Printable View
Until he was knocked out in the 5th.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
I agree that Tyson vs Lewis is no fair comparison, because Tyson by that point was a ghost of his original form.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
But Tyson did have occasional trouble getting off on big tall guys when they tied him up on the inside right away. Even bums like Mike Jameson had success in stifling Tyson's offense by tying him up and leaning on him.
True, but Mike Jameson ain't no Klitschko, either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vendettos
...and a prime Iron Mike Tyson circa 1986 to 1988 is no Lamon Brewster, Corrie Sanders, nor a Ross Purrity...
I agree with a lot of things people pointed out here. I would like to make a few points . Many people are neglecting changes that are made over time because we tend to talk about past fighters in the their prime as frozen moments when a fighter was at his best. Something like patterson getting flattened because of the peekaboo style against someone like liston... There's almost 25 years between that fight and Tyson starting to climb the ladder. Besides the differences that exist between body types, muscle mass and ring IQ of the fighters... please allow for some tweaking to the system/ style. Another issue, is D'amato's death in relation to the effect it had on tyson. Presence (current tense) and influence (no presence required) are two different things. Whoever said Cus babied Tyson wasn't lying. He had a free pass outside of the ring but Cus demanded perfection in training. After his death, Rooney, Jacobs and several others had positive influence on tyson and the was instrumental to his success in that it kept his confidence high and kept him believing in himself. Ripping through guys in 2-3 rounds does alot for your confidence but it also makes you complacent. Tyson needed to have the right counterbalance for doubt in his corner after an opponent weathered the early storm. It could be seen in some of the fights that went the distance where tyson kept chopping away till a big tree fell or wilted. The disparity of opinions on tyson also come from the range of difference from Tyson being at his best (where the detractors were waiting for an expose that didnt come till 5 years/25-30 fights later?) and fans that believe he was god like but stopped watching as soon as he lost his 38th fight. Looking at that line were things started to turn, its hardly a blip on the screen. The supporting cast of Jacobs, Rooney, Cayton and others was replace by King, Givens and her mother, and other hangers on. Change of employers/management, marriage, divorce, drugs, money problems are all things that could hamper anyone, but raise the stakes and gamble ones fame, ranking and fortune (not to mention health if you're not focused) and you can see where the clu$terfuck of identity crisis, prison terms, slacking off in training, car crash/ purported suicide attempt came from. These are not excuses but just a mention that it doesn't take a hell of a lot for someone to lose it all. The question that begs to be asked is was this a fighter who was coming to point where his talent/edge was tapering off, and it just coincided with these personal issues and he got beat and then stayed too long..... or was he a dominant force that started to lose focus because of these issues but was able to continue on with residual skill and power.. win some, lose some but never regain the will, the focus or control he had when was maintained by better people? Self destructive is self destructive, no matter what kind of wrapper you put on it. I think he was a force that if maintained better would have lasted longer burned brighter though still burned out. While he was here, there was no denying his success. It wasn't just the knockouts, it was the way he knocked them out. Coincidentally, I came across Mike on the street in the south bronx a few weeks ago when he was doing his show in NY. He seems to be in a better place... I guess we all have a path to walk...
Life happens to people....decisions you do or don't make have an affect on you. Mental issues, being bipolar, and coming from a broken home don't usually put you on a path to glory. Champions brush that off or rebound. I am glad Mike is in a better place now.
The training for the peek-a-boo style may have changed but the style has not. Tyson was the most dynamic at that style and his body was the best suited for it and he did as much as could be done with that style. Some of the guys that used that style.....it was just outrageously silly Buster Mathis was 6'3 and 300 pounds at times, he used that style. The technique of fighting against a guy in a crouch has never and will never change.
I do wonder if other fighters could have adopted the peek-a-boo style and done better than they did with their original styles, but they'd still be at the mercy of anyone with a good jab and long reach or a bigger bully. Shane Mosley comes to mind as someone who could have done well with that style, he reminded me of a mini-Tyson....but look who beat him Forrest & Wright...guys would were built to take on that style. Joe Frazier might have been better suited to the Peek-a-boo style, but then again he didn't really develop a right cross until the third time he fought Ali so who knows. But Tyson was without a doubt the best peek-a-boo style fighter ever....that said he'd still pretty much always lose to Holyfield & Lewis
We're talking prime for prime. The Wlad of the last 6 years or so is a much better fighter than the Wlad who got steamrolled by those guys, much like the Tyson who got destroyed by Evander and Lewis wasn't the same as the guy from 88.Quote:
Originally Posted by bradlee180
I don't think the "Lets end the Mike Tyson debate" thread is going to end the Mike Tyson debate...;)
As a J.O. (junior olympic) and Open class amatuer up to the time he fought Evander Mike was the best "most entertaining" fighter in the world!! With Cus as his mentor and Teddy as the trainer and Jimmy as their advisor and Cayton handling the money Mike had a solid team with everyones assignments clearly understand and a great plan in order. They had the halls and the matchmakers they need to to develop the record and build the fan base, and they did!
