Intimidation. Sonny Liston.

[BKM-]

You do make interesting points, but I'm sure you're basing your hate for Tyson upon religious grounds more than anything else.

Granted, Tyson had his flaws as both fighter and man, but every human being on the earth is flawed, including your "man of God" (who, speaking of dignity, lent himself to the Benny Hinn "touch-and-fall" healing farce, which was pitiful to watch independently from one's belief).

Simply put, Holyfield was mentally stronger than Tyson in both their fights. All the rest is merely personal belief, which counts as nothing in the overall picture. Most people, for example, keep talking about Tyson "looking for a way out" through the bite. But if you watch the third round with objectiveness, it was a hard-fought round, where Tyson hit Holyfield with great shots, to which Evander replied with other shots, plus lots of grappling to suffocate Tyson's attacks. So, that was a raging outburst, not a "way out" for me; he could have won that fight had he not snapped. Opinions, as I said.

Ultimately, if you believe that getting beaten up until you're in your half-age while in constant denial of your deterioration is better than using your extra-boxing skills to get a second chance at fame and money, then I don't know what to say.

My issue with Tyson and his fans stems from their inability to accept responsibility for misdeeds, making excuses for them, blaming others for his problems and his dumbass fans who glorify his past digusting behavior. So it's not so much about the things he did in his life but the way he goes about it.

That Tyson-disease in boxing extents much further than just Tyson topics. Case in point Evander Holyfield, can you even find a thread about Holyfield without it being polluted by Tyson fanboys taking digs at Evander about PED's, dirty tactics(ironically Tyson himself was extremely involved in PED's and dirty tactics)? Because they're so bitter about Evander spanking him twice. I mean this ridiculous thing that you're doing, trying to highlight Evander's flaws to lessen Tyson's, you seem like a normal enough individual so can you even remotely compare their flaws? Of course not. Holyfield really is an angel(no pun intended) in comparison.

So I don't want to keep ranting about it but you can understand where I'm coming from in these Holyfield-Tyson debates.

About their fights, the third round of the rematch was poignant as Tyson was having his best round and Holyfield still stood strong and was still hitting him back. So yeah the biting was definitely his way out. If a bully is being smacked around for ages, and he finally gets his own shots in and finds out it's still not enough? That will be his breaking point.

No version of Tyson ever beats any version of Evander. I used to think differently.

[BKM-]

The reason Mike got caught that way is because he never had to set up his punches. The style he learned, under Dempsey, does not have a method for going back...vis a vis it is not based on general movements, so much as getting the angle and attacking. Even defensively, One use the head and shoulders to move off the fighting line while coming directly in off the same line.

It makes one question Cus as a trainer to be honest with you, billeau. Such a glaring weakness in a style but he had no answer for it. He tried to keep Patterson away from Liston for as long as he could and he famously told Tyson he would never be able to defeat George Foreman.

Is it acceptable for a trainer to train his fighters a certain way and when they're faced with a style they can't overcome, he just shrugs his shoulders and pulls a Mickey Goldmill in Rocky 3? LOL.

There was no answer to being pushed back, it was assumed in the Dempsey/Tyson playbook that nobody would come in and push on you. There are of course ways to overcome this, I mean every style has a weakness and weaknesses can be dealt with, part of that might be to grapple back, or sprawl, etc. Liston fought stepping, and not shuffling in with small movements off a line. Liston would step back to make space to use a jab, or some such thing if a fighter tried to push him back off the heals.

I don't want to argue HOW Evander would do in a match, because its a whole other post, but I want to respond to your notions of his character: You are correct that his confidence is outstanding. I believe that this is from his personality but, as you say, his faith is a big factor. There is one more thing about Holly: he is a man who has chosen at times to be very coachable. When he has done so he has succeded. This includes the Tyson fights and the fight with Bowe that he won.

This coachability makes him a very special fighter. Kind of like Tunney who could discipline himself to fight a certain way to win. Evander has that ability when he chose to use it.

Points well taken. And just to be an even bigger Evander fanboy, I'd like to add that one must be very humble to be so coachable, well into his prime and success. I agree he was a very special fighter. He's underrated today.

[Tatabanya]

My issue with Tyson and his fans stems from their inability to accept responsibility for misdeeds, making excuses for them, blaming others for his problems and his dumbass fans who glorify his past digusting behavior. So it's not so much about the things he did in his life but the way he goes about it.

That Tyson-disease in boxing extents much further than just Tyson topics. Case in point Evander Holyfield, can you even find a thread about Holyfield without it being polluted by Tyson fanboys taking digs at Evander about PED's, dirty tactics(ironically Tyson himself was extremely involved in PED's and dirty tactics)? Because they're so bitter about Evander spanking him twice. I mean this ridiculous thing that you're doing, trying to highlight Evander's flaws to lessen Tyson's, you seem like a normal enough individual so can you even remotely compare their flaws? Of course not. Holyfield really is an angel(no pun intended) in comparison.

So I don't want to keep ranting about it but you can understand where I'm coming from in these Holyfield-Tyson debates.

