Who's prime is more overrated ?

[vandiar]

Who's angry? I'm laughing my ass off at mental lightweights like you and Junior! 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.

[Poet682006]

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

[vandiar]

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.”

[Spartacus Sully]

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.

[Poet682006]

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 bull**** 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

[vandiar]

Oh like D'Amato wasn't going to hype up his boy. Like any trainer Cuss was a bull**** 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.

[Poet682006]

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

[Poet682006]

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

Poet

[GJC]

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.

[Poet682006]

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

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