If Tyson Had Been In Prime, In His Fights With Holyfield and Lewis?

[BKM-]

By the time of Holyfield-Tyson (I) both were on PEDs, yes.

Do you believe Tyson was using/abusing pre Douglas?

Do you believe Holyfield was dirty in 1990?

I guess I am saying Holyfield-Tyson pre PEDs if that period ever existed.

I thought I believed it did exist in 1990, you are telling me no?

Absolutely it was around pre-90s, HGH in particular was very rampant in the 80s and Tyson has mentioned some of those drugs in past interviews indicating he knows more than his fans would wish to believe.

It was very obvious he was given and taking it since an early age, he had a very typical growth hormone look in his skull and obviously he was incredibly muscular/ripped while doing no weight lifting and massive amounts of cardio, while recovering on a superhuman fast level. Come on, this one was so obvious.

Lastly, there was no PED testing in boxing pre 90s. Tyson also admitted using a fake p4n1s with clean urine to pass his drug tests. It would be silly and naive to think he was ever clean at any point of his career.

So I gues the main point is Evander Holyfield never had an unfair advantage over Tyson when it came to drugs.

[Willie Pep 229]

Absolutely it was around pre-90s, HGH in particular was very rampant in the 80s and Tyson has mentioned some of those drugs in past interviews indicating he knows more than his fans would wish to believe.

It was very obvious he was given and taking it since an early age, he had a very typical growth hormone look in his skull and obviously he was incredibly muscular/ripped while doing no weight lifting and massive amounts of cardio, while recovering on a superhuman fast level. Come on, this one was so obvious.

Lastly, there was no PED testing in boxing pre 90s. Tyson also admitted using a fake p4n1s with clean urine to pass his drug tests. It would be silly and naive to think he was ever clean at any point of his career.

So I gues the main point is Evander Holyfield never had an unfair advantage over Tyson when it came to drugs.

No he didn't - he just had an unfair advantage over everyone else he fought.

You didn't address when Holyfield started using.

[BKM-]

No he didn't - he just had an unfair advantage over everyone else he fought.

You didn't address when Holyfield started using.

Who is this everyone else?

When Holyfield started? Probably already before the olympics. A lot of athlete kids were/are fed this stuff early on but once they reach the olympics they really start to hone their PED craft. Designer drugs, high tech programs etc.

And I'm fine with it since I believe they're all on it. It's their own choice, and it provides more entertaining fighters/fights. They recover quicker so they can train like mad men for longer etc.

[QueensburyRules]

Who is this everyone else?

When Holyfield started? Probably already before the olympics. A lot of athlete kids were/are fed this stuff early on but once they reach the olympics they really start to hone their PED craft. Designer drugs, high tech programs etc.

And I'm fine with it since I believe they're all on it. It's their own choice, and it provides more entertaining fighters/fights. They recover quicker so they can train like mad men for longer etc.

- - Y U always brag about being on Viagra?

Nobody denies the existence of PEDs, but end of the day, well, Viagra for U but not for me...

[Willie Pep 229]

Who is this everyone else?

When Holyfield started? Probably already before the olympics. A lot of athlete kids were/are fed this stuff early on but once they reach the olympics they really start to hone their PED craft. Designer drugs, high tech programs etc.

And I'm fine with it since I believe they're all on it. It's their own choice, and it provides more entertaining fighters/fights. They recover quicker so they can train like mad men for longer etc.

Not really into to my own argument; look back and you'll see it wasn't meant to be a self standing claim as much as a premise from which to build a PED free fantasy fight off of -- you make good points. The particluiars don't work out because the PEDs seem to always be there.

I don't agree that they should be used as PEDs but I do believe we need a policy overhaul. They are important drugs to help with healing and since an athlete's carreer is short to begin with, they should be used in the recovery process without punishemnt. (So say I.)

Its the same kind of screw-up on how we slipped into so many other poorly written, poorly enforced drug laws in the past. One step (innovation/appearance) at a time.

You know what I mean, Marijuana was a Schedule 1 drug along with Heroin, while ******* stayed a schedule 2 drug, avaiable by medical prescription. Never mind the coming and going of something as damaging as quaaludes.

