How Lewis Broke The Mike Tyson Mystique: Part 1

[mr.anthrax]

I can't bring myself to read all of this bull**** article. When Tyson fought Lewis he was way past his prime for the style of fighter that made him something special. Any boxing fan worth his salt knows that ****.

I would like to see Tyson vs Lewis in '88, '92, and '96 and then we would see over the course of three fights how these two really stack up against each other.

As for all the usual blah, blah, blah about Tyson just being a mediocre heavyweight... Did Lewis show greatness in his fight with Frank Bruno? Take a look at Mike's fights with Bruno for contrast if we are going to do the same thing with the fights against Rud****.

Did Lewis show greatness against Oliver McCall? Ray Mercer? The first fight with Rahman? Hell, I could think of several fights that Lewis looked hopelessly ordinary. The pathetic Euro with the mohawk that Lennox danced with for 12 sleep-inducing rounds? Yeah, that was great.

And Lewis always came back to win? Six months later in a rematch is quite different from the actual nights he was sent to the canvas. Isn't it, *******?

No, Mike Tyson was not the greatest. Mike didn't always accomplish all that he should have given with his talents. Okay? But considering all the problems Tyson seems to have had throughout his entire life, maybe we should consider just once how he managed to do all the things he did suceed in doing in the ring?

We all have read plent about everything from chemical imbalances, to messy public divorces, to fights between promoters, to ...damn near everything a person could think of. Does anyone really believe that Mike Tyson did nothing except fool a few scared fighters and (supposedly unintelligent) boxing fans into thinking Mike Tyson had elements of a great heavyweight fighter?

**** off.

[MickyHatton]

So you are a stat person, not a info/story/history person?

You don't learn anything from just looking over stats....you need to know the entire story.

Take Napoleon at Waterloo: why did he lose?

No, I am just saying it wont matter in the long run???

Tyson lost, end of story.

[MickyHatton]

Lewis was 36 years of age and heavyweight champion, and certainly not over the hill or shot.

Tyson on the other hand was shot after his fight with Holyfield, when he returned to fight Botha.

Point is that each fighter is different and when Lewis fought Tyson of 36 at 36 he was a much better and complete fighter at the time, Tyson was way past it. If it had been Tyson from the 90's I doubt the outcome wouldve been the same.

Read the original post line, I did not bring up age only pointed out that Lewis was older.

[MickyHatton]

With that type of thinking, that means Larry Holmes best win was over a 37 year old Ali.

How????

I never mentioned that Tyson was Lewis's best win, read my original post on one of the early pages.

Holyfield for me was a better result.

My point is, and please read this carefully, whether Tyson was past his prime or not the history books will only show a W against Lewis's record.

You can surmise as to the probable outcome ten years earlier but the facts are the facts.

[Neckodeemus]

I can't bring myself to read all of this bull**** article. When Tyson fought Lewis he was way past his prime for the style of fighter that made him something special. Any boxing fan worth his salt knows that ****.

I would like to see Tyson vs Lewis in '88, '92, and '96 and then we would see over the course of three fights how these two really stack up against each other.

As for all the usual blah, blah, blah about Tyson just being a mediocre heavyweight... Did Lewis show greatness in his fight with Frank Bruno? Take a look at Mike's fights with Bruno for contrast if we are going to do the same thing with the fights against Rud****.

Did Lewis show greatness against Oliver McCall? Ray Mercer? The first fight with Rahman? Hell, I could think of several fights that Lewis looked hopelessly ordinary. The pathetic Euro with the mohawk that Lennox danced with for 12 sleep-inducing rounds? Yeah, that was great.

And Lewis always came back to win? Six months later in a rematch is quite different from the actual nights he was sent to the canvas. Isn't it, *******?

No, Mike Tyson was not the greatest. Mike didn't always accomplish all that he should have given with his talents. Okay? But considering all the problems Tyson seems to have had throughout his entire life, maybe we should consider just once how he managed to do all the things he did suceed in doing in the ring?

