using a brain they clearly do not have. Cavemen like you will forever be performing manual labor for your intellectual betters.....you know them better as "Boss", as in "Yes Boss!", "Can I have my paycheck Boss?", "Can I kiss your ass for a raise Boss?".....chances that person you address as "Boss" is someone like myself you works with his brain not mere muscle.

Poet

really? think what you want to think, you probably think you kno more because of the age difference, but i have been surrounded by this sport from a young age, and doing this sport from a young age, you are a typical armchair fight fan who uses age as his passage to boxing knowledge. Im not going to start all this i kno more than you bs, but if there was a boxing quiz or w.e id ace it and you wont. All you do is cosign what poet says. I disagree with what poet says, but he knows what hes on about as far as boxing knowledge is concerned.


I know more about Boxing than you could ever possibly know and im not talking about historically, im talking about training technique and observation, dissecting fights, styles etc.

Yes i have Boxed and i have trained at Pro gym, so..........

I have sparred with pro fighters, when i was an amateur.

Ah yes! The argument resorted to by troglodytes everywhere. Trying the substitute the mindless exertion muscle for for using a brain they clearly do not have. Cavemen like you will forever be performing manual labor for your intellectual betters.....you know them better as "Boss", as in "Yes Boss!", "Can I have my paycheck Boss?", "Can I kiss your ass for a raise Boss?".....chances that person you address as "Boss" is someone like myself you works with his brain not mere muscle.

Poet


you act like you are a high roller, yet you are on this site 24/7, what exactly do you do?...you are probably one of these sad case middle aged men who still live at home with there mum. With no kids, no wife, no ***** full stop. damn man im starting to feel sorry for you. lol @ you trying to use your boxing intellect referring to him as "el cholo" a.k.a the indian....yes ive read his book too, so have many others. So please, tell me what exactly do you do? you sure arn't a fighter, like i said you are a talker not a doer. I bet you are a story writer....who has a vivid imagination...that thinks his actual name is poet, and thinking you have a wide variety of boxing knowledge.

I know more about Boxing than you could ever possibly know and im not talking about historically, im talking about training technique and observation, dissecting fights, styles etc.

Yes i have Boxed and i have trained at Pro gym, so..........

I have sparred with pro fighters, when i was an amateur.

training technique and observation? dissecting fights? styles? haha, ive grown up around a pro gym, i am a professional boxer, you were a two bit amateur, who cares about the amateurs? you sparred with a few professionals when you were an amateur means you are the Teddy Atlas of dissecting fights? man i started sparring with pros when i was 14.

Just so you dont think im a complete no brain when it comes to Boxing here is my break down of Froch vs Taylor.

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=264600&highlight=Froch+Taylor

By the way here are a few fighters who used to train at that Pro gym.


Max Maxwell, Dee Mitchell (aka Delroy Mitchell ), Pele Reid, Max Maxwell, Don Broadhurst (current Commonwealth Champion) Eddie McIntosh.

training technique and observation? dissecting fights? styles? haha, ive grown up around a pro gym, i am a professional boxer, you were a two bit amateur, who cares about the amateurs? you sparred with a few professionals when you were an amateur means you are the Teddy Atlas of dissecting fights? man i started sparring with pros when i was 14.

............So you say.

Charlie Z is a Pro and i know for a fact id kick his ass, unless you are a World Champ you aint impressing me.

Just so you dont think im a complete no brain when it comes to Boxing here is my break down of Froch vs Taylor.

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=264600&highlight=Froch+Taylor

By the way here are a few fighters who used to train at that Pro gym.


Max Maxwell, Dee Mitchell (aka Delroy Mitchell ), Pele Reid, Max Maxwell, Don Broadhurst (current Commonwealth Champion) Eddie McIntosh.


It doesnt matter about your prediction, you make one predication and you think you are great, take a look at my predictions...i predicted cotto to take the early rounds and then margarito to come on strong and stop him. i predicted Mosley to DOMINATE margarito-both came true to the T. Also...i predicted urbano antillion to recently get beat, incidentally the columbian was a 9 to 1 underdog...and guess what, he won.

Im not going to disrespect any fighter, and have talked to pele on a number of occasions and have the upmost respect for any man who walks into those ropes, but if you want to name drop, my gym-Howard Eastman, Chris Eubank, Tony Oakey....there british, Europan, WBU, and WBO champs there.

It doesnt matter about your prediction, you make one predication and you think you are great, take a look at my predictions...i predicted cotto to take the early rounds and then margarito to come on strong and stop him. i predicted Mosley to DOMINATE margarito-both came true to the T. Also...i predicted urbano antillion to recently get beat, incidentally the columbian was a 9 to 1 underdog...and guess what, he won.

Im not going to disrespect any fighter, and have talked to pele on a number of occasions and have the upmost respect for any man who walks into those ropes, but if you want to name drop, my gym-Howard Eastman, Chris Eubank, Tony Oakey....there british, Europan, WBU, and WBO champs there.


No im just to trying to show you that im not the moron you apparently think i am.

I also predicted Cotto would lose to Marg and im a Cotto fan so........


I also made a post that suggesting Pac could pull it off against Oscar with his speed etc because of how poor he looked against Forbers etc.

Fair, but bottom line is im trying to establish that im no moron when it comes to talking Boxing, ive done it and i have a good understating of it.

i am a professional boxer, you were a two bit amateur, who cares about the amateurs?

No, you're a proffesional bullsh1t artist. On the odd chance you MIGHT have actually strapped gloves on (a very SMALL chance since this the internet and little boys like yourself are famous for telling tall tales), in all likelyhood you are the definition of a future tomato can who gets himself beat up for $100 a bout.

As for me being on 24-7: How do you know I'm not a Government Employee at work right now on a Government Computer collecting 75 Large a year at taxpayer expense? Wouldn't be the first time a well payed white collar proffesional wasted time at work on the internet :D

Poet

No, you're a proffesional bullsh1t artist. On the odd chance you MIGHT have actually strapped gloves on (a very SMALL chance since this the internet and little boys like yourself are famous for telling tall tales), in all likelyhood you are the definition of a future tomato can who gets himself beat up for $100 a bout.

As for me being on 24-7: How do you know I'm not a Government Employee at work right now on a Government Computer collecting 75 Large a year at taxpayer expense? Wouldn't be the first time a well payed white collar proffesional wasted time at work on the internet :D

Poet
Could see a nasty row developing between ironalex and Dynamite Kid there thank god poet was there to calm it down :)

like i said you are a talker not a doer.

No, I'm someone who works with his brain rather his muscles like a pack animal.....in other words I'm your evolutionary superior with a developed mind as opposed to a brute laborer like yourself. Raise denied.....the guys who got good grades get the pay increases :D

Poet

Could see a nasty row developing between ironalex and Dynamite Kid there thank god poet was there to calm it down :)

More like throw gasoline on the fire where that little troglodyte Neanderthal boy is concerned :firedevil

Poet

this is too MAB and the poet,

MAB- I realise where you are coming from, it's just im sick of idiots like Poet assuming because im young i know nothing about this sport, i love boxing, i live it without sounding cliche, so when people are challenging my knowledge on this sport and try and name drop etc i too do it back. no i dont think you are a moron, its just i got defensive when you kept interupting me and kept on challenging me, fair play to you...i thought pacman was going to win only based on dlh fighting at 147.


