Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Quote:
Originally Posted by
cambay411
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Frank Bruno got as big as he did due to advances in training and most importantly Healthcare. Back in Tunney's day women still drank & smoked and did God knows what else while with child....so yeah IF IF IF all you like but I don't see anyone with a time machine around here
That's true.
Black people are more athletically gifted than white people ON AVERAGE.
What? Tell me you still don't believe that sht. That sht was used for marketing purposes way back in the day.
Yeah sure there are still a majority of African American pro athletes in football and basketball, but the NBA and NFL union, who basically run the NBA and NFL, are all founded by Africans Americans.
Trust me there is no difference outside of marketing.
Not certain but so far im with the Chinese on it.
Race and sports - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Bean both Holyfeild and Lewis were able to carry one way longer and after there primes. I am just saying Tyson burnt out and could not carry on or better himself when other greats have been able to . The guys you mention were old as dust by the time they were losing badly not a good comparison.
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Bean both Holyfeild and Lewis were able to carry one way longer and after there primes. I am just saying Tyson burnt out and could not carry on or better himself when other greats have been able to . The guys you mention were old as dust by the time they were losing badly not a good comparison.
Tyson was the type of fighter that was going to have a short prime, like Fraiser or Rocky they burn out. At his best he was better than Holyfield and Lewis could ever be.
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Bean both Holyfeild and Lewis were able to carry one way longer and after there primes. I am just saying Tyson burnt out and could not carry on or better himself when other greats have been able to . The guys you mention were old as dust by the time they were losing badly not a good comparison.
Tyson was the type of fighter that was going to have a short prime, like Fraiser or Rocky they burn out. At his best he was better than Holyfield and Lewis could ever be.
Tyson never really took a lot of damage tho. What did him I more than anything was prison time.
He looked like shit after he got out. And honestly imo the best he looked after prison was the second Holyfield fight which of course sadly ended early.
And lets be fair to Tyson, Holyfield was head butting the crap out of him. I remember a lot of people on here praising Floyd for sucker punching Ortiz because Ortiz was head butting him. Cant praise one fighter for not putting up with it and then trash another fighter.
And to say Tyson was afraid to lose and just wanted an exuse is bs. Look at Tyson in Holyfield vs Tyson 1 and look at the shape Tyson is in for Holyfield Tyson 2 and tell me Tyson didn't want that fight bad.
Tyson is just a crazy dumbass who screwed himself over.
Not to mention Holyfield was likely on juice.
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Truthfully Tyson was deteriorating after Rooney left. His life was falling a part with Givens and King taking advantage. Prison may have extended his career.
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Quote:
Originally Posted by
cambay411
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Bean both Holyfeild and Lewis were able to carry one way longer and after there primes. I am just saying Tyson burnt out and could not carry on or better himself when other greats have been able to . The guys you mention were old as dust by the time they were losing badly not a good comparison.
Tyson was the type of fighter that was going to have a short prime, like Fraiser or Rocky they burn out. At his best he was better than Holyfield and Lewis could ever be.
Tyson never really took a lot of damage tho. What did him I more than anything was prison time.
He looked like shit after he got out. And honestly imo the best he looked after prison was the second Holyfield fight which of course sadly ended early.
And lets be fair to Tyson, Holyfield was head butting the crap out of him. I remember a lot of people on here praising Floyd for sucker punching Ortiz because Ortiz was head butting him. Cant praise one fighter for not putting up with it and then trash another fighter.
And to say Tyson was afraid to lose and just wanted an exuse is bs. Look at Tyson in Holyfield vs Tyson 1 and look at the shape Tyson is in for Holyfield Tyson 2 and tell me Tyson didn't want that fight bad.
Tyson is just a crazy dumbass who screwed himself over.
Not to mention Holyfield was likely on juice.
I just cannot see a fighter intentionally crank arms among other things and go out of my way to 'be fair to him'. Tyson had much more to worry about than Holyfields head and he could not cope. Instead of removing a guy from his sences in one of the few sports where its encouraged and he was world renound for it...he choked..he was out fought and he went off the deep end in a desperate hope of getting Holyfield out of his game. I was never one to say he went 'insane' like was often repeated...he knew exactly what he was doing, both times.
