Let's assume Douglas doesn't get up

[Mugwump]

You've ignored every other example I provided of Tyson that proved you wrong and now you're making excuses. I like how you point out Tillis' stature as a fighter at the time yet you forget to mention that Tyson was a teenager who hadn't even had 20 fights yet and never fought a world class fighter yet.

Tillis could have been a world class fighter had he shown sufficient commitment. But even if he had - he was a loooong way shy of such when he faced Tyson. As for Tyson's age - sure he was young. But if ever a fighter matured early, Tyson was he. Lennox Lewis didn't flesh out in a similar fashion until his thirties.

Nobody said Tillis was as good as Evander and Lewis, that's a lame straw man.

So, you agree with me.

The whole point is about how he showed mental strength which I have proven with countless examples of him pre-prison, and he never showed that again post-prison except one other time against Frans Botha where he was losing on the scorecards and still got the knockout win.

Somehow this is supposed to be a complete coincidence to you. That he showed mental strength pre-prison about 6 times(Tillis, Tucker, Bruno, Douglass, Ruddock 2x) and yet post prison 0 times(Unless you count Botha where he also tried to break his arm out of frustration).

You're the guy weaving straw men - not me. I never said Tyson couldn't take a punch. I never said he was a coward. I never said he couldn't handle pressure. I did say he was mentally fragile and terrified of being bullied.

Fighters who bullied him caused a big fat "DOES NOT COMPUTE" error to flash up in his mind and his form immediately began to slip.

There's a moment in the Douglas fight when Douglas realises he's actually getting to Tyson. His confidence skyrockets and Mike's form starts to collapse. Yes, he caught Douglas, putting him down. But by that time he was throwing air-conditioners in pure desperation.

The other fighters you listed never got close to asserting the same kind of dominance that Douglas did. Ruddock got close, but he lacked the thudding and accurate trip-hammer jab which set about pulverising Mike's face early on.

Bruno? Puhleeze! Tucker made the same mistake Bonecrusher did - his perception of Tyson the Monster forced him to adopt a ridiculously cautious strategy. Had either seen Tyson's defeat at the hands of Douglas beforehand I'm certain neither would have repeated the error.

And Tyson's words can be contrued in several ways. You should read what Cus said about fighters with fear btw. Fear does not always mean weak mental strength, some even use it to their advantage.

I know the armchair psychology is fun and it conforms to the popular myths of the sport but I never bought it and neither should you.

I don't need a psychologist to interpret the words of an acutely expressive and loquacious man who is not just as perceptive a student of the sport as any but of himself.

I mean, maybe Tyson was being ironic or sarcastic when he said, "I'm terrified of being bullied", but my guess is not.

Call it "armchair psychology". Call it what you like. I'm satisfied with it.

[them_apples]

Tillis could have been a world class fighter had he shown sufficient commitment. But even if he had - he was a loooong way shy of such when he faced Tyson. As for Tyson's age - sure he was young. But if ever a fighter matured early, Tyson was he. Lennox Lewis didn't flesh out in a similar fashion until his thirties.



So, you agree with me.



You're the guy weaving straw men - not me. I never said Tyson couldn't take a punch. I never said he was a coward. I never said he couldn't handle pressure. I did say he was mentally fragile and terrified of being bullied.

Fighters who bullied him caused a big fat "DOES NOT COMPUTE" error to flash up in his mind and his form immediately began to slip.

There's a moment in the Douglas fight when Douglas realises he's actually getting to Tyson. His confidence skyrockets and Mike's form starts to collapse. Yes, he caught Douglas, putting him down. But by that time he was throwing air-conditioners in pure desperation.

The other fighters you listed never got close to asserting the same kind of dominance that Douglas did. Ruddock got close, but he lacked the thudding and accurate trip-hammer jab which set about pulverising Mike's face early on.

Bruno? Puhleeze! Tucker made the same mistake Bonecrusher did - his perception of Tyson the Monster forced him to adopt a ridiculously cautious strategy. Had either seen Tyson's defeat at the hands of Douglas beforehand I'm certain neither would have repeated the error.



I don't need a psychologist to interpret the words of an acutely expressive and loquacious man who is not just as perceptive a student of the sport as any but of himself.

I mean, maybe Tyson was being ironic or sarcastic when he said, "I'm terrified of being bullied", but my guess is not.

Call it "armchair psychology". Call it what you like. I'm satisfied with it.

I think you are half way there, you make good points about Tyson but you are exaggerating them a little to much.

[juggernaut666]

Tyson wouldn't have had to work as hard trying to knocking Holyfield out as he did with Douglas,he would have been fighting a guy nearly 25 pounds lighter ,shorter and whos going to walk right to him .The year 1991still favored Tyson ,i also believe Ruddock presented a bigger threat at that time than any HW including Bowe,who also presented more problems than Holyfield would have ,i think everyone gets caught up in popularity here and is not really looking at the circumstances of the time period .I think he goes undefeatted k.oing Bowe ,Morrison,Lewis,after Holyfield and Ruddock somewhere in between,possibly even mugging Foreman somewhere around 93 ,he retires around 95 as he starts losing motivation .He would have went down as the the best fighter of 2 different decades and cemented imop been the greatest HW of all time even without Rooney since he i think he would have been more than skilled enough staying busy and focused enough to not lose.Also i believe an in shape Douglas who brings skills and winning attitude would beat a 205 /210 pound early 90's Holyfield ,Tyson at his lowest level almost beating Douglas shows how good ,not bad he was . The whole Tyson agenda of mentally weak and not being able to fire back when tested is greatly exaggerated .Tyson at only 80 % and in shape could have beat anyone in history other than Lewis or Klitchkos,who i think he needs to be at near 90 /100 % of his ability to get the win.However the talented giants werent around and Lewis was relatively green and without Steward ,Tysons chances remaining undefeatted are a safe bet.