Evander simply stated was Mikes Cryptonite! Evander won't back up and had enought skills and power to detear Mikes onslaught!!!
Its very true that without his team in place Mike became fragile, its not an excuse its the facts!!
I do believe the Evander show down would have been different and Mike could have been under control of himself and asctually would have boxed Evander to a decision win but Cus & Jimmy were gone. Teddy was replaced and Kevin was in and Mike got rid of Cayton for King!!! Thats the History!
Ray.
Tyson was a very good inside fighter.sure he got held once in there at times but he did cause a lot of damage. He would have ripped the body of the klit brothers and then finished them off with head shots.
I disagree with your assumtion that Tyson was good inside!! The only time ike fought inside is when his opponents back was against the ropes!!! He ould move up and get off then side step and get off again!! In the center of the ring the vast majority of the time Mike would hook his opponents arm(s) and NOT fight inside!! He knew that his opponents against the ropes were 80% on defense and in the middle of the ring it was even!! I'm stating the majority of the sequences Mike would NOT engage inside!! I remember Teddy Atlas commentating this exact topic during Tyson fight on ESPN and everyone who knew what Mike was comfortable doing and not doing knew he prefered to move in and get off but not stay inside!!! Ray.
Thanks Ray.
I simply don't see Tyson beating Holyfield regardless of time. Being realistic it wouldn't have happened in 88 but had Douglas stayed on the canvas and it went off as planned he had the combination punching, hand speed, chin, tenacity and mental make up to pick his spots and keep Mike a step behind for win. Mike always squared after quick shifts and Holyfield has an understated ability to stare in the fire and stay smart in there.
Holyfield is an inconsistent enigma heavyweight champion he could be brilliant against Tyson, Lewis 2, Bowe but very poor against Moorer, Cooper, Stewart sect.
Hard to identify Evander at times! He sort of fought to his opponents caliber! He liked to give and take and he was almost to willing to give & take!! He took abuse that wasn't necessary at time it seems to keep the action flowing. I saw Evander at 175lbs and thought he was one of the best LtHvy I'd seen and that was in the amatuers! He was certainly a rare body type that could look good at 195 and 218lbs. A terrific fighter who was doing great with his career and financies and then began to loose his way, very sad to me. Evander is truely boxing modern day warrior! I hope he can let it go!
Ray
Squaring up as Mike Tyson did can allow more torque on the hooks and uppercuts, but the disadvantage is that you can be put off-balance easier. The instant that Tyson squared up, Holyfield would step forward and lean his shoulder into Tyson, putting him off-balance, and walk him backward, stopping Tyson's attack. Holyfield used that bald head of his coming in like that too sometimes...
Bingo, good call. Wasn't too bad at ripping off left hooks or uppercuts in there either. Hey, at least he wasn't torquing arms off Ravishing Rick Rude style though.Quote:
Originally Posted by bradlee180
I'll go with Moorer but more off of Moorers handspeed and a hard jab that had GPS that night. Still, if 2nd round was ruled as it should have..10-9 with KD. Holyfield keeps the title.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Stewart was just a good solid brawl with two early heavys. I don't think he looked poor at all. Cooper caught a flat mentally worn Holyfiled...go from a Mike Tyson, to a Damiani, to a last minute Cooper in front of hometown it had to be a mind melt. Save for two right hands, as scary as they were, he had his ass handed to him throughout.
Like I said what do you fellows think about Tyson vs Moored or Bows ....consider the 3 options prime vs prime, provided Tyson didn't serve time, or when they actually could have fought.