Poet- I can assure you i am no tomatoe can, i have a world class trainer, aswell as having a good amateur background with only one lone loss(15-1) and am 1-0 as a pro, i have sparred countless top fighters since i was young, that doesnt point to being a tomatoe can does it?....lol@ a rich boy office boy who has never stepped int he ring trying to make digs, you work for a ****ty government, and i find it ironic you have a picture of Joe louis, who incidentally shot himself due to not being able to pay taxes and yet you say:

"Government Computer collecting 75 Large a year at taxpayer expense"


YOU ARE A FOOL, WITH NO BOXING CREDENTIALS, WHO SLAM OTHER FIGHTERS YET YOU HAVE NEVER BEEN IN THE RING, AGAIN PROVES MY THEORY YOU A ARMCHAIR FIGHT FAN.

this is too MAB and the poet,

MAB- I realise where you are coming from, it's just im sick of idiots like Poet assuming because im young i know nothing about this sport, i love boxing, i live it without sounding cliche, so when people are challenging my knowledge on this sport and try and name drop etc i too do it back. no i dont think you are a moron, its just i got defensive when you kept interupting me and kept on challenging me, fair play to you...i thought pacman was going to win only based on dlh fighting at 147.

Poet- I can assure you i am no tomatoe can, i have a world class trainer, aswell as having a good amateur background with only one lone loss(15-1) and am 1-0 as a pro, i have sparred countless top fighters since i was young, that doesnt point to being a tomatoe can does it?....lol@ a rich boy office boy who has never stepped int he ring trying to make digs, you work for a ****ty government, and i find it ironic you have a picture of Joe louis, who incidentally shot himself due to not being able to pay taxes and yet you say:

"Government Computer collecting 75 Large a year at taxpayer expense"

YOU ARE A FOOL, WITH NO BOXING CREDENTIALS, WHO SLAM OTHER FIGHTERS YET YOU HAVE NEVER BEEN IN THE RING, AGAIN PROVES MY THEORY YOU A ARMCHAIR FIGHT FAN.

Translation: You're a beast of burden who works with his hands for a living. While you're "doing" (ie. performing mindless manual labor) I'm using my brain to get 3 to 4 times the lifetime earning power that YOU will have. Makes you look pretty dumb doesn't it? :rofl: See, you'll never amount to anything in life because you're a dumb jock who lacks the intelligence to do anything more labor at ****e jobs and grunt.

PS. This forum is for boxing FANS not specifically for fighters. Maybe you should find some gym forum where you can grunt like a caveman with other dumb jocks :rofl:

Poet

Translation: You're a beast of burden who works with his hands for a living. While you're "doing" (ie. performing mindless manual labor) I'm using my brain to get 3 to 4 times the lifetime earning power that YOU will have. Makes you look pretty dumb doesn't it? :rofl: See, you'll never amount to anything in life because you're a dumb jock who lacks the intelligence to do anything more labor at ****e jobs and grunt.

PS. This forum is for boxing FANS not specifically for fighters. Maybe you should find some gym forum where you can grunt like a caveman with other dumb jocks :rofl:

Poet

So Joe Louis is a dumb jock?...tell me how much money did ODLH make before being a business man?...im a professional fighter not a manual labourer, professional boxing is my job....yours is counting tax. you wish you had my job, you idolise people with my job, but you dont have the talent or balls to step through those ropes. maybe if there is a tax website, you might see me come on there and idolise some of your tax people, because that is the equivalnt you are doing here. Lastly im british, you are american, that automatically makes me more intelligent than you....End of.

Lastly im british, you are american, that automatically makes me more intelligent than you....End of.

Can't argue with facts :)
BTW bringing up slimey is not fair.

So Joe Louis is a dumb jock?...tell me how much money did ODLH make before being a business man?...im a professional fighter not a manual labourer, professional boxing is my job....yours is counting tax.

Misses the point: You are neither Louis or De La Hoya and would never even be considered good enought to spar with them. People who play sports proffesionally work with their hands rather than their brains hence they are manual laborers.

Lastly im british, you are american


Ah! Now THAT explains your lack of boxing knowledge (and ability): Pommies have historically been the laughing stocks of the boxing world. Hell, if Pommies could fight the United States wouldn't have had to bail their asses out in two world wars :D

that automatically makes me more intelligent than you....End of.

:haha: If Pommies are so smart how come they no longer have an empire? How's India working out for you these days? Oh that's right! There's more Indians in the UK these days than there are Pommies :rofl:

Poet

can't argue with facts
btw bringing up slimey is not fair.

;) ;) ;) ;)

Can't argue with facts :)
BTW bringing up slimey is not fair.

BTW, I've crossed swords with this baboon before. He can make a new account but he can't hide the fact that it's the same old troglodyte untermenchen destined for a career serving up fish 'n chips.

Poet

Tyson...youngest ever Heavyweight Champ...never hit a man when he was down, unlike (uhem) Roy Jones Jr. against Glen Johnson.

Misses the point: You are neither Louis or De La Hoya and would never even be considered good enought to spar with them. People who play sports proffesionally work with their hands rather than their brains hence they are manual laborers.




Ah! Now THAT explains your lack of boxing knowledge (and ability): Pommies have historically been the laughing stocks of the boxing world. Hell, if Pommies could fight the United States wouldn't have had to bail their asses out in two world wars :D



:haha: If Pommies are so smart how come they no longer have an empire? How's India working out for you these days? Oh that's right! There's more Indians in the UK these days than there are Pommies :rofl:

Poet

Wow im dissapointed, you took such a long time to reply yet you mustered up that pathetic response?

Definition of Manual labour: Manual labour is physical work done with the hands, especially in an unskilled job such as fruit and vegetable picking, road building, or any other field where the work may be considered physically arduous, and which has as a profitable objective, usually the production of goods...boxing is maybe unskilled when you do it, but not when i do it, therefore im not a manual labourer. plus:

"People who play sports proffesionally "

you dont play boxing, but i wouldnt expect an armchair fight fan to know any different.

lol and a gringo insulting a small island who conquered america....has america ever invaded UK? no. why not? because they are cowards.

Fact remains England has a long history, America only dates back a couple hundred years? yet you think your country is superiour...haha, half your country is stupid as f uck, voting in a dumb ass redneck who sent help to tsunami quicker than those in hurricane katrina, wow, even YOUR OWN ELECTED PRESIDENT OPTED TO SAVE OTHER PEOPLE FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY RATHER THAN HIS OWN, proves my point again.

America bailed England out? all you did was drop a bomb, because half your airforce got destroyed by another small country, wow its always a true case of david and goliath with america isnt it? If you known your history, Germany and Italy were the main oppositions in the war, and they surrounded before America intervened.

All americans do is go into poor under developed countries, take there raw materials, "couple of billion goes missing"....and claim they are for peace etc, they are fakes. which you are incidently, you are a two bit taxman, who worships a guy who shot himself over the inability to pay the taxman, and comes on here acting liek he knows about boxing? and challenges a PROFESSIONAL about boxing knowledge? a guy who actually DOES boxing PROFESSIONALLY, actually knows fighters, actually watches it live and not on the tv with a few cans of beers....you have no boxing credentials, like i said, you envy my job, but cannot do it because you dont have talent, you dont have balls....if i want to talk taxes...id come to you (in fact i wouldnt...i wouldnt trust my money with a redneck)...otherwise, stop spending ages trying to think up a reply, stop trying to talk boxing with me, you are leagues below my level, and it shows.

Ah! Now THAT explains your lack of boxing knowledge (and ability): Pommies have historically been the laughing stocks of the boxing world. Hell, if Pommies could fight the United States wouldn't have had to bail their asses out in two world wars :D



No its true we appreciated your help in the 1917/18 World War 1 and 1942/45 World War 2 :)
Do think though that we would probably lose less men if you guys were on the other side at times, friendly fire is a great phrase!