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Master in Tyson prime he could not prove he was better then Holyfeild or Lewis because he fought a lot of cans to be honest. I know hes your favorite fighter but in prime he lost to fucking Douglas. Yea he may of under trained but its no excuse he lost to a fighter he was a 40 1 favorite to win. As for the second Holyfeild fight Tyson was losing and looked for a way out he was mental weak fighter. Also for the juice thing been over it did Holyfeild test for it before or after the fight if not well shit he broke no rules. Tyson never fought a caliber of a Holyfeild or Lewis in his so called prime not even close to them in skill. Saying that master how can you say he was way better in prime when he beat jack shit really compared to Holyfeild, Lewis, Ali, and Foreman. I just don't understand the reasoning most other fighters who lost there big fights don't get amped as much not even close to it.
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Master in Tyson prime he could not prove he was better then Holyfeild or Lewis because he fought a lot of cans to be honest. I know hes your favorite fighter but in prime he lost to fucking Douglas. Yea he may of under trained but its no excuse he lost to a fighter he was a 40 1 favorite to win. As for the second Holyfeild fight Tyson was losing and looked for a way out he was mental weak fighter. Also for the juice thing been over it did Holyfeild test for it before or after the fight if not well shit he broke no rules. Tyson never fought a caliber of a Holyfeild or Lewis in his so called prime not even close to them in skill. Saying that master how can you say he was way better in prime when he beat jack shit really compared to Holyfeild, Lewis, Ali, and Foreman. I just don't understand the reasoning most other fighters who lost there big fights don't get amped as much not even close to it.
All big time boxers are fed fighters. Of course some like Holyfield have also taken, fought and conquered the big challenges.
But Tyson had 44 KO's, 23 or more in the first round. You cant just say "well it was against lower caliber fighters". All big time fighters have fought just as many lower caliber fighters and none have over 20 first round KO's.
Tyson was a killer. Albiet a mentally weak killer who was his own worste enemy.
Has for the second Holyfield fight, maybe he did just want a way out. The only one who truly knows is Tyson. But imo, the look in his eyes, combined with the shape he was in, he looked like a Tyson we had yet seen. And it was a shame what he did. That fight wasn't being dominated by Holyfield. He was winning yes but Tyson was also starting to land.
And as far as prison prolonging Tyson's career, it could have if he was smart. But he was not even close to being the same Tyson when he got out. We didn't see anything close to prime Tyson until Holyfield 2. Then after that he went down hill again.
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
I do not want to compare Mike to anyone at this point because it's been done to death but I will mention this as I have pointed out in the past, Mike was a high energy fighter and to delve even further these types need inspiration and once this inspiration is gone so is their skill level so Rooney on the plus side and Robbing Givens on the minus side and neither of them met in the middle.
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
I wish Tyson did fight Holyfield back in 1989 when both had quick wins against Williams and Rodriguez.
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Boxer4life
I noticed there are two sides boxing heads take when it comes to iron mike. We either think hes the greatest most unbeatable heavyweight ever or a completely overrated puncher. Let me make a case for why some of us say the former.
The argument for him being average usually goes something like this
1. He lost most of his meaningful fights
2. Most of his losses were stoppages
While this maybe be true the guys that rate him in the upper echelon are those that know in his prime he would demolish anyone of the guys he lost too, he had speed, he had power, he had defense, and yes, he had a tremendous chin. Sure his losses were mostly stoppages but they were stoppages due to pure exhaustion from lack of training. So on paper he is not THE greatest, purely because the greatest intangible in a great is discipline, and without cus he didn't have it, but sheer skill and tenacity in the ring was something the heavyweights haven't seen up to that point, haven't seen since, and probably will never see again. Mike in his prime, and the potential he had if he kept developing is unrivaled, only heavyweight in history who would give him trouble is Ali, they're strangely tailor made for each other which is why i think it would be the most interesting fight in boxing history , but that's besides the point, thoughts?