We all have read plent about everything from chemical imbalances, to messy public divorces, to fights between promoters, to ...damn near everything a person could think of. Does anyone really believe that Mike Tyson did nothing except fool a few scared fighters and (supposedly unintelligent) boxing fans into thinking Mike Tyson had elements of a great heavyweight fighter?

**** off.

Nice idea. You do realise, as many boxing fans from the time do, that Lewis was paid step aside money in the 1990's so Tyson could feast on Holyfield who was considered shot at that time? Evidently Tyson's team feared Lewis and thought Holyfield was easy meat. It was cynical matchmaking desgined to keep the illusion rolling. You coul dahve got your wish to see them fight in the 1990's and I can tell that Lewis would have hammered him even more, plus Tyson would be too small to bite the ear in the rematch so he'd get another beating and it would go 0-2 (0) and **** goes the trilogy.

We know how that panned out.

Lewis did show greatness in coming back from the McCall and Rahman fights. I could easily throw up a bunch of fights in which Tyson looked poor, as long as I give my reasoning.

Tyson never avenged a defeat, never flipped a losing fight (unless you think Ruddock landing a few shots meant Tyson was in dire straights).

Tyosn was never mentally strong enough to beat Lewis, that is the position of the article, with more reading it may have become clearer, and in making excuses based on chemical imbalances and the like you only add to the argument. Lewis got frozen out after his loss and came back. I'm sorry but Tyson should have been made to man up earlier in life. If a fighter loses a bout then says: "I felt depressed in there!" would you really excuse him?

Tyson was mentally weak and physically right for Lewis.

[FUMIN 88]

By Terence Dooley - In his autobiography, Bill Clinton talks about the idea of a person living parallel lives. Bill applies it to himself, in the absence of an available intern, by showing how he could, on the one hand, steer his country through a relatively prosperous time in terms of international relations (the USA was hated then, it is now merely derided) whilst also, with other hand, putting his political career into the mouth of danger by doing very bad (or good) things with Monica Lewinsky in the oval office. [details]

i agree 100% it was a good read ive always said tyson is the most overrated boxer ever

[mr.anthrax]

Yes, I am aware of the scrapped 96 fight. But that was Don King's doing, all because he wanted rights to Lewis in case he should win. That is just one of many things that hurt Tyson's career in the long run.

[The Iron Man]

Pretty poor article, he does **** all over tyson. One thing made me laugh, he said tyson never fought back during a tough fight and then gave examples of when he did, Botha,Tucker and then just threw them out the window because they arnt great fighters? since wen were McCall and Rahman great fighters. I can take peoples opinion its wen they go out their way to completely rip it out of fighters that pisses me off. Also he seemd to miss out what happend when those two sparred!

[Neckodeemus]

Pretty poor article, he does **** all over tyson. One thing made me laugh, he said tyson never fought back during a tough fight and then gave examples of when he did, Botha,Tucker and then just threw them out the window because they arnt great fighters? since wen were McCall and Rahman great fighters. I can take peoples opinion its wen they go out their way to completely rip it out of fighters that pisses me off. Also he seemd to miss out what happend when those two sparred!

I gave Tyson his due with Botha but it did make him look bad that it took him so long to get-off in that fight. Plus Botha was only outboxing him, when a guy really went to town on him Tyson would go into a shell.

He did well after taking a decent right uppercut from Tucker but was again seen to go into a shell.

McCall and Rahman were not great, although McCall is underrated, but when Lewis fought a great fighter in Holyfield he won overall. Instead of saying he lost to fighters who are not great how about beating a great fighter? Plus avenging his losses.

As for the sparring. I think I bring that up in the second part. I hear Tyson ripped into Lewis, Lewis took a battering then tried to get back into it and that made an impression on Mike. Holyfield also was said to have taken a pool cue from Tyson's hands as a youngster and that said a lot to Tyson about Holyfield and his mentality.

[Ryn0]

Good article but it underates Tyson, Lewis was the better fighter but Tyson was not 100% mentally Physically he was fine but Lewis had all the tools and the skills as well as the mental strengths to come back from devastating KO losses. Lewis is better IMO but Tyson isn't average. Lewis would beat any Tyson IMO because of the stylistic advantage he had.