Wow im dissapointed, you took such a long time to reply yet you mustered up that pathetic response?

Definition of Manual labour: Manual labour is physical work done with the hands, especially in an unskilled job such as fruit and vegetable picking, road building, or any other field where the work may be considered physically arduous, and which has as a profitable objective, usually the production of goods...boxing is maybe unskilled when you do it, but not when i do it, therefore im not a manual labourer. plus:

"People who play sports proffesionally "

you dont play boxing, but i wouldnt expect an armchair fight fan to know any different.

lol and a gringo insulting a small island who conquered america....has america ever invaded UK? no. why not? because they are cowards.

Fact remains England has a long history, America only dates back a couple hundred years? yet you think your country is superiour...haha, half your country is stupid as f uck, voting in a dumb ass redneck who sent help to tsunami quicker than those in hurricane katrina, wow, even YOUR OWN ELECTED PRESIDENT OPTED TO SAVE OTHER PEOPLE FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY RATHER THAN HIS OWN, proves my point again.

America bailed England out? all you did was drop a bomb, because half your airforce got destroyed by another small country, wow its always a true case of david and goliath with america isnt it? If you known your history, Germany and Italy were the main oppositions in the war, and they surrounded before America intervened.

All americans do is go into poor under developed countries, take there raw materials, "couple of billion goes missing"....and claim they are for peace etc, they are fakes. which you are incidently, you are a two bit taxman, who worships a guy who shot himself over the inability to pay the taxman, and comes on here acting liek he knows about boxing? and challenges a PROFESSIONAL about boxing knowledge? a guy who actually DOES boxing PROFESSIONALLY, actually knows fighters, actually watches it live and not on the tv with a few cans of beers....you have no boxing credentials, like i said, you envy my job, but cannot do it because you dont have talent, you dont have balls....if i want to talk taxes...id come to you (in fact i wouldnt...i wouldnt trust my money with a redneck)...otherwise, stop spending ages trying to think up a reply, stop trying to talk boxing with me, you are leagues below my level, and it shows.
No he does know his boxing, it is apparent he knows **** all about history though :)

No its true we appreciated your help in the 1917/18 World War 1 and 1942/45 World War 2 :)
Do think though that we would probably lose less men if you guys were on the other side at times, friendly fire is a great phrase!

obviously the american troops have the same problem Poet the oap does....eyesight.

No he does know his boxing, it is apparent he knows **** all about history though :)

if you would of seen my state school, you wouldn't have had the best history either...either way, the politics is correct.

and challenges a PROFESSIONAL about boxing knowledge? a guy who actually DOES boxing PROFESSIONALLY, actually knows fighters, actually watches it live and not on the tv with a few cans of beers....you have no boxing credentials

On that rationale you need to be a cat or dog to be a vetenarian then?

On that rationale you need to be a cat or dog to be a vetenarian then?

why you backing the sceptic tank? thats a ****ty comparison as like Poet Dogs and Cats dont have a brain hence why they cant operate on themselves, if they did however they would make better vetenarians then humans as they know more about their kind..from personal expereince. Just as i kno more about boxing than him, from personal expereince, i.e. boxing, surrounded by the sport etc.

why you backing the sceptic tank? thats a ****ty comparison as like Poet Dogs and Cats dont have a brain hence why they cant operate on themselves, if they did however they would make better vetenarians then humans as they know more about their kind..from personal expereince. Just as i kno more about boxing than him, from personal expereince, i.e. boxing, surrounded by the sport etc.
They do have brains just brains that don't function like a human's. Also they couldn't read medical books for me the real problem is the lack of opposable thumbs.
My point is that whilst boxing does give you a perspective it does not mean that you have a better take on boxing than someone else who is a fan really.
You like football?
Alex Ferguson is far more knowledgable on football than Diego Maradona but there is no comparison on who was the better player. See my point?

yes i agree with you, but what i don't like is Poet disrespecting fighters who have the balls to step in the ring, its easy to sit on your chair and criticise, when hes far from there capabilities, and insulting everyone left and right for there opinion, plus he pulled the age card, i pulled the "im actually a fighter you arnt card"...does him being older than me make him more knowledgable about boxing? no.

this is too MAB and the poet,

MAB- I realise where you are coming from, it's just im sick of idiots like Poet assuming because im young i know nothing about this sport, i love boxing, i live it without sounding cliche, so when people are challenging my knowledge on this sport and try and name drop etc i too do it back. no i dont think you are a moron, its just i got defensive when you kept interupting me and kept on challenging me, fair play to you...i thought pacman was going to win only based on dlh fighting at 147.

av
Poet- I can assure you i am no tomatoe can, i have a world class trainer, aswell as having a good amateur background with only one lone loss(15-1) and am 1-0 as a pro, i have sparred countless top fighters since i was young, that doesnt point to being a tomatoe can does it?....lol@ a rich boy office boy who has never stepped int he ring trying to make digs, you work for a ****ty government, and i find it ironic you he a picture of Joe louis, who incidentally shot himself due to not being able to pay taxes and yet you say:

"Government Computer collecting 75 Large a year at taxpayer expense"


YOU ARE A FOOL, WITH NO BOXING CREDENTIALS, WHO SLAM OTHER FIGHTERS YET YOU HAVE NEVER BEEN IN THE RING, AGAIN PROVES MY THEORY YOU A ARMCHAIR FIGHT FAN.



Okay but Dude!! stop taking this **** to heart because all i said was........................"
Joe got him more because he put more pressure on. Joe Frazier was a pressure fighter "

Then!! ironically YOU start accusing ME of knowing nothing about Boxing, that is what you are pissed about with Poet isn't it ?

That's the unhinged response I wanted :D

Definition of Manual labour: Manual labour is physical work done with the hands, especially in an unskilled job such as fruit and vegetable picking, road building, or any other field where the work may be considered physically arduous, and which has as a profitable objective, usually the production of goods...boxing is maybe unskilled when you do it, but not when i do it, therefore im not a manual labourer.

Break it down Junior: Manual = hands; labor = work (ie. you work with your hands). Didn't learn much English before you dropped out did ya?

plus:

"People who play sports proffesionally "

you dont play boxing, but i wouldnt expect an armchair fight fan to know any different.

It's a sport dude. It's not like quantum physics (you know, something that's actually important).

lol and a gringo insulting a small island who conquered america....has america ever invaded UK? no. why not? because they are cowards.

Britain doesn't have anything of value so why on Earth would be arsed?

Fact remains England has a long history, America only dates back a couple hundred years? yet you think your country is superiour...

Ah yes! You've been around long enough to be swept into the dust been of history as a has-been nation.

haha, half your country is stupid as f uck, voting in a dumb ass redneck who sent help to tsunami quicker than those in hurricane katrina, wow, even YOUR OWN ELECTED PRESIDENT OPTED TO SAVE OTHER PEOPLE FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY RATHER THAN HIS OWN, proves my point again.

This from a country that's been voting for Socialists the past 60 years? :rofl: I'll take a redneck over a fvcking Commie anyday :D

America bailed England out? all you did was drop a bomb, because half your airforce got destroyed by another small country, wow its always a true case of david and goliath with america isnt it? If you known your history, Germany and Italy were the main oppositions in the war, and they surrounded before America intervened.

Apparently he didn't learn any history before he dropped out! Those "State Schools" aren't exactly up to Eton standards are they huh?

All americans do is go into poor under developed countries, take there raw materials, "couple of billion goes missing"....and claim they are for peace etc, they are fakes.

