Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Tyson revisionism is something that has taken hold in last last few years since the Lewis loss and the McBride and Williams debacles....More and more so these revisionists are creeping out.
Look back to the '80's and the excitement and thrill of Tyson unifying the belts and with a style that excited ALL. He got people interested in boxing in a way that hadnt been so since the '70's. He did it with flair and power to dazzle and at such a young age.
Tyson was young and had demons and in due course let those skills waste away. He then got incarcerated for 3 years and came back in a rush and underprepared. The slide was apparent even a decade ago. The Tyson that lost to Holyfield was not the same Tyson that had reawakened the sport.
The Tyson of those few years (1986-1988) had a style, confidence and swagger that ANYONE in the history of boxing would have issues with. Mike was special, but Mike allowed his flaws and weaknesses to eventually take hold.
That peak period Tyson would be a handful for anybody in the history of boxing no doubt...and that is why he deserves his respect...
He got the wrong people interested in boxing. Most of his fights were short and brutal. Everyone that was solely a tyson fan just wanted to see a knock out. In fact i blame tyson for a lot of things that went arye with boxing in the late 80's early 90's. People who were solely fans of tyson didn't wanna see fights that were technical clinics that the dedicated fan would enjoy, they wanted to see unskilled (not saying tyson is unskilled because thats far from the truth but im saying in relation to other fights not involving tyson) anybodies just throw punch after punch with no emphasis on defense (again tyson had a great defense but this isn't about his fights) going for knockouts. Without tyson, More people would've viewed the PBF/ De la Hoya fight in a more positive light.
What does Tyson have to do with Oscar/ Floyd?? Tyson brought energy and excitement and lived up to his billing. Floyd and Oscar fought an interesting but predictable technical fight. Therein is the difference. Floyd against Oscar wasnt exciting. But since the prime of Tyson we have had any number of exciting bouts. How about Barrera: Morales? Gatti: Ward? Which do you prefer? Floyd against Oscar or other classic fights which have indeed happened since prime Tyson left the planet.
There are great fights throughout the divisions...Tyson is not connected to Oscar: PBF in any way...
I dont see what you are saying...
I'm saying that there's people who were only interested in brutal style fights because of tyson. WE can see the skill that tyson had, but some people who were drawn to the sport by tyson only saw him for his power and knockouts. Some of the boxing fans that have defected for other more "entertaining" sports are these people. I'm not saying tyson is the only person to ever have an intense physical fighting style. I would rather see a classic battle between two fighters but I see the skill involved behind that. There are others who only see it as all out punching with no technique. De la Hoya mayweather is bashed for 1 reason more than any other. Not because they were over paid. Not because it was the technical display that every true boxing fan expected but because there wasn't enough brutallity. I have heard on more than one main stream sports show that in order for a boxing match to be classic there has to be blood and bruised eyes. Thats tyson's fault.
I am a fan of boxing. Boxing can mean a brawl or a boxing clinic. Both appeal to me. It is not Tysons fault that a sports show says that "in order for a boxing match to be a classic there has to be blood and bruised eyes"! That is the fault of a dumb and illinformed network. Tyson has nothing to do with that.
It is silly that you can "blame" modern boxing on Tyson when actually there is so much good boxing around you!!!
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Tyson revisionism is something that has taken hold in last last few years since the Lewis loss and the McBride and Williams debacles....More and more so these revisionists are creeping out.
Look back to the '80's and the excitement and thrill of Tyson unifying the belts and with a style that excited ALL. He got people interested in boxing in a way that hadnt been so since the '70's. He did it with flair and power to dazzle and at such a young age.
Tyson was young and had demons and in due course let those skills waste away. He then got incarcerated for 3 years and came back in a rush and underprepared. The slide was apparent even a decade ago. The Tyson that lost to Holyfield was not the same Tyson that had reawakened the sport.
The Tyson of those few years (1986-1988) had a style, confidence and swagger that ANYONE in the history of boxing would have issues with. Mike was special, but Mike allowed his flaws and weaknesses to eventually take hold.