About their fights, the third round of the rematch was poignant as Tyson was having his best round and Holyfield still stood strong and was still hitting him back. So yeah the biting was definitely his way out. If a bully is being smacked around for ages, and he finally gets his own shots in and finds out it's still not enough? That will be his breaking point.

No version of Tyson ever beats any version of Evander. I used to think differently.

In fairness, I added a few final lines to my previous post while you were writing, you may want to check them out. Anyhow, I'll end this discussion by telling you this.

I am 56, therefore not a kid defending his idol and his defects. I was a genuine Tyson fan when he erupted on the scene, but with the age have become a more neutral observer. I rate Holyfield highly, too, and don't want to use his defects to lessen Tyson's. It just doesn't matter to me, but I love objectivity. You still sound like a Holyfield fanboy (your self-definition in a subsequent post), and seem to write your views accordingly, especially in view of the religion/moral issue, which (in my opinion) blinds you a little bit, and makes you consider Tyson a piece of shìt whatever his accomplishments. But the world is not made by perfect people everywhere, Tyson is not the only star who had issues in the past. At least he admitted them, how many people act fake while they're still dirty? Just think of Oscar De La Hoya. Things are not always as they seem, perhaps Holyfield, too, has some skeleton in his closet but was smarter than Tyson in that regard.

I don't buy into some myths of the Tyson vs Holyfield rivalry, and after having watched those fights time and again I have grown all the more convinced of my stance about them. Overall, I think that Holyfield fought a great fight in the first meeting (I remember telling my girlfriend "Holyfield was great tonight" as I was hurting to see Mike beaten) and that the rematch would have been an even better one had Tyson not snapped. Basically, I was more angry at Tyson not managing to keep his cool than Holyfield's headbutts, if you get my point. I also happen to think that the 1986-1988 version of Tyson would have defeated both Holyfield and Lennox Lewis, but this is obviously yet another debatable opinion.

[QueensburyRules]

My issue with Tyson and his fans stems from their inability to accept responsibility for misdeeds, making excuses for them, blaming others for his problems and his dumbass fans who glorify his past digusting behavior. So it's not so much about the things he did in his life but the way he goes about it.

That Tyson-disease in boxing extents much further than just Tyson topics. Case in point Evander Holyfield, can you even find a thread about Holyfield without it being polluted by Tyson fanboys taking digs at Evander about PED's, dirty tactics(ironically Tyson himself was extremely involved in PED's and dirty tactics)? Because they're so bitter about Evander spanking him twice. I mean this ridiculous thing that you're doing, trying to highlight Evander's flaws to lessen Tyson's, you seem like a normal enough individual so can you even remotely compare their flaws? Of course not. Holyfield really is an angel(no pun intended) in comparison.

So I don't want to keep ranting about it but you can understand where I'm coming from in these Holyfield-Tyson debates.

About their fights, the third round of the rematch was poignant as Tyson was having his best round and Holyfield still stood strong and was still hitting him back. So yeah the biting was definitely his way out. If a bully is being smacked around for ages, and he finally gets his own shots in and finds out it's still not enough? That will be his breaking point.

No version of Tyson ever beats any version of Evander. I used to think differently.

- -U drink differently now is it?

The worst version of Tyson fought the better worst of Field and butted to 2 wins.

The best version of Tyson was with his HOF team as a record setter while U Mr Field being hospitalized on deaths door by a tubby Qawi.

[Ben Bolt]

Even Ali looked scared when he faced Liston. I wonder who of modern era HW champs could resist his fear when standing in front of Sonny.

And why Ali (Clay) had played the role of a lunatic at the weigh-in. He and his camp described the strategy in Ali's 1975 biography.

Liston scared opponents by his mean stare. So what could scare Liston? A crazy man.

[BKM-]

- -U drink differently now is it?

The worst version of Tyson fought the better worst of Field and butted to 2 wins.

The best version of Tyson was with his HOF team as a record setter while U Mr Field being hospitalized on deaths door by a tubby Qawi.

That tubby Qawi was pretty badass, man.

[ShoulderRoll]

There was no answer to being pushed back, it was assumed in the Dempsey/Tyson playbook that nobody would come in and push on you.

Cus D'Amato had answers to getting pushed back.

Kevin Rooney shows a brief snippet of some of that methodology here, up to the 8:08 minute mark:

[billeau2]

So Cleveland Williams can do it, and some journeymen can brake his jaw/stop him. Butb the bigger and better Holyfield cannot back him up?

Who else can't Holyfield back up? Ray Robinson had some fast feet... and i'm pretty sure you'll tell me he was MUCH BIGGER than Holyfield.

My first thought was that you had not read the post. I actually wrote a good bit from that premise...I guess I am prone to denial... I cannot imagine you are that daft... Your not really that ****** and I cannot see how you could post this nonsense otherwise unless you just didn't read what I wrote.

Do I really have to explain this to you? First off when Liston was beat he was not backed up on his his heels. Not anything to do with how good, or bad, Liston was RIGHT? "different discussion." Backing someone up is not really what this is about, its about weight placement, triangulation, timing... a coach telling you where to be, when. Its also not really about size, you should know that from wrestling: If you can sprawl me you can stop me from taking your legs right? If I manage to get into that space before you can sprawl...its a different story yes?