Sounds like the way Britain ran all their colonies :D

which you are incidently, you are a two bit taxman, who worships a guy who shot himself over the inability to pay the taxman, and comes on here acting liek he knows about boxing? and challenges a PROFESSIONAL about boxing knowledge? a guy who actually DOES boxing PROFESSIONALLY, actually knows fighters, actually watches it live and not on the tv with a few cans of beers....you have no boxing credentials...like i said, you envy my job, but cannot do it because you dont have talent, you dont have balls....if i want to talk taxes...id come to you (in fact i wouldnt...i wouldnt trust my money with a redneck)

Now we have the crux it! You resent those who were smarter than and could make a living as something more than a mindless piece of meat. NO ONE envies you and it drives you nuts doesn't it? NO ONE wants to be you! You're a sub-human troglodyte lost in a world that revolves around the intelligence that you simply don't possess.

[QUOTE=ironalex;5810200]stop trying to talk boxing with me, you are leagues below my level, and it shows.

On the contrary, I'm an intelligent human being and you're a drooling Neanderthal.

PS. Junior Witter, now a quitter, career's in the sh1tter: A typical Pommy fighter it's true! It reminds me so much.....of you!

Poet

Mike Tysons by FAR!you are a Tyson hater... you try to diminish the achievements of Tyson so as to try to make Lennox Lewis out to be the better of the two, yet deep down you know fine well that Lewis was a first round KO for prime Tyson

mike tyson was a great puncher, but Roy Jones fights were also nice, they are both great, but when i have to choose i would say mike tyson, because of his short career

poet why do you assume as i am a fighter i am instantly thick?... i have 11 GCSE's to my name, which is a lot harder than american curriculum, as well as 3 A2s and 4 AS'. To be a tax man you hardly need to be a scholar, all you do is...collect taxes..."hardly quantum physics is it".

And an american giving a person from england english lessons? how does that work?

So youd take a war mungering industralist redneck over a socialist?..okay this proves my point that you are a retard.


Again, you keep saying how intelligent you are, is it a self doub thing?...you keep on having to make yourself believe you arctually smart?

Fact remains you are on here 24/7, i doubt you even have a job, you are the growing percentage of unemployed in these recession times....you should cut back costs and save on the electricity old man.


You were the one who brought history into it, and i was just merely stating how England have a much more decorate history than your beloved america.

Furthermore, what value does America have? dunking dougnuts? mtv? why be proud of a country whos sponsored terroirsts?...A poor middle eastern country USED and ABUSED your country...you americans truly are dumb!...why be proud of a country who is known for being the most racist country on earth...England have never had nowhere near as many race wars as yanks (yes i am aware that America voted in Barrack Obama, but seriously...hes more white than he is black, if he was fully African American your racist country wouldn't have it)

Americans are envous of English people, because when English people go to the US, the women leave there pathetic fat gringos and get with a civilised english guy.


Fact, England has never been conquered, America has.


Fact, England is not the most hated country in the world, America is.

Fact, you are envous of the balls and talent it takes to do my job...you do like a good scrap...but only a good scrap on the keyboard, you aren't a true man, you dont have the webos to confront face to face.

Fact, you are American, i am English, that automatically means i am smarter than you.

poet why do you assume as i am a fighter i am instantly thick?... i have 11 GCSE's to my name, which is a lot harder than american curriculum, as well as 3 A2s and 4 AS'. To be a tax man you hardly need to be a scholar, all you do is...collect taxes..."hardly quantum physics is it".

And an american giving a person from england english lessons? how does that work?

So youd take a war mungering industralist redneck over a socialist?..okay this proves my point that you are a retard.

Again, you keep saying how intelligent you are, is it a self doub thing?...you keep on having to make yourself believe you arctually smart?

Fact remains you are on here 24/7, i doubt you even have a job, you are the growing percentage of unemployed in these recession times....you should cut back costs and save on the electricity old man.

You were the one who brought history into it, and i was just merely stating how England have a much more decorate history than your beloved america.

Furthermore, what value does America have? dunking dougnuts? mtv? why be proud of a country whos sponsored terroirsts?...A poor middle eastern country USED and ABUSED your country...you americans truly are dumb!...why be proud of a country who is known for being the most racist country on earth...England have never had nowhere near as many race wars as yanks (yes i am aware that America voted in Barrack Obama, but seriously...hes more white than he is black, if he was fully African American your racist country wouldn't have it)

Americans are envous of English people, because when English people go to the US, the women leave there pathetic fat gringos and get with a civilised english guy.

Fact, England has never been conquered, America has.

Fact, England is not the most hated country in the world, America is.

Fact, you are envous of the balls and talent it takes to do my job...you do like a good scrap...but only a good scrap on the keyboard, you aren't a true man, you dont have the webos to confront face to face.

Fact, you are American, i am English, that automatically means i am smarter than you.

:haha: I love it when the idiots become unhinged! I still await an intelligent response to my essay (written at your request) detailing Tyson's flaws.....not that I expect you to actually produce anything of intelligence.

PS. I love it when Pommies throw tantrums over the fact that their country no longer matters in the world.....insane jealousy at its finest and oh so entertaining :lew:

Poet

Just had a look and the average U.K. IQ is 100 and its 98 in the U.S. so its official :)

I love it when Pommies throw tantrums over the fact that their country no longer matters in the world.....insane jealousy at its finest and oh so entertaining :lew:

Poet

We're just resting it is tiring running the world for 400 years you know.

Just had a look and the average U.K. IQ is 100 and its 98 in the U.S. so its official :)

exactly...its OFFICIAL. also GJC check out the obesity rates, im pretty sure Poet is one of those obese percentage, as he sits in his armchair all day dreaming of being able to fight.

Just had a look and the average U.K. IQ is 100 and its 98 in the U.S. so its official :)

That's because you older chaps have a disproportionate impact on the result ;)

Poet

exactly...its OFFICIAL. also GJC check out the obesity rates, im pretty sure Poet is one of those obese percentage, as he sits in his armchair all day dreaming of being able to fight.

Still waiting for an intelligent response Sir Troglodyte!

Poet

:haha: I love it when the idiots become unhinged! I still await an intelligent response to my essay (written at your request) detailing Tyson's flaws.....not that I expect you to actually produce anything of intelligence.

PS. I love it when Pommies throw tantrums over the fact that their country no longer matters in the world.....insane jealousy at its finest and oh so entertaining :lew:

Poet

you brought IQ etc into this first not me, you just are trying to change the subject because like always im right and you are wrong.

Prime Tyson flaws?-mental weakness...and B- Stamina, thats it, you say he didnt work the body enough...check out the tubbs and johnson fights....what was his famous combo? right hook to the body, right uppercut to the head.

headmovement A*
hand speed A*
power A

Fact- anyone who thinks joe louis was quicker than tyson knows nothing.

Fact- anyone who has a picture of a guy who shot himself over being unable to pay the taxman, whilst being a taxman and bragging about being one, makes them a hypocrit.

Fact- Poet is an armchair fight fan who has no friends apart from his computer.

you brought IQ etc into this first not me, you just are trying to change the subject because like always im right and you are wrong.

Prime Tyson flaws?-mental weakness...and B- Stamina, thats it, you say he didnt work the body enough...check out the tubbs and johnson fights....what was his famous combo? right hook to the body, right uppercut to the head.

headmovement A*
hand speed A*
power A

Fact- anyone who thinks joe louis was quicker than tyson knows nothing.

Fact- anyone who has a picture of a guy who shot himself over being unable to pay the taxman, whilst being a taxman and bragging about being one, makes them a hypocrit.

Fact- Poet is an armchair fight fan who has no friends apart from his computer.