That peak period Tyson would be a handful for anybody in the history of boxing no doubt...and that is why he deserves his respect...
He got the wrong people interested in boxing. Most of his fights were short and brutal. Everyone that was solely a tyson fan just wanted to see a knock out. In fact i blame tyson for a lot of things that went arye with boxing in the late 80's early 90's. People who were solely fans of tyson didn't wanna see fights that were technical clinics that the dedicated fan would enjoy, they wanted to see unskilled (not saying tyson is unskilled because thats far from the truth but im saying in relation to other fights not involving tyson) anybodies just throw punch after punch with no emphasis on defense (again tyson had a great defense but this isn't about his fights) going for knockouts. Without tyson, More people would've viewed the PBF/ De la Hoya fight in a more positive light. 
What does Tyson have to do with Oscar/ Floyd?? Tyson brought energy and excitement and lived up to his billing. Floyd and Oscar fought an interesting but predictable technical fight. Therein is the difference. Floyd against Oscar wasnt exciting. But since the prime of Tyson we have had any number of exciting bouts. How about Barrera: Morales? Gatti: Ward? Which do you prefer? Floyd against Oscar or other classic fights which have indeed happened since prime Tyson left the planet.
There are great fights throughout the divisions...Tyson is not connected to Oscar: PBF in any way...
I dont see what you are saying...
I'm saying that there's people who were only interested in brutal style fights because of tyson. WE can see the skill that tyson had, but some people who were drawn to the sport by tyson only saw him for his power and knockouts. Some of the boxing fans that have defected for other more "entertaining" sports are these people. I'm not saying tyson is the only person to ever have an intense physical fighting style. I would rather see a classic battle between two fighters but I see the skill involved behind that. There are others who only see it as all out punching with no technique. De la Hoya mayweather is bashed for 1 reason more than any other. Not because they were over paid. Not because it was the technical display that every true boxing fan expected but because there wasn't enough brutallity. I have heard on more than one main stream sports show that in order for a boxing match to be classic there has to be blood and bruised eyes. Thats tyson's fault.
I am a fan of boxing. Boxing can mean a brawl or a boxing clinic. Both appeal to me. It is not Tysons fault that a sports show says that "in order for a boxing match to be a classic there has to be blood and bruised eyes"! That is the fault of a dumb and illinformed network. Tyson has nothing to do with that.
It is silly that you can blame modern boxing on Tyson when actually there is so much good boxing around you!!!
I should probably have worded my earlier response better. I'm not blaming MY outlook on the sport today on tyson because i know there are many skilled and exciting boxers south of the heavy division. I'm blaming tyson for the way that main stream media and younger fans view the sport. Cotto and Judah is coming up. Is anybody talking about that on sports shows? No because its not a heavyweight fight. I'm saying tyson has a lot to do with the state of boxing in america. There's a low fan base in america if we don't have a ko artist cleaning up the heavyweigh division i wonder who's fault that is? We have probably the most gifted athlete of our current era PBF not getting any attention at all because hes not a ko artist heavyweight and thats BS.
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Miles when you sadclick someone if you then coolclick them it takes the sadclick away im right are'nt i
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
I would say that the follow up heavyweights are accountable for that. If there were fighters as skilled and exciting as prime Mike around today then the heavyweight division would still be at the top and surrounded in publicity. As it stands, all of the heavyweights are crushing bores these days.
But you've got to remember that the avarage guy will always look to the heavyweights no matter what the real fan is thinking...
There are great fight out there, but boxing has suffered from poor matchmaking, judicial decisions etc...
These are even more detrimental than Mike Tyson!
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO
Miles when you sadclick someone if you then coolclick them it takes the sadclick away im right are'nt i
Ive heard this. I presume it is so.
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO
Miles when you sadclick someone if you then coolclick them it takes the sadclick away im right are'nt i
Ive heard this. I presume it is so.
