was a prime mike tyson predictable

[Shazam!]

He was much better early on. In 88 when he decided to go with a black power nobody, he turned into a ****ty fighter. He wasn't very good and it's a wonder he didn't lose before the Douglas fight.

Tyson looked so bad in the Frank Bruno fight I thought at several points throughout that fight that he was going to get KO'd. The post prison version was even worse, but still good enough to beat most HW's of the time.

You're obviously a big Tyson fan. As am I. But I would argue that his downward spiral post-88 was as much down to better opposition as it was to his trainer, personal life etc.

Tyson was sensational as a youngster but he also had a pretty decent run to the heavyweight title. Most of the top fighters he faced in his career came after he had won the title. I'm thinking Tucker, Ruddock and yes, Douglas who, while by no means a HOF fighter, fought one of the greatest fights in HW history that night.

It doesn't matter who you are, eventually you're gonna come up against some kryptonite and it's up to the true greats to adapt their game to meet these new demands and rise above the challenge. As destructive as he could be, Tyson just didn't have a plan B.

[Snopkins]

I think that harold lederman called him as predictable as a hurricane.

It was Larry Merchant who said that.He made a comment something along the lines of "Some said that Tyson at his best was predictable. So is a hurricane. What can you do about it?"

[bklynboy]

It was Larry Merchant who said that.He made a comment something along the lines of "Some said that Tyson at his best was predictable. So is a hurricane. What can you do about it?"

That quote sounds about right.

[CarlosG815]

You're obviously a big Tyson fan. As am I. But I would argue that his downward spiral post-88 was as much down to better opposition as it was to his trainer, personal life etc.

Tyson was sensational as a youngster but he also had a pretty decent run to the heavyweight title. Most of the top fighters he faced in his career came after he had won the title. I'm thinking Tucker, Ruddock and yes, Douglas who, while by no means a HOF fighter, fought one of the greatest fights in HW history that night.

It doesn't matter who you are, eventually you're gonna come up against some kryptonite and it's up to the true greats to adapt their game to meet these new demands and rise above the challenge. As destructive as he could be, Tyson just didn't have a plan B.

I agree with most of what you said, but I don't feel like Holyfield was on Prime Tyson's level. I just don't see Holyfield lasting when Tyson was at his best.

Buster Douglas, when he wanted to be, was a lot better than he got credit for. He had a lot of talent and having watched the fight just yesterday on ESPN classic, he could have beat anybody that night. He was durable, fast, and his shots were pinpoint accurate and he was throwing hard even in the latest rounds.

Mix that with the fact that Tyson was a 1 dimensional "go for the KO in one hit" fighter that night, it was a recipe for destruction for Tyson.

I don't agree that it was better opposition so much as the personal life and trainer. Tyson got dropped by his sparring partner before the Douglas fight and was ****ing 4 jap girls at a time in Tokyo before the fight.

He was in no condition to go 12 rounds and in his mind (probably the mindset his "crew" put him in) he wouldn't need to prepare for more than 8 rounds.

[*RAZOR RUIZ*]

it was predictable he was going to win by KO

hahah so true.

[razzledaz 38]

Yes, but predicting what he would do and being able to nullify it were two different things.

Poet

exactly! larry merchant once said about tyson being predictable *so is a hurricane but there,s nothing you can do about it*

[sonnyboyx2]

dundee said he was

was he??

predictable in that he was always ****in exciting and would try to hammer his opponent into the ground

[sonnyboyx2]

You're obviously a big Tyson fan. As am I. But I would argue that his downward spiral post-88 was as much down to better opposition as it was to his trainer, personal life etc.

Tyson was sensational as a youngster but he also had a pretty decent run to the heavyweight title. Most of the top fighters he faced in his career came after he had won the title. I'm thinking Tucker, Ruddock and yes, Douglas who, while by no means a HOF fighter, fought one of the greatest fights in HW history that night.

It doesn't matter who you are, eventually you're gonna come up against some kryptonite and it's up to the true greats to adapt their game to meet these new demands and rise above the challenge. As destructive as he could be, Tyson just didn't have a plan B.

i agree with what you are saying, but Buster Douglas is vastly underestimated, if you watch Douglas vs Berbick, Douglas vs McCall, Douglas vs Page & Douglas vs Ferguson you will see that it is the same Douglas that fought Tyson.. Styles ,make fights and Tyson had the perfect Style for Douglas to show his skills... i dont think Tyson peaked in the late 80s IMO he was just not training correctly 89-90 so got beat, IMO Tyson vs Holyfield (1) was Mike Tyson at his very very best, it was one of the Top 5 greatest Heavyweight fights in History.. The beating Tyson took in that fight `finished him` as a top flight fighter.

[fight_professor]

Yes, but predicting what he would do and being able to nullify it were two different things.

Poet

Exactly. He had a method, but no one could undo it until Douglas.

[Sugarj]

Hi Sonnyboyx, I'm suprised you think that Tyson was at his very best in 1996against Holyfield (1). He looked good in spurts over the first five rounds, but the combinations and head movement weren't quite what they were.

It was a good fight, one I've watched many times but Holyfield's incessant clinching early on didn't half make for stop/start action, I guess it is what he needed to do though. Poor Mitch Halpern had his hands full that night.