I said an INTELLIGENT response: Not the hyperbolic paroxysms of an unhinged fan-boi. Try again Junior.

Poet

you brought IQ etc into this first not me, you just are trying to change the subject because like always im right and you are wrong.

Prime Tyson flaws?-mental weakness...and B- Stamina, thats it, you say he didnt work the body enough...check out the tubbs and johnson fights....what was his famous combo? right hook to the body, right uppercut to the head.

headmovement A*
hand speed A*
power A

Fact- anyone who thinks joe louis was quicker than tyson knows nothing.

Fact- anyone who has a picture of a guy who shot himself over being unable to pay the taxman, whilst being a taxman and bragging about being one, makes them a hypocrit.

Fact- Poet is an armchair fight fan who has no friends apart from his computer.

Oh, BTW, referring to me as a "taxman" is more proof of your lack of ability to comprehend text. I never said anything about being a tax collector: I said that for all you knew I was a government employee making 70 grand a year at taxpayers expense. I never made statement as to exactly what my occupation was, rather I merely pointed out the possibility. Besides, being the good Socialist (read: scum of the Earth) that you are you should LOVE a taxman :luvbed:

Poet

exactly...its OFFICIAL. also GJC check out the obesity rates, im pretty sure Poet is one of those obese percentage, as he sits in his armchair all day dreaming of being able to fight.
I would but I need to reboot (?) my internet thing and its all the way across the room and need to catch my breath.

Oh, BTW, referring to me as a "taxman" is more proof of your lack of ability to comprehend text. I never said anything about being a tax collector: I said that for all you knew I was a government employee making 70 grand a year at taxpayers expense. I never made statement as to exactly what my occupation was, rather I merely pointed out the possibility. Besides, being the good Socialist (read: scum of the Earth) that you are you should LOVE a taxman :luvbed:

Poet
I've not been here a long time ironalex but trust me if Poet was a taxman I'm sure we would have had a forum or two on it by now!

Fact- anyone who has a picture of a guy who shot himself over being unable to pay the taxman, whilst being a taxman and bragging about being one, makes them a hypocrit.


Should this not read **** himself?

poet you are the one not coming up wit an intelligent response, you are the one soo embarrassed in what you do, yet you appear like you are some scientist working for nasa, you probably are a trolly pusher. You are the one whos like a little kid, always trying to get the last word in,you are an old man, TRYING to get the better of a teenager in an ONLINE argument, you are foolish, im done talking wit you.

They do have brains just brains that don't function like a human's. Also they couldn't read medical books for me the real problem is the lack of opposable thumbs.
My point is that whilst boxing does give you a perspective it does not mean that you have a better take on boxing than someone else who is a fan really.
You like football?
Alex Ferguson is far more knowledgable on football than Diego Maradona but there is no comparison on who was the better player. See my point?
You do realise that my 1000th landmark post on a boxing site was about household pets and football. Would someone warn me when I'm approaching my 2000th post to come up with something better?
Mind 2000 posts at my age might be ambitious, I don't buy green bananas anymore as I don't want to appear ****y at the green grocers

poet you are the one not coming up wit an intelligent response, you are the one soo embarrassed in what you do, yet you appear like you are some scientist working for nasa, you probably are a trolly pusher. You are the one whos like a little kid, always trying to get the last word in,you are an old man, TRYING to get the better of a teenager in an ONLINE argument, you are foolish, im done talking wit you.
Don't let the junior bit get to you, he calls me junior and I'm 70!
You must keep going because he does like to get the last word in!!!

Call me crazy but I think Louis' handspeed was atleast comparable to Tyson's. We all know about his slowly shuffling feet but as Ali said, "Louis was fast from here on up" while pointing at his waist.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/H22jmyGvya4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/H22jmyGvya4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

dont forget Great A he had 6 to 8 oz gloves on, joe louis was never as quick as mike:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRs5budNvxg

im not doubint louis had hand speed, but tyson was a league above in speed.

dont forget Great A he had 6 to 8 oz gloves on, joe louis was never as quick as mike:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRs5budNvxg

im not doubint louis had hand speed, but tyson was a league above in speed.

That was a 14 year old Tyson...

That was a 14 year old Tyson...

he was 15 i believe, and yes, that goes to show his speed as a kid, he got quicker when he was nearer his prime

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9R9KM_YJFc

check out the 55 second mark in particular, those look like 16s on. Louis could not have thrown it with that speed.

he was 15 i believe, and yes, that goes to show his speed as a kid, he got quicker when he was nearer his prime

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9R9KM_YJFc

check out the 55 second mark in particular, those look like 16s on. Louis could not have thrown it with that speed.

Tyson did not get faster. They say that Louis was a quick mover in the amateurs but that matters very little when discussing them as professional fighters.

Here's Tyson in his prime. He is certainly quick but not any quicker than what is shown of Louis against Abe Simon:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OJOZPzmIJ2w&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OJOZPzmIJ2w&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/H22jmyGvya4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/H22jmyGvya4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Berbick moved quite a lot, therefore Tysons full speed could not be shown, check out the Tyson johnson fight...whereas Louis was fighting in 6oz gloves, and against a more stationary less hard to hit target, but you have your opinion and i respect that.

For starters Tyson was limited by his body type. Having a short reach he was locked into fighting one way which left him with no "plan B" if things didn't go right (this is the same reason Marciano and Frazier would never be number one). His stocky build and non-existent neck also played against him as it left him unable to turn his upper body adequetly to deal with someone giving him angles. This left him with the choice of either turning his entire body to position himself or punching ineffectively from a poor postition. Later, as he muscled up more, he was also unable to punch while turning (a key argument against weight lifting for fighters). Short-armed pressure fighters have a serious vulnerability against fighters like George Foreman and Sonny Liston and that in and of itself would preclude them from being the Heavyweight GOAT. Fighters like Tyson, Marciano, and Frazier could fight Foreman 100 times and they would LOSE the vast majority of them. The limitations of their bodies make it a nightmare stylistic matchup for them. Cuss himself told Tyson repeatedly he could never hope to beat Foreman: Someone a past-prime Ali defeated with relative ease.

While Tyson had quick feet straight ahead he was relatively clumsy and slow-afoot laterally. This was trouble against a mover with more in mind than mere survival (ie. someone using movement offensively as opposed to running for their lives).

As is apparent from watching any of Tyson's fights where the opponent wasn't focusing solely on survival Mike was NOT that difficult to hit. The idea Tyson was some kind of defensive wiz was a myth started by Hank Kaplan for whom Tyson could do no wrong. Even members of the D'Amato/Rooney team said that was a myth, that Tyson's offense was his defense and fighters running like hell simply aren't going to score with any regularity. Those chickens came home to roost in the Douglas fight.

Additionally, Tyson was not a good inside fighter as someone with his body type is normally expected to be. Tyson wanted to fight at mid-range where he could leap into his punches for maximum leverage. Them Apples is something of an expert on Tyson and his style (and, I might add, a Tyson FAN rather than a nuthugger) and can confirm this. Watching film of his fights with a critical eye will also confirm this. Tyson would tie up on the inside to provoke the ref into breaking the fighters and putting Tyson back out at the range he was comfortable at (this is partly a point in Tyson's favor as he conserved energy by allowing the referee to force the break rather than working his way back out). This is one of the reasons why Tyson was not a consistant body-puncher: Fighting from mid-range practically begs a fighter to head-hunt.....which was what Tyson wanted in any case.

