Tyson-Hollyfield 1991

[ross]

Mike Tyson is the ONE GUY whose losses never stuck to his legacy

"Oh he was past his prime"

"Sure he lost, but if Cus were still around!"

"He didn't train hard enough"

"He never should have left Rooney"

"Don King ruined him"

"In his prime he was unbeatable!"


Just one excuse after another and the complete denial that Mike Tyson had an easy era pre Holyfield and Lewis. The only differences in "Prime" Tyson and post prison Tyson are: a little more aggression, he stopped moving his head in round 3-4 as opposed to round 5-6, and he would throw 2-3 punches more often than just 1-2 big ones.....that is IT but that is also what happens to pressure fighters in general. Pressure fighters typically fade out of the sport by/around 27 years old just because the body can't handle the pace they set OR they have just worn themselves down by turning easier fights into battles.

A way for you to understand the decline in Mike Tyson.

Mike Tyson became less effective and opponents had an easier time with him after leaving Rooney as his trainer because he wasnt being taught to do what made him great.

Wladamir Klitschko on the other hand is like Tyson in reverse. His opponents used to hurt him and knock him out, whereas when he got with Steward he was being taught to do what now makes him successfull. Tysons was the headmovement and combinations, Wlads is the leaning and holding

Would this Wlad beat the Wlad that Sanders defeated? Yes, different fighter. Would the Tyson that beat Holmes and Spinks have lost to the Tyson that waded in to punches against Douglas? No, different fighter, not doing what made him successful.

Tyson losing to Holyfield, Douglas, Lewis etc should be taken as seriously as you take Wlads losses to Sanders and Brewster. He is now a different fighter.