He and Moorer were pretty much a safe bet if he beat Holyfield. I just can't see him holding up over 12 without Tyson breaking through at one point. Both were very close in regards to the amount of 'mental' baggage they could carry. Moorer was a boxing jab happy fool in that window and had reinvented himself from a free swinging seek and destroy guy, but to take Mike he would have needed some of that fire. Then again he went wild early with ancient Smith and was rocked. Nearly all the big to huge punchers he faced rocked him or dropped him not to mention some of the not so big. Moorer would have to fight a perfect fight with zero mistakes, he slowed down mentally and coasted...Tyson could lapse also but still cave a face made of lego pieces in. I think Tyson gets him out.
I see Tyson vs Moorer like this, in the 3 ways I mentionedQuote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
1. Prime vs Prime: Mike Tyson by KO 4. Even in his Prime Moorer didn't have the greatest chin and a free swinging Tyson would have landed flush shots early on and I don't think MM would have taken it well...but it would have been the heavyweight version of Hagler-Hearns IMO not saying MM was a great fighter, but he was fun to watch and he gunned for KO's as much as anyone else.
2. Providing Tyson didn't serve time, they would have met around 1994 after MM beat Holyfield: A closer fight, Moorer probably weathers the first few onslaughts and maybe wins a few rounds due to his boxing more carefully, but I think Tyson eventually catches up with him before Tyson tired out. Tyson TKO 7
3. When they could have actually fought 1996 after MM beat Frans Botha: I actually think MM was a broken fighter at this point and even an older Tyson with less head movement and throwing fewer combinations would quickly dispose of a guy who just didn't have boxing in his heart after the loss to Foreman. Tyson KO 1
And Riddick Bowe vs Tyson? Any takers on that action?
So since this is a debate just how would Tyson do against the champs of the past and their competition?
Starting around 1906: Left out the likes of Corbett, Fitzy, Jeffries and Sullivan.
Call it catharsis. Been seeing these threads since the internet was invented.
Tommy Burns. Tyson destroys him and anybody he beat legitimately.
Jack Johnson. With the exception of Jeanette, Langford and Mcvea who would pose problems for Mike I think he waxes everyone on Johnson’s ledger and beats Jack himself.
Dempsey and Willard. Tyson beats the piss out of both of them and anyone on both of their charts.
Tunney. He never defended once he won it but head to head I just don’t see him keeping Mike off him and with or without the neutral corner rule I think he leaves the ring on his back.
Schmeling. Tyson beats him anyone he did with the exception of Louis and if people are honest with themselves there is a chance he gets to Louis also.
Sharkey. Tyson slaughters him beats all he did.
Carnera. Ditto
Baer. Tyson v Max would have been fun to watch. Tyson beats everybody he ever fought.
Braddock. Tyson again.
Louis. I would tend to lean with Louis and I think a prime Walcott would be tough on Tyson. I think a prime Ezzard could beat Tyson. Tyson beats up everyone else on Joe’s hit list.
Charles. See above and I think guys like Johnson and Satterfield would have been good scraps with Mike. Can’t discount some of those Murderers Row guys with anyone really although they all may have been too small in their prime.
Jersey Joe. Essentially covered.
Marciano. The Rock deserves his respect but he would not last long with Tyson nor would anyone he fought when he fought them. He never fought any of the guys already mentioned in their prime or even close to it.
Floyd Patterson. He gets blasted out by Tyson and in Liston like fashion. Speaking of Sonny that is a hell of a fight. They could easily split a couple. Laugh if you will but I think Chuvalo’s durability troubles Mike but Tyson beats everyone else Floyd did.
Johansson. Tyson rubs him out along with everyone he fought.
Liston. Hell of a fight between the two but once again nobody he beat bothers Mike. Williams gives him a go but that’s about it
Terrell. Tyson beats him and anyone he beat except one that he lost to.
Ali. Here is where Tyson runs into some trouble. I’ll leave out those already mentioned.
Frazier was my favourite hev but I don’t think he hangs with Tyson. Mike was faster, had better feet and head movement and concussive power from both sides. Hell of a fight but I think Mike prevails. Norton's crab style may have given issues to the likes of Ali and Holmes but it simply does not work with Tyson. It’s a 50/50 fight
Foreman. Frazier's fight simply does not reflect how a Tyson fight pans out. Nobody really got to Foreman prior to Ron Lyle. Tyson gets to him and once he decks Foreman his finishing kick would finish the job. Speaking of Lyle imo he has a much better chance at Tyson then Foreman despite being beaten by him. That’s another 50/50 fight. I think Jimmy Young has the goods to beat Tyson. Not much hope for Earnie I’m afraid and Leon might lose his life. I think Mike at his best beats any version of Holmes. I believe a prime Ali beats Mike but it’s not a walk in the park.