Its physics. Liston moved around, he was taught to stutter step punch, and punch on the half step occasionally. He could do this going backwards as well. You could not bully in and push him back on his heels to stop his attack, you could do other things.

[billeau2]

It makes one question Cus as a trainer to be honest with you, billeau. Such a glaring weakness in a style but he had no answer for it. He tried to keep Patterson away from Liston for as long as he could and he famously told Tyson he would never be able to defeat George Foreman.

Is it acceptable for a trainer to train his fighters a certain way and when they're faced with a style they can't overcome, he just shrugs his shoulders and pulls a Mickey Goldmill in Rocky 3? LOL.



Points well taken. And just to be an even bigger Evander fanboy, I'd like to add that one must be very humble to be so coachable, well into his prime and success. I agree he was a very special fighter. He's underrated today.

Yeah... Its one of those damn things lol. Or as the young say these days (one of the few aphorisms I like from them) "it is what it is." Mike and Jack had compactness, density and it is counter intuitive to push up against that. If a guy has reach he picks you off outside. If hes smaller and really really a talent at it he might try to counter you... For example, what would James Toney be able to do against Mike? could he catch mike in a counter? cause he isn't going to win that fight with a jab... I think we saw a lot with Spinks that way as well...

So if you are Tyson, or Dempsey...even FRazier (though Joe was a little different style/more like Marciano) you use a lot of head movement, feints and explosive movements to get close and to do so you simply have to move the fighting line forwards.

That moving the line forwards is HUGE! It is why an older Holmes would never beat Tyson... When Tyson can keep moving forwards he will find you. Your jab has to be able to stop him dead in his tracks, like Buster's did. Tunney was able to fight Dempsey under similar circumstances, using counters, and stopping Jack's momentum forwards.

My point is that while the style has a weakness, it has a way to overcome this weakness. You keep your opponent moving back. Holy was strong enough to move in the opposite direction and literally slam into Mike to make him have to punch off his heels.

Holly fought a lot of the best comp. A hell of a lot better than the Klitchko Bros. At his best he had a nice balance of power and boxing skills. He had the power of a puncher almost of an elite puncher, and the boxing skills to press and cause problems for aa lot of fighters.

[PRINCEKOOL]

There has literally never been a boxer in history more famous for staredowns than Bite Tython.



He explained it in his 09 bio flick. Sometimes he wouldn't look them in eyes the untill the end before they walk back to their corners. Or he'd just stare them down from the start.

It was all calculated on his part. Against Evander he looked very shook, he couldn't look Evander in the eyes, his eyebrows were going higher up on his face. Deer in headlights. But Evander was ice cold.


This is a mess of nonsense, really. I don't even know where to begin to dismantle what you just said, every single word and letter is wrong.

Are you seriously trying to compare the mental toughness of Holyfield(one of the toughest minds ever in boxing) and Tyson(one of the weakest minds ever in boxing) ?

None of these fighters are scared of each other, none of the top guys anyway 'Tyson was not intimidated by Holyfield' Infact? Throughout his entire career even in the later stages, Tyson kept his aura of intimidation to a certain extent.

It is a myth that Tyson had a sub-par mentality.

The myth exists and was created to make certain people feel better about themselves, or sleep better at night.

Mike Tyson in all of his fights 'When he was met with resistance always fought back furiously'. And that statement is fact for every single version of Mike Tyson, whether that was late 80's, early 90's and even post prison Mike Tyson etc

All boxers in some ways are all bullish to a certain extent, the very nature of sport requires you to be this way. Razor Ruddock was not overly intimidated by Mike Tyson 'Did Mike Tyson disappear? NO, he proceeded to break his Jaw, Ribs, and smash his orbital bone'.

Even in all of Mike Tyson's loses, he displayed that his innate instincts as a fighter/man where to always fight back furiously 'I don't even think boxing taught him this, because it was who he was inside'. NOW I will point out that Tyson did become frustrated inside of the ring, but he sure as anything did not fold.

The scenes of Mike Tyson on the canvas feeling around for his gum shield then putting it back in against Buster Douglas, to then rise to his feet 'Those are not the behaviors of a man who just disappears when met with resistance'.

When Danny Williams detonated a 20+ punch combination upon a injured Mike Tyson, at the end of the exchange? Mike Tyson loaded up one more right hand, before being hammered to the canvas ''Those are not the behaviors of a man who just disappears when met with resistance'.

Not at any point in his fight against Lennox Lewis did I see Mike Tyson, visibly give up 'In a fight he must of known he was in deep waters' Courage has been described as 'Discovering that you may not win, BUT still trying when you know you can lose' Mike Tyson early on in that fight knew that maybe he could not win, even still he did not disappear at the first signs of resistance 'Because that was not who he was as a fighter'

The Notion that Mike Tyson just folded or disappeared when met with resistance WAS and IS a fairy-tale 'It is science fiction, It is not real'.