Re: Tyson of 1988 versus Lewis of 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
I'm still scratching my head on when this great erosion of skill happened in Tyson within the devistating ko of Spinks till the Douglas 1st bell a yr and few months later? Was it the 6,7 rounds in between vs chinny Williams or a deer in the headlights Bruno? I think it had more to do with finally running into a fluid mobile combination puncher who didn't shit himself when Mike yelled "boo" and had superior mental make up. All things Holyfield owned. That Cooper shot gets greatly blown out of proportion and it doesn't translate to Mike whacking him that easily if he had not pulled out. What, if it was Evander instead of Douglas vs a 'slipping' Tyson that Feb night the result would have same as well? Holyfield recovered btw and almost ripped Berts head off his shoulders, Mike, ehh, not so much.
Kevin Rooney said Mike wasnt training fully for the Spikns fight and just bulldozed in during the fight. He noticed as soon as King was in his head that Mike wasnt fully focused any more. Look at the Bruno fight, all those better fighters he fought but the laughing stock of the heavyweight division is the first to have a punch have any effect on him, as well as even land a decent shot.
Anyone that cant acknowledge that Mikes skills were not the same are just trying too hard to discredit his achievments and why I dont know. The Tyson that fought Douglas was nothing like the fighter that fought and beat Tucker, Tubbs and Holmes. Big difference in the skills on show.
Sounds like your saying his skills were still there really but he just didnt give a shate to stay focused and trained then? Thats on him.
Yes it is but my point is, at his best his skills were awesome. He could avoid getting hit, he could out jab men of 6,5" he could also throw combinations of punches that were like lightning and any of the punches could have knocked the opponent down or out. As soon as he wasnt being trained by Rooney he wasnt do the things that made him great.
Put it this way. Mike dies at the end of 88. In 99 after Lewis has just scraped past Holyfield, there is a poll in the boxing mags on who would win. Between Tyson and Lewis. Tyson would win the poll hands down.
This is whatpeople choosing Tyson are getting at. Up to 88 he was a force. Not a bully but a highly skilled and physically very gifted fighter that in 88 alot of boxing "experts" trully believed was unbeatable and knocking at the door to alis lofty placing in all time rankings. Thats just a fact, that is haw good he was and how people perceived him back then.
Re: Tyson of 1988 versus Lewis of 1999
Yea but it turned out to be wrong and he did not achieve any thing close to Ali.
Re: Tyson of 1988 versus Lewis of 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Yea but it turned out to be wrong and he did not achieve any thing close to Ali.
It wasnt wrong, those "experts"saw with their own eyes a phenomenom. They saw a man tidy up a division, he defeated 3 defending champions, smashed Holmes up, beat the linear champ, there was absolutely no argument who the top man in the division was. They were basing their assesments on what they had seen, not what they were thinking could happen in the future. No one can take away or deny Mike Tyson was a fantastic fighter. It may have been for a short period but he still managed to have enough fights in that short period to prove when he was being trained right, he was consistant (neither Holyfield or Lewis had a dominant or consistant period like Mike. There were too many shaky moments inbetween. No one ever thought of them at any point in their careers as unbeatable and that hurts some people) and very nearly unbeatable as they were calling him then. Its only when he left the team that were looking after him that it all went tits up.
In fact, if Tyson had retired straight after the Spinks fight I think his career is better than Marcianos.
Re: Tyson of 1988 versus Lewis of 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Yea but it turned out to be wrong and he did not achieve any thing close to Ali.
It wasnt wrong, those "experts"saw with their own eyes a phenomenom. They saw a man tidy up a division, he defeated 3 defending champions, smashed Holmes up, beat the linear champ, there was absolutely no argument who the top man in the division was. They were basing their assesments on what they had seen, not what they were thinking could happen in the future. No one can take away or deny Mike Tyson was a fantastic fighter. It may have been for a short period but he still managed to have enough fights in that short period to prove when he was being trained right, he was consistant (neither Holyfield or Lewis had a dominant or consistant period like Mike. There were too many shaky moments inbetween. No one ever thought of them at any point in their careers as unbeatable and that hurts some people) and very nearly unbeatable as they were calling him then. Its only when he left the team that were looking after him that it all went tits up.
In fact, if Tyson had retired straight after the Spinks fight I think his career is better than Marcianos.
Much as it pains me to say it ;D I agree ;)
Re: Tyson of 1988 versus Lewis of 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BIG H
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Yea but it turned out to be wrong and he did not achieve any thing close to Ali.
It wasnt wrong, those "experts"saw with their own eyes a phenomenom. They saw a man tidy up a division, he defeated 3 defending champions, smashed Holmes up, beat the linear champ, there was absolutely no argument who the top man in the division was. They were basing their assesments on what they had seen, not what they were thinking could happen in the future. No one can take away or deny Mike Tyson was a fantastic fighter. It may have been for a short period but he still managed to have enough fights in that short period to prove when he was being trained right, he was consistant (neither Holyfield or Lewis had a dominant or consistant period like Mike. There were too many shaky moments inbetween. No one ever thought of them at any point in their careers as unbeatable and that hurts some people) and very nearly unbeatable as they were calling him then. Its only when he left the team that were looking after him that it all went tits up.
In fact, if Tyson had retired straight after the Spinks fight I think his career is better than Marcianos.
Much as it pains me to say it ;D I agree ;)
Ditto. Minus the pain :p