Holmes. Anyone Holmes beat Mike beats with perhaps a few exceptions. I think a more experienced Witherspoon gives Tyson some issues and a prime Mercer. We all know that Holyfield beat Mike but I don’t think he beats the late eighties version or its certainly not clear that he would.
The 80’s and 90’s are pretty self explanatory since he was in them and the only two up to say 1999 that beat a prime Tyson are most likely Lennox and Vitali. It’s hard to know what happened for sure to Mike on that fateful night in Tokyo but to his credit Douglas fought a perfect fight and probably could not have done it twice given how he looked against Holyfield. Bowe probably would have given him a good scrap. Moorer would be in a coma.
From 2000 on I again do not see anyone other then Lewis or Vitali that beat a prime Mike including all the belt holders and anyone they fought. If Sanders was serious he may have had a chance but Mike cruises through.
Wlad. The Wlad of today might have a shot but nobody on his list does.
My conclusion: This is just my opinion based on the whole picture. I never even liked Tyson and kept going out of my way to see his fights hoping he would lose. As much as Leonard stopping Hearns in the 14th was one of my worst nights, seeing Tyson on all fours reaching for his mouth piece was a highlight. My personal feelings are simply not relevant.
Tyson is an ATG and 1st ballot hall of famer.
Tyson is a Top 10 ATG heavyweight.
Tyson is arguably a Top 5 ATG heavyweight.
Gene Tunney defended his heavyweight title 2 times, the rematch vs Dempsey and a fight vs Tom Heeney.
Max Baer fought Joe Louis, and no way no how does Tyson beat Louis. Joe was too powerful and too precise with his punches.
But that was a very long list so good on you for posting that
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
I say Tyson kills Louis. Inside of 3 rounds.
Mike Tyson destroys anyone from 1960 downward. Not necessarily because he was a better fighter than some of these guys, but he had the benefit of more modern sport science and "nutrition" (take that to mean what you want). Athletically, we've come a long way since Joe Louis' day.
We all have our opinionsQuote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Now answer about Riddick Bowe somebody!!! In detail 1. Prime vs Prime, 2. Circa 1993 after Bowe beat Holyfield provided that Tyson didn't go to jail and 3. in 1996 after beating Holyfield in the rubber match but before the Golota fights and Tyson would have just gotten done beating Bruce Seldon
Only the first sentence was opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Of course.....and so Riddick Bowe???Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Yeah I know he did but he never really went on a run. I also know that Baer fought Louis. I was going at first in the order that fighters became belt holders or recognized as such so I mixed in two angles or I would have went over the character limit. I don't think its far fetched to suggest that Tyson beats Louis. Joe had a shaky chin and Mike would not have to look for him. Its not like Louis would be using the shoot and run tactic. The point was to show that Tyson love him or hate him deserves to be in the conversation when talking about the greatest heavyweights of all time.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
I don't think Joe's chin was shaky so much as he could get knocked off balance every so often...I mean 72 total fights and only 2 stoppage losses, one coming when he was really long in the tooth vs one of the greatest pound for pound punchers in the history of the game....come on now.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuitYeah I know he did but he never really went on a run. I also know that Baer fought Louis. I was going at first in the order that fighters became belt holders or recognized as such so I mixed in two angles or I would have went over the character limit. I don't think its far fetched to suggest that Tyson beats Louis. Joe had a shaky chin and Mike would not have to look for him. Its not like Louis would be using the shoot and run tactic. The point was to show that Tyson love him or hate him deserves to be in the conversation when talking about the greatest heavyweights of all time.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Mike Tyson IS great, I never denied it...I just have a tough time fitting him securely in the top 10, but he's certainly in the neighborhood.
So yes....about Tyson vs Bowe?
Bowe may have beaten him but the reverse is also the case. Shame they had a blood oath not to fight each other. I think Tua and Ike would have also been interesting fights with Mike.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongI don't think Joe's chin was shaky so much as he could get knocked off balance every so often...I mean 72 total fights and only 2 stoppage losses, one coming when he was really long in the tooth vs one of the greatest pound for pound punchers in the history of the game....come on now.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuitYeah I know he did but he never really went on a run. I also know that Baer fought Louis. I was going at first in the order that fighters became belt holders or recognized as such so I mixed in two angles or I would have went over the character limit. I don't think its far fetched to suggest that Tyson beats Louis. Joe had a shaky chin and Mike would not have to look for him. Its not like Louis would be using the shoot and run tactic. The point was to show that Tyson love him or hate him deserves to be in the conversation when talking about the greatest heavyweights of all time.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Mike Tyson IS great, I never denied it...I just have a tough time fitting him securely in the top 10, but he's certainly in the neighborhood.