Finally, Tyson's endurance was not that good. Like a young Foreman Tyson consistantly gassed around the 6th or 7th round in those fights that went that far. He slowed down rapidly after that point and relied on his early points lead and the fact that his opponent was usually in survival mode to secure the decision (at that point, against an opponent content to merely survive, Tyson could pick off some of the late rounds without actually doing anything other than being aggressive). Against a fighter who could absorb or deflect Tyson's early aggression AND hit him back was would simply take over after the mid-point of the fight.

Now. You wanted an analysis of Tyson's flaws and you now have it. Next?

Poet

The analysis of Tyson's flaws that marshmellowalex lacks the intellectual capacity to respond to intelligently.

Poet

Berbick moved quite a lot, therefore Tysons full speed could not be shown, check out the Tyson johnson fight...whereas Louis was fighting in 6oz gloves, and against a more stationary less hard to hit target, but you have your opinion and i respect that.

Berbick was hardly a defensive artist though. I saw Tyson landing just about every punch he threw on him. He was basically a tough, strong, awkward guy just like Abe Simon was, with very little "finesse".

Tyson did destroy Michael Jack Johnson but he was not the only man to do it. Johnson was knocked out 17 times.

Louis looked like Sugar Ray Robinson against some of the lesser opponents he fought but we have to go by the fighters' best performances against credible opposition.

I'm not going to claim that I know who was faster than the other but I don't think it's ridiculous to assume that Louis' handspeed was comparable to Tyson's. Both were certainly very quick with their hands.

look people, think what you think, its all opinions...i cannot be bothered to reply anymore.

look people, think what you think, its all opinions...i cannot be bothered to reply anymore.

Ah yes.....A quitter just like Witter :rofl:

Poet

Tyson did not get faster. They say that Louis was a quick mover in the amateurs but that matters very little when discussing them as professional fighters.

Here's Tyson in his prime. He is certainly quick but not any quicker than what is shown of Louis against Abe Simon:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OJOZPzmIJ2w&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OJOZPzmIJ2w&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/H22jmyGvya4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/H22jmyGvya4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

are you kidding? you are one of the most knowledgeable posters on here but Louis isn't anywhere close in the same department when it comes to speed. not to mention mike is moving that fast and he has a good 17-20 natural pounds on Louis.

Go show those videos to the average person and ask who you think looks faster. I think it's a case of you convincing yourself that Louis was just as quick.

I'm speaking only about hand speed here. The only guy quicker than him was prime Ali and probably a prime Holmes, mainly because they were lighter as well, he was thick. I don't even think a comeback Ali was as quick as prime Mike.

Patterson get's a shout to.

EDIT: and you are showing Louis vs Abe Simon, to make Louis look fast. Then you show mike vs Berbick (average).

show Tyson vs somebody slow and he will look fast as hell to.

are you kidding? you are one of the most knowledgeable posters on here but Louis isn't anywhere close in the same department when it comes to speed. not to mention mike is moving that fast and he has a good 17-20 natural pounds on Louis.

Go show those videos to the average person and ask who you think looks faster. I think it's a case of you convincing yourself that Louis was just as quick.

I'm speaking only about hand speed here. The only guy quicker than him was prime Ali and probably a prime Holmes, mainly because they were lighter as well, he was thick. I don't even think a comeback Ali was as quick as prime Mike.

Patterson get's a shout to.

EDIT: and you are showing Louis vs Abe Simon, to make Louis look fast. Then you show mike vs Berbick (average).

show Tyson vs somebody slow and he will look fast as hell to.

As I said in my original response:

Call me crazy but I think Louis' handspeed was atleast comparable to Tyson's. We all know about his slowly shuffling feet but as Ali said, "Louis was fast from here on up" while pointing at his waist.

I'm not talking about overall speed, only the handspeed. Everyone knows that Louis had slow feet and was not one to use much upperbody movement.

But his hands were very quick in my opinion.

Tyson by the way only had 5 pounds on Louis in some of the fights I showed. Louis was 208 against Simon, Tyson was 213 against Ribalta, so that's not a huge difference. Tyson must have been around 180-190 lbs in the video of a 14-15 year old Tyson training with Atlas.

Berbick's speed was not average. He was a sluggish, awkward fighter, not as slow as the huge, lumbering Simon, but almost. This is why I chose to show these fights, because they were both in there against slow opponents.

Even an ancient Ali was faster than Berbick:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/e7T6cDroK8Q&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/e7T6cDroK8Q&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

If you want to look at Louis against fighters on the level of Tyson's early opposition, then look at his fights against Levinsky and Ramage (when Louis was 20-21 years old). He doesn't look much different from Tyson, devastating his opposition in one round knockouts. Those fights don't tell much.

Tony Tubbs in my opinion held a speed advantage over Tyson but it was obvious who had the advantage in power:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-z3z0tTcUEs&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-z3z0tTcUEs&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I don't think there's any question that Patterson was faster than Tyson, Tyson himself admitted that much. Then again Patterson was much lighter.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pazrZZbvi6w&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pazrZZbvi6w&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
3:20

As I said in my original response:



I'm not talking about overall speed, only the handspeed. Everyone knows that Louis had slow feet and was not one to use much upperbody movement.

But his hands were very quick in my opinion.

Tyson by the way only had 5 pounds on Louis in some of the fights I showed. Louis was 208 against Simon, Tyson was 213 against Ribalta, so that's not a huge difference. Tyson must have been around 180-190 lbs in the video of a 14-15 year old Tyson training with Atlas.

Berbick's speed was not average. He was a sluggish, awkward fighter, not as slow as the huge, lumbering Simon, but almost. This is why I chose to show these fights, because they were both in there against slow opponents.

Even an ancient Ali was faster than Berbick:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/e7T6cDroK8Q&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/e7T6cDroK8Q&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

If you want to look at Louis against fighters on the level of Tyson's early opposition, then look at his fights against Levinsky and Ramage (when Louis was 20-21 years old). He doesn't look much different from Tyson, devastating his opposition in one round knockouts. Those fights don't tell much.

Tony Tubbs in my opinion held a speed advantage over Tyson but it was obvious who had the advantage in power:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-z3z0tTcUEs&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-z3z0tTcUEs&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


you take their prime weight and Tyson is 217, Louis is 200. I don't remember Tyson being 213 ever, in almost all of his title fights he was 217 pre prison.

I see your point on hand speed though.

I just don't agree with the weight, you can't pick one fighters lowest and another fighters highest to decide size.

I think even Foreman started at what 212?

you take their prime weight and Tyson is 217, Louis is 200. I don't remember Tyson being 213 ever, in almost all of his title fights he was 217 pre prison.

I see your point on hand speed though.

I just don't agree with the weight, you can't pick one fighters lowest and another fighters highest to decide size.

I think even Foreman started at what 212?

I'm not saying that Louis was as big as Tyson but I picked these two particular fights because there was not such a huge difference in weight to make much of a difference. Tyson did weigh 213 for the Ribalta fight.

I also think that Louis looked the most solid, physically, that he ever was against Abe Simon the second time. Unfortunately he had to go to the army after this bout, and came back a diminished fighter.

http://pro.corbis.com/images/U947160INP.jpg?size=67&uid=6f2adb5f-3fea-4433-b801-cf989458c0ac&uniqID=82502c88-b26d-4231-b97e-b9d920d92721

http://pro.corbis.com/images/U947156INP.jpg?size=67&uid=44584c26-f02d-4e01-9720-a40fbb595a65&uniqID=fa2d6720-4223-4614-842f-9d1274443ab9

Picture from the Baer rematch:

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/louispics/louis_baer23.jpg

I'm not saying that Louis was as big as Tyson but I picked these two particular fights because there was not such a huge difference in weight to make much of a difference. Tyson did weigh 213 for the Ribalta fight.