Its like this.
Mike Tyson prime is absolutely Brilliant, but there are certain match ups (like Holifield) in which he is inferior.
He rips through lesser fighters with such horrific violence that people mistakenly think he could do that to anyone in his prime. But the truth is once you get a boxer with an iron jaw like Holyfield where Mikes punches just bounce off you are back to who has the most skill who connects more and who has the better work rate, or whos smarter.
Also someone like foreman might be a problem for him too since he is so big strong powerful and has the size and range advantage. (not that tyson couldnt beat him im just saying tyson has his limitations)
People are so blinded by the spectical of his speed and power and his knockouts (and skill) that they get blinded to the reality that he can be beaten by another skillful boxer with an iron jaw or another boxer with as many or more or physical gifts than he has.
Did he go down hill after Cus died and his old trainers got fired? Definately! But was that the sole reason for him not being unstoppable? Definately not!
There you go the answer lays somewhere between the two extremes.
He is probably in his prime one of the best (most effective) boxers of all time a top 10 HW of all time but probably not number 1.
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Bean both Holyfeild and Lewis were able to carry one way longer and after there primes. I am just saying Tyson burnt out and could not carry on or better himself when other greats have been able to . The guys you mention were old as dust by the time they were losing badly not a good comparison.
Tyson was the type of fighter that was going to have a short prime, like Fraiser or Rocky they burn out. At his best he was better than Holyfield and Lewis could ever be.
cocaine and prostitutes had more to do with his burn out than "his style" or the "type of fighter" he was. It was his personality not his fighting that caused him to burn out, but to assume a man that fights aggressive has to live an explosive life is just silly, obviously he did, but that was a personal choice, hes had years of discipline and work ethic, he just chose to mess it up. where im coming from is that if he didn't, these guys couldn't touch him. He went on record himself stating that to maintain that type of style, he couldn't have a life outside the ring(translation: cant party your ass off)
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Quote:
Originally Posted by
OMGWTF
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Boxer4life
I noticed there are two sides boxing heads take when it comes to iron mike. We either think hes the greatest most unbeatable heavyweight ever or a completely overrated puncher. Let me make a case for why some of us say the former.
The argument for him being average usually goes something like this
1. He lost most of his meaningful fights
2. Most of his losses were stoppages
While this maybe be true the guys that rate him in the upper echelon are those that know in his prime he would demolish anyone of the guys he lost too, he had speed, he had power, he had defense, and yes, he had a tremendous chin. Sure his losses were mostly stoppages but they were stoppages due to pure exhaustion from lack of training. So on paper he is not THE greatest, purely because the greatest intangible in a great is discipline, and without cus he didn't have it, but sheer skill and tenacity in the ring was something the heavyweights haven't seen up to that point, haven't seen since, and probably will never see again. Mike in his prime, and the potential he had if he kept developing is unrivaled, only heavyweight in history who would give him trouble is Ali, they're strangely tailor made for each other which is why i think it would be the most interesting fight in boxing history , but that's besides the point, thoughts?
Its like this.
Mike Tyson prime is absolutely Brilliant, but there are certain match ups (like Holifield) in which he is inferior.
He rips through lesser fighters with such horrific violence that people mistakenly think he could do that to anyone in his prime. But the truth is once you get a boxer with an iron jaw like Holyfield where Mikes punches just bounce off you are back to who has the most skill who connects more and who has the better work rate, or whos smarter.
Also someone like foreman might be a problem for him too since he is so big strong powerful and has the size and range advantage. (not that tyson couldnt beat him im just saying tyson has his limitations)
People are so blinded by the spectical of his speed and power and his knockouts (and skill) that they get blinded to the reality that he can be beaten by another skillful boxer with an iron jaw or another boxer with as many or more or physical gifts than he has.
Did he go down hill after Cus died and his old trainers got fired? Definately! But was that the sole reason for him not being unstoppable? Definately not!