Thanks mate just proving a point to punisher
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Tyson revisionism is something that has taken hold in last last few years since the Lewis loss and the McBride and Williams debacles....More and more so these revisionists are creeping out.
Look back to the '80's and the excitement and thrill of Tyson unifying the belts and with a style that excited ALL. He got people interested in boxing in a way that hadnt been so since the '70's. He did it with flair and power to dazzle and at such a young age.
Tyson was young and had demons and in due course let those skills waste away. He then got incarcerated for 3 years and came back in a rush and underprepared. The slide was apparent even a decade ago. The Tyson that lost to Holyfield was not the same Tyson that had reawakened the sport.
The Tyson of those few years (1986-1988) had a style, confidence and swagger that ANYONE in the history of boxing would have issues with. Mike was special, but Mike allowed his flaws and weaknesses to eventually take hold.
That peak period Tyson would be a handful for anybody in the history of boxing no doubt...and that is why he deserves his respect...
He got the wrong people interested in boxing. Most of his fights were short and brutal. Everyone that was solely a tyson fan just wanted to see a knock out. In fact i blame tyson for a lot of things that went arye with boxing in the late 80's early 90's. People who were solely fans of tyson didn't wanna see fights that were technical clinics that the dedicated fan would enjoy, they wanted to see unskilled (not saying tyson is unskilled because thats far from the truth but im saying in relation to other fights not involving tyson) anybodies just throw punch after punch with no emphasis on defense (again tyson had a great defense but this isn't about his fights) going for knockouts. Without tyson, More people would've viewed the PBF/ De la Hoya fight in a more positive light.
What does Tyson have to do with Oscar/ Floyd?? Tyson brought energy and excitement and lived up to his billing. Floyd and Oscar fought an interesting but predictable technical fight. Therein is the difference. Floyd against Oscar wasnt exciting. But since the prime of Tyson we have had any number of exciting bouts. How about Barrera: Morales? Gatti: Ward? Which do you prefer? Floyd against Oscar or other classic fights which have indeed happened since prime Tyson left the planet.
There are great fights throughout the divisions...Tyson is not connected to Oscar: PBF in any way...
I dont see what you are saying...
I'm saying that there's people who were only interested in brutal style fights because of tyson. WE can see the skill that tyson had, but some people who were drawn to the sport by tyson only saw him for his power and knockouts. Some of the boxing fans that have defected for other more "entertaining" sports are these people. I'm not saying tyson is the only person to ever have an intense physical fighting style. I would rather see a classic battle between two fighters but I see the skill involved behind that. There are others who only see it as all out punching with no technique. De la Hoya mayweather is bashed for 1 reason more than any other. Not because they were over paid. Not because it was the technical display that every true boxing fan expected but because there wasn't enough brutallity. I have heard on more than one main stream sports show that in order for a boxing match to be classic there has to be blood and bruised eyes. Thats tyson's fault.
I am a fan of boxing. Boxing can mean a brawl or a boxing clinic. Both appeal to me. It is not Tysons fault that a sports show says that "in order for a boxing match to be a classic there has to be blood and bruised eyes"! That is the fault of a dumb and illinformed network. Tyson has nothing to do with that.
It is silly that you can blame modern boxing on Tyson when actually there is so much good boxing around you!!!
I should probably have worded my earlier response better. I'm not blaming MY outlook on the sport today on tyson because i know there are many skilled and exciting boxers south of the heavy division. I'm blaming tyson for the way that main stream media and younger fans view the sport. Cotto and Judah is coming up. Is anybody talking about that on sports shows? No because its not a heavyweight fight. I'm saying tyson has a lot to do with the state of boxing in america. There's a low fan base in america if we don't have a ko artist cleaning up the heavyweigh division i wonder who's fault that is? We have probably the most gifted athlete of our current era PBF not getting any attention at all because hes not a ko artist heavyweight and thats BS.
i think tyson was just to good in his prime and set the bar really high in HW division just like ALI before him
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO
Miles when you sadclick someone if you then coolclick them it takes the sadclick away im right are'nt i
Ive heard this. I presume it is so.