I also think that Louis looked the most solid, physically, that he ever was against Abe Simon the second time. Unfortunately he had to go to the army after this bout, and came back a diminished fighter.

http://pro.corbis.com/images/U947160INP.jpg?size=67&uid=6f2adb5f-3fea-4433-b801-cf989458c0ac&uniqID=82502c88-b26d-4231-b97e-b9d920d92721

http://pro.corbis.com/images/U947156INP.jpg?size=67&uid=44584c26-f02d-4e01-9720-a40fbb595a65&uniqID=fa2d6720-4223-4614-842f-9d1274443ab9

Picture from the Baer rematch:

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/louispics/louis_baer23.jpg

yea he does look pretty strong in those pictures, wonder if he was hitting the weights.

yea he does look pretty strong in those pictures, wonder if he was hitting the weights.

No, if I remember right Louis would chop wood in training camp.

Poet

I'm not saying that Louis was as big as Tyson but I picked these two particular fights because there was not such a huge difference in weight to make much of a difference. Tyson did weigh 213 for the Ribalta fight.

And at 215 in several of his in-prime fights. In any case I tend to think that for Heavyweights any weight difference of less than 10 pounds is negligable. That sort of thing looms larger in the lighter weight classes where a pound is a greater percentage of total body weight. In other words, then pounds has a much greater impact when a fighter weighs 120 pounds than when a fighter weighs 220.

Poet

I cant believe this thread is still running :lol1:

I think its mark of two things, either Mike Tyson is extremely overrated by his fans or other fans are not giving him his due.

I tend to think the former is true because if Mike was that great he would not need defending, his record would stand up to scrutiny with facts!! not opinion.

I cant believe this thread is still running :lol1:

I think its mark of two things, either Mike Tyson is extremely overrated by his fans or other fans are not giving him his due.

I tend to think the former is true because if Mike was that great he would not need defending, his record would stand up to scrutiny with facts!! not opinion.

Naw, the thread is pretty much done.....marshmellowalex has said he's done with us ignant "old peeps" (ie. he's run up a white flag and quit) :rofl:

Poet

Louis wasn't even faster than Schmeling or Walcott. The lad had Max clamping on the ropes in pain, basicely DEFENSELESS, and he is throwing punches at him slower than old Foreman. You'd think he would try to get him out as fast as he can when he has a guy in front of him acting like a non moving heavy bag. That was a pathetic display of speed.

Louis' handspeed was comparable to Sonny Liston. Holyfield, Tyson, Ali, Patterson and many others were much much faster than bumbeater.

And to answer the TS's question on who's prime was more overrated between Roy Jones and Mike Tyson, I would have to say Joe "bumbeater" Louis. That is my answer. Good day lads.

And to answer the TS's question on who's prime was more overrated between Roy Jones and Mike Tyson, I would have to say Joe "bumbeater" Louis. That is my answer. Good day lads.

Phew that came out of the blue.
Still it was getting off topic and he does like to keep to the subject at hand so out of Tyson and RJJ it was Joe Louis.

Phew that came out of the blue.
Still it was getting off topic and he does like to keep to the subject at hand so out of Tyson and RJJ it was Joe Louis.

I would say that the comment wasn't germaine to the discussion except that the uneducated troll would doubtlessly think I was referring to the Krauts ;)

Poet

Well, I tend to see Jones at Light-Heavy since he was a true Middleweight only VERY early in his career. I would say Jones would be competetive with the bottom half of the Light-Heavy ATGs. Ezzard Charles, Gene Tunney, Archie Moore, and Bob Foster would probably be too tall an order. I would favor Michael Spinks over Roy but I think that's a very competetive fight that Jones could possibly even win: Call it Spinks 6 out of 10 fights.



Most of them. I tend to think that against Marciano and Frazier it's even-odds.....maybe even Dempsey though I would personally favor Jack.
Poet

Dempsey is more overrated than Tyson. Check out his resume. Fighters from the 20's 30's and 40's seem to get a pass for being overrated.

Dempsey is more overrated than Tyson. Check out his resume. Fighters from the 20's 30's and 40's seem to get a pass for being overrated.

And posters under 30 overrate anyone who fought post 1980 or 1990 under the assumption that every generation is better than the last. That's why you see completely moronic statements like "Mayweather's the best ever" and "The Klitschko's would smoke every other Heavyweight in history". Complete horsesh1t.

Poet

You mean pre-1980

Reed

Louis wasn't even faster than Schmeling or Walcott. The lad had Max clamping on the ropes in pain, basicely DEFENSELESS, and he is throwing punches at him slower than old Foreman. You'd think he would try to get him out as fast as he can when he has a guy in front of him acting like a non moving heavy bag. That was a pathetic display of speed.

Louis' handspeed was comparable to Sonny Liston. Holyfield, Tyson, Ali, Patterson and many others were much much faster than bumbeater.

That Max Schmeling sure was slow.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/026iLzyw-t4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/026iLzyw-t4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
1:35 no handspeed whatsoever...

Louis by the way looked the quicker of the two in the early rounds until Schmeling's pin-point accurate right hands took their toll.

Walcott had quick hands and feet but he wasn't exactly trading shots with Louis. He set him up for counter punches. The one time he did, in the 11th round of their second fight, he was beaten to the punch and knocked out.

That wasn't exactly a prime Louis either. Look at Tyson post-prison and compare it to that Louis.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hVMLesBGMAM&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hVMLesBGMAM&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Louis picked his punches against Schmeling and finished him off in the first round. Hardly a pathetic display.

You mean pre-1980

Reed

Nevermind... read your post wrong. :)

And posters under 30 overrate anyone who fought post 1980 or 1990 under the assumption that every generation is better than the last. That's why you see completely moronic statements like "Mayweather's the best ever" and "The Klitschko's would smoke every other Heavyweight in history". Complete horsesh1t.

Poet

That's very true. I find myself doing that sometimes. I'm not old enough to have a proper discussion about pre-90's boxer.

That's very true. I find myself doing that sometimes. I'm not old enough to have a proper discussion about pre-90's boxer.

Don't get me wrong, it isn't the entire under-30 bracket that does that. Those pre-1980 fights are in abundance over on the Video Trading Block and a number of under-30 posters eat those up and are quite knowledgable about the earlier eras.

Really, though, I think the ones who drive me nuts are the ones who HAVE seen earlier fights but still act like nobody prior to 1980 knew how to fight and in-ring strategy was only invented in the last 10 years (ie. we know how to deal with that type of fighter THESE days, nobody did then ect.) :dunno:

Poet

And posters under 30 overrate anyone who fought post 1980 or 1990 under the assumption that every generation is better than the last. That's why you see completely moronic statements like "Mayweather's the best ever" and "The Klitschko's would smoke every other Heavyweight in history". Complete horsesh1t.

Poet

Well, you'll never read any post of mine claiming that. But the point is I can go back and look at fighters like Dempsey who many claim to be one of the greatest and tear his resume to shreds. Even more so than Tyson's. It works both ways.Old timers tend to favor people from their era just like the younger fans favor people from their's. I have np problem with it until they become unrealistic and too biased.

Well, you'll never read any post of mine claiming that. But the point is I can go back and look at fighters like Dempsey who many claim to be one of the greatest and tear his resume to shreds. Even more so than Tyson's. It works both ways.Old timers tend to favor people from their era just like the younger fans favor people from their's. I have np problem with it until they become unrealistic and too biased.

I can tear any fighter's resume to pieces from any era and have done so on numerous occasions when a point needed to be made.

Poet

I can tear any fighter's resume to pieces from any era and have done so on numerous occasions when a point needed to be made.