[califo]

Tyson was on the path to self destruct. If it wasn't Douglas it would have been someone else, but not Dokes.

[jiopsi]

If he wins the scare and learns from it, the unanimous best ever I've no doubts about it.

The first 20 minutes in the Bruno I HBO pre-fight show is pretty good sum up what was going with Mike Tyson back then. Absolutely incredible amount of drama outside the fights going on, which you can't possibly handle such young age.

[billeau2]

Tyson wouldn't have had to work as hard trying to knocking Holyfield out as he did with Douglas,he would have been fighting a guy nearly 25 pounds lighter ,shorter and whos going to walk right to him .The year 1991still favored Tyson ,i also believe Ruddock presented a bigger threat at that time than any HW including Bowe,who also presented more problems than Holyfield would have ,i think everyone gets caught up in popularity here and is not really looking at the circumstances of the time period .I think he goes undefeatted k.oing Bowe ,Morrison,Lewis,after Holyfield and Ruddock somewhere in between,possibly even mugging Foreman somewhere around 93 ,he retires around 95 as he starts losing motivation .He would have went down as the the best fighter of 2 different decades and cemented imop been the greatest HW of all time even without Rooney since he i think he would have been more than skilled enough staying busy and focused enough to not lose.Also i believe an in shape Douglas who brings skills and winning attitude would beat a 205 /210 pound early 90's Holyfield ,Tyson at his lowest level almost beating Douglas shows how good ,not bad he was . The whole Tyson agenda of mentally weak and not being able to fire back when tested is greatly exaggerated .Tyson at only 80 % and in shape could have beat anyone in history other than Lewis or Klitchkos,who i think he needs to be at near 90 /100 % of his ability to get the win.However the talented giants werent around and Lewis was relatively green and without Steward ,Tysons chances remaining undefeatted are a safe bet.

Yu make a good point regarding Ruddock. It has become customery these days to give Razor short shift..the reasoning usually goes something like him being slow, a one armed fighter....The truth is that RR was also relentless. He found a way to get inside where two hands are not as important and he had a decent hook and very good power inside.

I would say that Rudock could have been construed as being a greater threat in some respects than Hollyfield. I say this because Hollyfield used technique to get Tyson on his heals, where as Rudock just fought that way and used a constant attack to get his man moving back.

If one understands that in Tyson's toolbox was a very compitant CPU that could usually make some adaptations when on the fly, then one could assume that with a compitant scenerio Tyson might have been able to figure out why he was getting thrown back by Holfield...also Mike with a decent corner does not go to pieces emotionally.

[juggernaut666]

Yu make a good point regarding Ruddock. It has become customery these days to give Razor short shift..the reasoning usually goes something like him being slow, a one armed fighter....The truth is that RR was also relentless. He found a way to get inside where two hands are not as important and he had a decent hook and very good power inside.

I would say that Rudock could have been construed as being a greater threat in some respects than Hollyfield. I say this because Hollyfield used technique to get Tyson on his heals, where as Rudock just fought that way and used a constant attack to get his man moving back.

If one understands that in Tyson's toolbox was a very compitant CPU that could usually make some adaptations when on the fly, then one could assume that with a compitant scenerio Tyson might have been able to figure out why he was getting thrown back by Holfield...also Mike with a decent corner does not go to pieces emotionally.

Ruddock was anything but slow despite loading up at times his shots were like fast balls coming at you and had a vicious right upper cut as well.Holyfield would not have thrown Tyson around in the early 90's for two reasons ,Tyson had the speed accurate shots then and Holyfield didnt have the size.

[mannypacqloud]

myke tython ith overathad

[Sugarj]

Going back to the title of the thread; hell, if Douglas didn't beat the count Tyson would have been awarded one of the best come from behind victories of all time.

Too many people (rightly or wrongly) have the view that Tyson never won a war of attrition or had a great come from behind victory. He nearly got it in round 8 of the Douglas fight......though the right and most deserved man definitely won, slow count or not!

[billeau2]

Going back to the title of the thread; hell, if Douglas didn't beat the count Tyson would have been awarded one of the best come from behind victories of all time.

Too many people (rightly or wrongly) have the view that Tyson never won a war of attrition or had a great come from behind victory. He nearly got it in round 8 of the Douglas fight......though the right and most deserved man definitely won, slow count or not!

That would have been quite a downer for me....That night stands supreme....I decided to blow off studying (grad school) just on a lark, and what a lark that was! Figured I would grab a beer on the Haight... Wow! Wouldn't have been the same if Tyson had won on that shot.