Thanks mate just proving a point to punisher
TBH im sick of Tyson being questioned by court jesters that have only experienced him in the twilight. Tyson is held high by those that love the sport and that recognise the freak skills he possessed that made him so exciting. He beat everybody. He unified. That is a great fighter.
So what if he didnt beat Lewis? With hindsight it is obvious. And Holyfield too. Only 5 years too late.
Tyson did the hard work early and then burned out
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy McClure
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Tyson revisionism is something that has taken hold in last last few years since the Lewis loss and the McBride and Williams debacles....More and more so these revisionists are creeping out.
Look back to the '80's and the excitement and thrill of Tyson unifying the belts and with a style that excited ALL. He got people interested in boxing in a way that hadnt been so since the '70's. He did it with flair and power to dazzle and at such a young age.
Tyson was young and had demons and in due course let those skills waste away. He then got incarcerated for 3 years and came back in a rush and underprepared. The slide was apparent even a decade ago. The Tyson that lost to Holyfield was not the same Tyson that had reawakened the sport.
The Tyson of those few years (1986-1988) had a style, confidence and swagger that ANYONE in the history of boxing would have issues with. Mike was special, but Mike allowed his flaws and weaknesses to eventually take hold.
That peak period Tyson would be a handful for anybody in the history of boxing no doubt...and that is why he deserves his respect...
He got the wrong people interested in boxing. Most of his fights were short and brutal. Everyone that was solely a tyson fan just wanted to see a knock out. In fact i blame tyson for a lot of things that went arye with boxing in the late 80's early 90's. People who were solely fans of tyson didn't wanna see fights that were technical clinics that the dedicated fan would enjoy, they wanted to see unskilled (not saying tyson is unskilled because thats far from the truth but im saying in relation to other fights not involving tyson) anybodies just throw punch after punch with no emphasis on defense (again tyson had a great defense but this isn't about his fights) going for knockouts. Without tyson, More people would've viewed the PBF/ De la Hoya fight in a more positive light.
What does Tyson have to do with Oscar/ Floyd?? Tyson brought energy and excitement and lived up to his billing. Floyd and Oscar fought an interesting but predictable technical fight. Therein is the difference. Floyd against Oscar wasnt exciting. But since the prime of Tyson we have had any number of exciting bouts. How about Barrera: Morales? Gatti: Ward? Which do you prefer? Floyd against Oscar or other classic fights which have indeed happened since prime Tyson left the planet.
There are great fights throughout the divisions...Tyson is not connected to Oscar: PBF in any way...
I dont see what you are saying...
I'm saying that there's people who were only interested in brutal style fights because of tyson. WE can see the skill that tyson had, but some people who were drawn to the sport by tyson only saw him for his power and knockouts. Some of the boxing fans that have defected for other more "entertaining" sports are these people. I'm not saying tyson is the only person to ever have an intense physical fighting style. I would rather see a classic battle between two fighters but I see the skill involved behind that. There are others who only see it as all out punching with no technique. De la Hoya mayweather is bashed for 1 reason more than any other. Not because they were over paid. Not because it was the technical display that every true boxing fan expected but because there wasn't enough brutallity. I have heard on more than one main stream sports show that in order for a boxing match to be classic there has to be blood and bruised eyes. Thats tyson's fault.
I am a fan of boxing. Boxing can mean a brawl or a boxing clinic. Both appeal to me. It is not Tysons fault that a sports show says that "in order for a boxing match to be a classic there has to be blood and bruised eyes"! That is the fault of a dumb and illinformed network. Tyson has nothing to do with that.
It is silly that you can blame modern boxing on Tyson when actually there is so much good boxing around you!!!