We need an overhaul on standards and enforcement but not encouraged use. We don't even do that to horses, or so we are not suspose to anyway.

[The D3vil]

I see it the opposite of you.

Holyfield would always give Mike trouble because Holyfield was a straight up warrior, just look at his fights with Bowe, Qawi, Foreman, etc. . .

Remember, Lennox got KO'd by Mike's sparring partner and was prone to getting KTFO

But as a prediction, I'd go with '88 Tyson winning a controversial decision over Holyfield and knocking Lennox out.

[Anthony342]

I see it the opposite of you.

Holyfield would always give Mike trouble because Holyfield was a straight up warrior, just look at his fights with Bowe, Qawi, Foreman, etc. . .

Remember, Lennox got KO'd by Mike's sparring partner and was prone to getting KTFO

But as a prediction, I'd go with '88 Tyson winning a controversial decision over Holyfield and knocking Lennox out.

I can see that in one fight and Holyfield winning a trilogy. Most likely a close UD and late TKO with the TKO being a ****er and decision having some exciting but also tactical rounds. Kind of like the second Holyfield fight with Bowe.

[Slugfester]

My 2¢ worth: "Tyson wilts under pressure," would make a good headline for all his losses. He was a front runner. That is not good enough to overcome Lewis or Holyfield, who will exert great pressure of their own in response to his. Mike would be shocked and start wilting.

If all championship fights were 3 rounds, Tyson pierces the top 5. That does not mean he always wins the first 3 rds of a 12 round fight. All-out for 3 rds, though, who even has much of a chance against him? He has a good chin. Wilting would not be a factor in a 3 rd fight, and stamina is not the worry it would otherwise be.

[shawnkemp804]

The Tyson of 1997 would have beaten Holyfield in the bite fight, had he not snapped. Let alone prime Tyson. The best Holyfield was almost knocked out by Bert Cooper and saw hell against Alex Stewart, which 1990's Tyson ate in less than one round.

Lewis would have been more difficult but - again - if a prime Lewis gets caught cold by McCall, 1986-1988 Tyson does the job as well.

Mike Tyson struggled against James Tillis. Tim Witherspoon knocked out Tillis in 1 round. So that means Witherspoon is better than Tyson by your logic right? Mike Tyson took 10 rounds to take out Jose Ribalta. The 180 pound Ricardo Richardson knocked out Ribalta in 7 rounds. Mike Tyson couldn't knock out James "Bone Crusher" Smith while James Broad knocked out Smith with a body punch.

Buster Douglas got knocked out by various fighters before he fought Tyson while Tyson got knocked out by Buster Douglas.

[Tatabanya]

Mike Tyson struggled against James Tillis. Tim Witherspoon knocked out Tillis in 1 round. So that means Witherspoon is better than Tyson by your logic right? Mike Tyson took 10 rounds to take out Jose Ribalta. The 180 pound Ricardo Richardson knocked out Ribalta in 7 rounds. Mike Tyson couldn't knock out James "Bone Crusher" Smith while James Broad knocked out Smith with a body punch.

Buster Douglas got knocked out by various fighters before he fought Tyson while Tyson got knocked out by Buster Douglas.

With Tyson, you always have to consider a major factor: oftentimes, he didn't seriously train for fights. It is well known that he was sleeping with **********s and didn't train before the Douglas fight. It is equally well known that he won the title in 1986 against Berbick while suffering from a STD. The list might go on and on. Whereas, Holyfield was struggling with someone like Cooper and Stewart even at the peak of his physical condition.

Under Richie Giachetti, Tyson showed the last remnants of what he could have been without jail time, Don King, Robin Givens and his own indiscipline. My idea about the second Holyfield fight has always been the same: it would have been a fantastic fight, that a more disciplined and better trained Tyson could have won (OK - I'll give you the "could" instead of "would" )

As little as I regard the hypothetical matchups, one should always think of the fighters involved at their best, at least in the period under analysis. That's why this is always little more than a funny game. No opinion is to be considered carved in stone.