There you go the answer lays somewhere between the two extremes.
He is probably in his prime one of the best (most effective) boxers of all time a top 10 HW of all time but probably not number 1.
great post, your mostly spot on except I don't agree that holyfield could beat him, holyfiled is tough but young mike was much faster and much more fluid than the shell holyfield fought
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Boxer4life
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Bean both Holyfeild and Lewis were able to carry one way longer and after there primes. I am just saying Tyson burnt out and could not carry on or better himself when other greats have been able to . The guys you mention were old as dust by the time they were losing badly not a good comparison.
Tyson was the type of fighter that was going to have a short prime, like Fraiser or Rocky they burn out. At his best he was better than Holyfield and Lewis could ever be.
cocaine and prostitutes had more to do with his burn out than "his style" or the "type of fighter" he was. It was his personality not his fighting that caused him to burn out, but to assume a man that fights aggressive has to live an explosive life is just silly, obviously he did, but that was a personal choice, hes had years of discipline and work ethic, he just chose to mess it up. where im coming from is that if he didn't, these guys couldn't touch him. He went on record himself stating that to maintain that type of style, he couldn't have a life outside the ring(translation: cant party your ass off)
I agree Tyson is an ATG and he should have been better. But we will never know whether or not guys like Holyfield or Lewis could touch him if he didn't mess up.
Style wise imo prime Tyson would have matched up good against Lewis and Holyfield when. A prime Tyson with his work output imo could have overwhelmed these guys. Style wise a pressure fighter matches up good against traditional boxing styles.
Re: Lets end the Mike Tyson debate
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Boxer4life
Quote:
Originally Posted by
OMGWTF
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Boxer4life
I noticed there are two sides boxing heads take when it comes to iron mike. We either think hes the greatest most unbeatable heavyweight ever or a completely overrated puncher. Let me make a case for why some of us say the former.
The argument for him being average usually goes something like this
1. He lost most of his meaningful fights
2. Most of his losses were stoppages
While this maybe be true the guys that rate him in the upper echelon are those that know in his prime he would demolish anyone of the guys he lost too, he had speed, he had power, he had defense, and yes, he had a tremendous chin. Sure his losses were mostly stoppages but they were stoppages due to pure exhaustion from lack of training. So on paper he is not THE greatest, purely because the greatest intangible in a great is discipline, and without cus he didn't have it, but sheer skill and tenacity in the ring was something the heavyweights haven't seen up to that point, haven't seen since, and probably will never see again. Mike in his prime, and the potential he had if he kept developing is unrivaled, only heavyweight in history who would give him trouble is Ali, they're strangely tailor made for each other which is why i think it would be the most interesting fight in boxing history , but that's besides the point, thoughts?
Its like this.
Mike Tyson prime is absolutely Brilliant, but there are certain match ups (like Holifield) in which he is inferior.
He rips through lesser fighters with such horrific violence that people mistakenly think he could do that to anyone in his prime. But the truth is once you get a boxer with an iron jaw like Holyfield where Mikes punches just bounce off you are back to who has the most skill who connects more and who has the better work rate, or whos smarter.
Also someone like foreman might be a problem for him too since he is so big strong powerful and has the size and range advantage. (not that tyson couldnt beat him im just saying tyson has his limitations)
People are so blinded by the spectical of his speed and power and his knockouts (and skill) that they get blinded to the reality that he can be beaten by another skillful boxer with an iron jaw or another boxer with as many or more or physical gifts than he has.
Did he go down hill after Cus died and his old trainers got fired? Definately! But was that the sole reason for him not being unstoppable? Definately not!
There you go the answer lays somewhere between the two extremes.
He is probably in his prime one of the best (most effective) boxers of all time a top 10 HW of all time but probably not number 1.
great post, your mostly spot on except I don't agree that holyfield could beat him, holyfiled is tough but young mike was much faster and much more fluid than the shell holyfield fought
And to think it was Holyfield being called a shell and basically a walking corpse going into it. Hindsights a funny thing.