So yes....about Tyson vs Bowe?
Holyfeild had one of the greatest resumes of any fighter i have ever seen no fighter has gone for 175 to heavyweight and been consider top ten but Holyfeild. No way Tyson can beat Holyfeild unless he has a heart attack in the ring which could happen. He was a better boxer then Tyson and had a better chin, he also would smother Tyson inside game and if he had to get dirty Holyfeild makes Hopkins blush. Tyson is great i give him top ten but unlike the others he is kinda like a what if, Holyfield, Lennox, and Ali showed that they could win vs guys that are in the top ten.
To which everyone will mention Larry Holmes who Tyson beat the dog crap out of is a Top 10 All-Time Great Heavyweight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
There was a point where a Tyson fight and a Bowe fight were scheduled for the same weekend in Vegas- maybe Tyson vs Byrd, and a Bowe/Holyfield fight, and I think the Tyson fight was rescheduled- and my friend was in town that weekend. He watched Tyson work out and Bowe workout. He said that Tyson was a whole level above bowe in terms of speed and power. For what that is worth.
I think Louis beats Tyson just about every time. There is, of course, the chance that Tyson comes out and blitzes Louis. But I don't think that is likely because Louis didn't start slow so much as he took his time. Come out, make him fight, and he'd go right with you. I think he would time Tyson coming in with those punches he threw, and he is the most devastating puncher ever. And if louis started landing the jab, then Tyson is in for a one way beating for as long as he could take it.
But I think Tyson beats Ali, especially the young Ali. We'll get into that when the protests come.
Even though Larry was coming off losses and a 2 year lay off i give Tyson the win but Holyfeild and Lennox had more and they kicked Tyson ass as for Ali well his resume speaks for its self.
There have been two all time great heavyweights since the war, Joe Louis and Cassius Clay. Unfortunately Rocky Marciano does not deserve to join them because he was never tested against serious opposition (most of his opponents were over 40 years old), bit like Joe Calzaghe but that's for another thread.
The best that Mike Tyson can hope for, if we exclude the cheating and fouling in the ring, together with even worse behaviour outside, is that he is compared favourably to Joe Frazier, a fighter of similar style, an Olympic Champion but still not quite an all time great.
The worst that we can remember about Mike Tyson is that a generation of dangerous dogs were named after him by phsycopathic nutters who beleived the 80's hype (some even named their kids after him!).
So lets get it in perspective, Joe Frazier acheived far more in his career than Mike Tyson, who has been humiliated many times since Buster Douglas sussed him out.
I think Tyson beats Joe Louis but Joe was the better champion because he showed consistency and a will to win when the odds were against him.
beanflicker or anyone else; Someone please enlighten me on the "new sciences" in sports and the more modern techniques in training that enables Tyson to beat any heavy before the 1960's (love to hear this)
Please elaborate on the "training sciense "stuff"" HA!!!! Can't wait to learn what Mike ate at the training table in the Catskills!!! :rolleyes: Ray.
You cant simply narrow the scope and then broaden it depending on who the person is. The suggestion that there have only been two great heavyweights since WW2 is ridiculous and who cares whether some half wit punk names his pitbull after him or that Tyson was a dickhead? Guys like Liston, Ketchel, Benny Leonard, Walker and yes even Robinson to name but a few make Tyson look like a cub scout. And Joe Frazier and him really fought nothing alike at all unless you consider a hook conjoining their styles. A prime Mike Tyson would have been at the top of the pile in any era including Ali's. What he did or did not do outside the ring or how many people name their budgies after him is not a qualifier for his standing historically as a fighter.Quote:
Originally Posted by nuggetdotcom
i think it just lasted him for a while, after fame came, he discpline slipped and he kept beating guys only because of his strong foundation, i dont think , and this is purely opinion, that tyson was a complete project, i think he couldve develped further and possibly never have been beatenQuote:
Originally Posted by bradlee180
Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuit
that about sums it up