I should probably have worded my earlier response better. I'm not blaming MY outlook on the sport today on tyson because i know there are many skilled and exciting boxers south of the heavy division. I'm blaming tyson for the way that main stream media and younger fans view the sport. Cotto and Judah is coming up. Is anybody talking about that on sports shows? No because its not a heavyweight fight. I'm saying tyson has a lot to do with the state of boxing in america. There's a low fan base in america if we don't have a ko artist cleaning up the heavyweigh division i wonder who's fault that is? We have probably the most gifted athlete of our current era PBF not getting any attention at all because hes not a ko artist heavyweight and thats BS.
i think tyson was just to good in his prime and set the bar really high in HW division just like ALI before him
your right Troy and my god Tyson haters do my head in ;D
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO
Miles when you sadclick someone if you then coolclick them it takes the sadclick away im right are'nt i
Ive heard this. I presume it is so.
Thanks mate just proving a point to punisher
TBH im sick of Tyson being questioned by court jesters that have only experienced him in the twilight. Tyson is held high by those that love the sport and that recognise the freak skills he possessed that made him so exciting. He beat everybody. He unified. That is a great fighter.
So what if he didnt beat Lewis? With hindsight it is obvious. And Holyfield too. Only 5 years too late.
Tyson did the hard work early and then burned out
I followed Tyson since i was 5 getting up early sunday mornings with my mum to watch his fights and im 26 now god he was great save anyone working it out i was 5 in 86 ;D
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
I think Tyson peaked too soon.
Youngest Heavyweight champ
Unified all those titles and knocked out the other number one heavyweight in michael spinks.
He had nothing more to accomplish or to prove, the worst thing was he was 22 and boxing was all he knew. That was the downfall in his career. He accomplished everything anyone could possibly hope to and when he did he was only 22 and all he had ever been bred to do was box and thats all he ever knew so...even when there was no reason to go on he HAD to. And that was his ultimate downfall.
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Wow, this thread is still going strong, :coolclick: to Mr140.
I've already posted twice on this thread, but have done some thinking about the situation. Gathered by what all others have posted, and the general public view of Tyson, my honest answer why Tyson is held so high, is because he has the "Ali(or Clay)" effect on people. What I mean is that, any heavy handed fighter, or speed demon can win on a given night. But, a prime Ali(or Clay), could make the best look stupid, and outbox the ears off, with his speed, aura, and pure boxing skill. As for Mike, he could KO anyone with his hand-speed, head-movement, and attitude or aura of invincibility, and his power.
The reason that Ali will always be higher though, is because of heart IMO. Ali had a lay-off, so did Mike, and they were close as in how long. The difference is, that Ali come back to beat the best, and Mike couldn't. Both were great fighters, and I take nothing away from either.
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
Wow i didn't think my post would even go this far and love this site more ever day and thank you ice for agreeing with me i think you are the only one in most of the post that did, atleast someone thought i was right.
Ice will agree with you mate he's a fellow Tyson hater ;) ;D
Did you not read my posts because if you did you would find i was praising Tyson but i do agree with the new member mr140 on somethings he said.
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO
Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO
Miles when you sadclick someone if you then coolclick them it takes the sadclick away im right are'nt i
Ive heard this. I presume it is so.
Thanks mate just proving a point to punisher
TBH im sick of Tyson being questioned by court jesters that have only experienced him in the twilight. Tyson is held high by those that love the sport and that recognise the freak skills he possessed that made him so exciting. He beat everybody. He unified. That is a great fighter.
So what if he didnt beat Lewis? With hindsight it is obvious. And Holyfield too. Only 5 years too late.
Tyson did the hard work early and then burned out
One thing that amazes me is that the same people who say he was overrated and not a 'Great' use the fact that he only won fights on fear as a negative. Well if he was so ordinary what were all the opponents afraid of?? Maybe they know a bit more than some of the Jonny come latlies on here ;)
Re: Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high
Well BIG H to be fair his opponents were all scared im not saying thats only reason he won of course im not he won by being the better fighter with more skills but having mental edge on your opponent before the fight is a good advantage to have on your side.
