28 years ago today...

[ross]

Yeah it is just opinion but Mike Tyson at that time back then was seen as unbeatable. The other top fighters around would have all had percieved weaknesses or losses as skilled and consistent as they were they didnt have that aura of invincibility and destruction where it was possible to see Mike beating any fighter in history (at that point)

[Beanflicker]

For a heavyweight to get p4p #1 recognition is truely impressive, given the fact that the honor is biased towards smaller weights. Especially when JCC was like 70-0 at the same time.

[Beanflicker]

God damn, why did Mike have to shit the bed against Buster Douglas? Tyson vs Holyfield circa 1990 would have been incredible.

[Bobthepen]

God damn, why did Mike have to shit the bed against Buster Douglas? Tyson vs Holyfield circa 1990 would have been incredible.

Yup. He'd have got knocked out by Holyfield instead.

[El Kabong]

God damn, why did Mike have to shit the bed against Buster Douglas? Tyson vs Holyfield circa 1990 would have been incredible.

Yup. He'd have got knocked out by Holyfield instead.

It's more like "Why did Buster Douglas show up to fight"....Mike didn't lose that fight as much as Buster won it. Buster fought his ass off, he did a great job. Yeah we hear all the "Mike's training consisted of drugs & hookers" but Douglas really fought well.

I just wish between the Holyfield & Lewis fights that Tyson would have had a go at more of the other top fighters of that era: Bowe, Foreman, Mercer, Morrison, Moorer, McCall, Rahman, Briggs, etc...I think they would have been very fun fights to watch regardless of how close they were. I still wanted Tyson to fight John Ruiz when Holyfield had such trouble with him, Chris Byrd would have been a decent fight, Valuev, Vitali, Wladimir, Brewster....people were intrigued by the aura of Tyson, nobody will deny that but he could have really had some more interesting fights in his career, but the very same can be said of every other fighter

[Master]

God damn, why did Mike have to shit the bed against Buster Douglas? Tyson vs Holyfield circa 1990 would have been incredible.

Yup. He'd have got knocked out by Holyfield instead.

I think they would have had a triology with Tyson winning the first but losing the next two as he was losing it slowly. Either way by the time Bowe and Lewis were coming up Tyson would have eventually lost to one of them. Prison may have preserved him for a bit.

[Beanflicker]

Yup. He'd have got knocked out by Holyfield instead.

You could be right, I don't rightly know who to pick in that one. But I think it would be a hell of a lot better than their eventual 1996 showdown,.

[ross]

Yup. He'd have got knocked out by Holyfield instead.

You could be right, I don't rightly know who to pick in that one. But I think it would be a hell of a lot better than their eventual 1996 showdown,.

For sure!

Even though back in 90 or 91 his skills had declined, his fights with Rudduck proved he still had a fighters attitude and stamina and was active and getting rounds in.

Compare that to someone who hadn't trained for 4 years and had just 16 and a half minutes of action in prep.

People slate Tysons win over Holmes but Holmes was only out 18 months before he started training for for Tyson!

[Bobthepen]

Yup. He'd have got knocked out by Holyfield instead.

You could be right, I don't rightly know who to pick in that one. But I think it would be a hell of a lot better than their eventual 1996 showdown,.

For sure!

Even though back in 90 or 91 his skills had declined, his fights with Rudduck proved he still had a fighters attitude and stamina and was active and getting rounds in.

Compare that to someone who hadn't trained for 4 years and had just 16 and a half minutes of action in prep.

People slate Tysons win over Holmes but Holmes was only out 18 months before he started training for for Tyson!

Sauce for the goose et al. Holyfield was in his mid thirties and considered by most to be shot when he fought Tyson. He wasn't shot, but he wasn't the fighter he was five years earlier.

[Spicoli]

Yeah it is just opinion but Mike Tyson at that time back then was seen as unbeatable. The other top fighters around would have all had percieved weaknesses or losses as skilled and consistent as they were they didnt have that aura of invincibility and destruction where it was possible to see Mike beating any fighter in history (at that point)

I think that aura and mystique is exatlly what helped get Mike beat up by Buster Douglas. That, Don King and a hot water bottle. The greatness and place in history was better placed around the outcome of a match with number 1 ranked Holyfield the first time around and its a shame they cancelled the second signed date and missed a chance for definition.

I really think alot of Mike being a number 1 p4p had as much to do with his speed and Heavyweight concussive endings as it did being a household name and benifiting from massive exposure like no other fighter then. Again, its comes down to what we interpreate it as. Opposition? Longevity? Actual skillset?Douglas was a solid package that night but to see him make Rings #6 p4p doesn't say much for whole thing, beating a p4p doesn't make you an actual p4p type fighter. Not to mention Tyson still being 7th even after being thumped and then 5th p4p even after the Ruddock fights speaks to more of the popularity push imo while at the same time his skills were starting to show big cracks. He was living on yesterdays.