Poet

The issue is a comparison between two fighters. On paper Tyson has a better resume than Dempsey's but you'll see a lot more people claiming Tyson is overrated. But some of the same people will never mention Dempsey's overrated resume. As much hate as I probably will get for saying it, I would put Wlad Klitschko's resume over Dempsey. Dempsey defended his title 5 times in 7 years and lost to the only great fighter he ever faced. Twice. Another top heavyweight he faced(Jack Sharkey) was beating Dempsey handily until Dempsey hit him low. When Sharkey complained to the ref, Dempsey clocked him. And the fact that Jess Williard is one of the worst heavyweight champions ever is not debatable imo.

The issue is a comparison between two fighters. On paper Tyson has a better resume than Dempsey's but you'll see a lot more people claiming Tyson is overrated but some of the same people will never mention Dempsey's overrated resume. As much hate as I probably will get for saying I would put Wlad Klitschko's resume over Dempsey. Dempsey defended his title 5 times in 7 years and lost to the only great fighter he ever faced. Twice. Another top heavyweight he faced(Jack Sharkey) was beating Dempsey handily until Dempsey hit him low. When Sharkey complained to the ref, Dempsey clocked him. And the fact that Jess Williard is one of the worst heavyweight champions ever is not debatable imo.

And the great fighters that Wlad Klitschko has faced? Oh, that's right! He hasn't faced any! The truth of the matter is that Tyson faced no in-prime greats during his own prime either. If you give Tyson a pass for getting clubbed like a baby seal by Evander Holyfield because Mike was past-prime then the same applies to Dempsey who was past-prime when he faced Tunney and Sharkey. You can't apply the one standard to Tyson and Wlad then a different one to Dempsey.

Poet

And the great fighters that Wlad Klitschko has faced? Oh, that's right! He hasn't faced any! The truth of the matter is that Tyson faced no in-prime greats during his own prime either. If you give Tyson a pass for getting clubbed like a baby seal by Evander Holyfield because Mike was past-prime then the same applies to Dempsey who was past-prime when he faced Tunney and Sharkey. You can't apply the one standard to Tyson and Wlad then a different one to Dempsey.

Poet

Lots of good fighters didn't beat prime greats in their life time. Holmes, Liston, did Holyfield even beat any? ( I guess you could argue Tyson)

Ali beat some, Frazier did...

I hardly know of any boxers at HW that beat ATG's in their prime. Most finished off past greats.

And the great fighters that Wlad Klitschko has faced? Oh, that's right! He hasn't faced any! The truth of the matter is that Tyson faced no in-prime greats during his own prime either. If you give Tyson a pass for getting clubbed like a baby seal by Evander Holyfield because Mike was past-prime then the same applies to Dempsey who was past-prime when he faced Tunney and Sharkey. You can't apply the one standard to Tyson and Wlad then a different one to Dempsey.

Poet

And Vice versa. You can't claim that Dempsey was one of the greatest but **** on Tyson and Klitschko. At least those two are/were active heavyweight champions fighting everybody in their division while Dempsey found low budget hollywood movies and circuses more to his liking. I don't rate any of the three top 10 all time but the same standards should apply to ALL of them.

Lots of good fighters didn't beat prime greats in their life time. Holmes, Liston, did Holyfield even beat any? ( I guess you could argue Tyson)

Ali beat some, Frazier did...

I hardly know of any boxers at HW that beat ATG's in their prime. Most finished off past greats.

Agreed. I remember KOTF (a member who posts here) having this quote as his signature:

Using the illogic of the "you must beat a prime great to be great", then how is Liston great? Because he beat Patterson? Who did Patterson beat that was great and in his prime? Therefore, Ali hadn't proven that he was great by 71, when he lost to Frazier. Frazier, therefore, isn't a "great", since Ali hadn't proven that he was "great" by not beating a prime great fighter.

Lots of good fighters didn't beat prime greats in their life time. Holmes, Liston, did Holyfield even beat any? ( I guess you could argue Tyson)

Ali beat some, Frazier did...

I hardly know of any boxers at HW that beat ATG's in their prime. Most finished off past greats.

You're right. Ali is one of the few who did that. And that was not prime Ali who Frazier beat.

And Vice versa. You can't claim that Dempsey is one of the greatest but **** on Tyson and Klitschko. At least those two are/were active heavyweight champions fighting everybody in their division while Dempsey found low budget hollywood movies and circuses more to his liking. I don't rate any of the three top 10 all time but the same standards should apply to ALL of them.

Except that resume is only one component I use when rating fighters. I'm not a single issue voter. In Wlad's case there's more things wrong with him than just the fact that he fights in the worst Heavyweight era since weight classes were invented.

Poet

You're right. Ali is one of the few who did that. And that was not prime Ali who Frazier beat.

It wasn't a prime Ali, but it was a pretty damn good version. all 3 fights were competitive.

Except that resume is only one component I use when rating fighters. I'm not a single issue voter. In Wlad's case there's more things wrong with him than just the fact that he fights in the worst Heavyweight era since weight classes were invented.

Poet

You know i'm not a fan of Wlad, but he will eventually make some peoples ATg lists ( not mine) because he was dominant in this era. Even if this is a below average era for HW's he still has dominated it. I wouldn't give him much of a chance against other greats though.

You can't have guys like Dempsey and Johnson on an ATG list either though, they have just as many loopholes as Wlad's resume, such as poor competition, bad losses etc.

You know i'm not a fan of Wlad, but he will eventually make some peoples ATg lists ( not mine) because he was dominant in this era. Even if this is a below average era for HW's he still has dominated it. I wouldn't give him much of a chance against other greats though.

You can't have guys like Dempsey and Johnson on an ATG list either though, they have just as many loopholes as Wlad's resume, such as poor competition, bad losses etc.

But again, I don't make my ratings bases soley on resume: It's only one factor and not even the the top one at that.

Poet

Tyson's.....because his rabid fans portray him as the GOAT because he got quickie KOs over Trever Berbick calibre fighters.....then when it occurs to them that Berbick was crap and a C class fighter at best they go through contortions to transform Berbick from a crap C class fighter into a credible opponent.

Poet

I just watched the Muhammad Ali-Berbick fight.

The one where an 40 year old, Parkinson's Ali acually won 3-4 rounds out of 10 rounds.

Your right about the class of fighter Berbick was.

I just watched the Muhammad Ali-Berbick fight.

The one where an 40 year old, Parkinson's Ali acually won 3-4 rounds out of 10 rounds.

Your right about the class of fighter Berbick was.

Trevor Berbick certainly wasn't one of the best title holders.

Berbick made all kinds of excuses about the Tyson loss, claiming he had been poisoned and that the fight was a fix. He said the knockout punch never landed on him...

Trevor Berbick certainly wasn't one of the best title holders.

Berbick made all kinds of excuses about the Tyson loss, claiming he had been poisoned and that the fight was a fix. He said the knockout punch never landed on him...

Berbick was not mentally stable. And I'm not being facetious. He really was crazy.

Berbick was not mentally stable. And I'm not being facetious. He really was crazy.

True. The Holmes-Berbick brawl (not the actual fight) is still one of the most hilarious incidents in boxing history.

Tyson's.....because his rabid fans portray him as the GOAT because he got quickie KOs over Trever Berbick calibre fighters.....then when it occurs to them that Berbick was crap and a C class fighter at best they go through contortions to transform Berbick from a crap C class fighter into a credible opponent.

Poet

Couldn't agree more but im a huge tyson fan he could have been the GOAT if took boxing more seroiusly in my imo. After Cus D'Amato died he fell apart..