Tyson at welterweight.

[ross]

Tyson was successful because he fought, at HW, like a lighter weight fighter. Slipping punches, countering, changing angles, etc...are rarely seen at HW and the big guys tend to be dumb as well as slow. At WW, those skills are pretty common among the top guys. In addition they always fight at a faster pace and are much smarter than HWs. There have been numerous short, hard hitting welters; some did well, others did not. None are among the top guys at that weight, except Armstrong and his style was nothing like that of Tyson.
Tyson did not fight well inside, he did his damage on the way in. More often than not, he tied up in close, or accepted being tied up. That would hurt him at welter, where he'd be far more likely to get hit coming in.
The number punching system, and being around people that 'understood' it is pretty irrelevant in and of itself. Unless you think there is an important difference between saying "1-2-3" and saying "jab, right hand, hook." What hurt Tyson was when his reflexes slowed a bit and then he started standing straight up and walking in. At welter, that would make him Larry Barnes.

It wasn't just a numbered punching system

Buddy McGirt being interviewed about training Tyson.

"Yep. We've been working together all this week. Mike is going to take Saturday and Sunday off and we go back to the gym again on Monday. Let me tell ya, working with Mike has been really exciting for me AND it's a great learning experience. It's made me realize that every coach has their masterpiece... and Mike Tyson is Cus D'Amato's masterpiece. What Cus taught him... what Cus did with him... is truly amazing. I don't think Cus could have gotten the same results with of any other fighter. I always thought Cus' system was all about the peek-a-boo style. But it's not. It's about positioning yourself to throw punches... and Mike does it VERY well. Mike is extremely gifted and it's incredible to watch him. The other day Mike and I were walking down the street and I told him 'Man, you know... you're Cus D'Amato's masterpiece!' Mike agreed with me, and told me that Cus told him that he's one fighter that he never would have to protect."

Latest boxing News and Events in the USA and around the World

Exactly what you say when you're on the payroll of a man you know to be mentally fragile.

He had great talent but the dude didn't have it between the ears.

I'm shocked that some don't realize how much better the lighter fighters are. It's not even close.

Only Mayweather can compare to Tyson's shear dominance.

Mike also didn't have the luxuries of catch weights. He had to fight people 30lbs heavier than him. His skill set was that amazing that he dealt with these much bigger stronger men easily.

Ask Pacquiao to face froch or Kovalev. Thats the size difference Mike was dealing with.

[p4pking]

That's why this is so pointless though Ross, the HW's are a completely different thing because a big man with natural power is going to be able to hurt anyone they fight, they hit exponentially harder just for being that size. How huge a man would it take to soak up Tysons punch the way Froch or Kovalev would do to Pacquiao? Flip that around and imagine PAcquiao did have the ability to hurt a guy that size with one punch, if that were the case he would beat them!

[Master]

Tyson was successful because he fought, at HW, like a lighter weight fighter. Slipping punches, countering, changing angles, etc...are rarely seen at HW and the big guys tend to be dumb as well as slow. At WW, those skills are pretty common among the top guys. In addition they always fight at a faster pace and are much smarter than HWs. There have been numerous short, hard hitting welters; some did well, others did not. None are among the top guys at that weight, except Armstrong and his style was nothing like that of Tyson.
Tyson did not fight well inside, he did his damage on the way in. More often than not, he tied up in close, or accepted being tied up. That would hurt him at welter, where he'd be far more likely to get hit coming in.
The number punching system, and being around people that 'understood' it is pretty irrelevant in and of itself. Unless you think there is an important difference between saying "1-2-3" and saying "jab, right hand, hook." What hurt Tyson was when his reflexes slowed a bit and then he started standing straight up and walking in. At welter, that would make him Larry Barnes.

It wasn't just a numbered punching system

Buddy McGirt being interviewed about training Tyson.

"Yep. We've been working together all this week. Mike is going to take Saturday and Sunday off and we go back to the gym again on Monday. Let me tell ya, working with Mike has been really exciting for me AND it's a great learning experience. It's made me realize that every coach has their masterpiece... and Mike Tyson is Cus D'Amato's masterpiece. What Cus taught him... what Cus did with him... is truly amazing. I don't think Cus could have gotten the same results with of any other fighter. I always thought Cus' system was all about the peek-a-boo style. But it's not. It's about positioning yourself to throw punches... and Mike does it VERY well. Mike is extremely gifted and it's incredible to watch him. The other day Mike and I were walking down the street and I told him 'Man, you know... you're Cus D'Amato's masterpiece!' Mike agreed with me, and told me that Cus told him that he's one fighter that he never would have to protect."

Latest boxing News and Events in the USA and around the World

Exactly what you say when you're on the payroll of a man you know to be mentally fragile.

He had great talent but the dude didn't have it between the ears.

I'm shocked that some don't realize how much better the lighter fighters are. It's not even close.

Only Mayweather can compare to Tyson's shear dominance.

Mike also didn't have the luxuries of catch weights. He had to fight people 30lbs heavier than him. His skill set was that amazing that he dealt with these much bigger stronger men easily.

Ask Pacquiao to face froch or Kovalev. Thats the size difference Mike was dealing with.

@ross give it a rest on this one. Tyson was great but p4p he could not live with real great fighters like Robinson, Duran, Whitaker, Leonard and I would add Hearns to that welterweight list.

[ross]

We are being asked to imagine a scaled down version of Tyson. If he was at heavy, very fast, hard to hit, powerfull and takes a good shot from men 30lb heavier than him, the biggest hardest hitting men in boxing, you have to imagine he has these same attributes at welter where he is fighting men of equal weight and not of 3 or 4 weights above.

Mike was a heavyweight smaller than the size of old heavyweights dealing with modern size heavies. There hasnt been a shorter world heavy weight champ.

Its a hypothetical question but suddenly Mike would lose all his great attributes?

Like I said, the size difference Mike was dealing with, as in weight, is like Pacquaio and mayweather fighting at super middle. Are their skills that much that they could dominate over that much bigger men?

At welter he may be short but he was at heavy, only difference is his opponents are now the same weight and cant hold and lean in with their strength advantage.

If you don't like imaginary hypothetical questions dont look.

[Master]

We are being asked to imagine a scaled down version of Tyson. If he was at heavy, very fast, hard to hit, powerfull and takes a good shot from men 30lb heavier than him, the biggest hardest hitting men in boxing, you have to imagine he has these same attributes at welter where he is fighting men of equal weight and not of 3 or 4 weights above.

Mike was a heavyweight smaller than the size of old heavyweights dealing with modern size heavies. There hasnt been a shorter world heavy weight champ.

Its a hypothetical question but suddenly Mike would lose all his great attributes?

Like I said, the size difference Mike was dealing with, as in weight, is like Pacquaio and mayweather fighting at super middle. Are their skills that much that they could dominate over that much bigger men?

At welter he may be short but he was at heavy, only difference is his opponents are now the same weight and cant hold and lean in with their strength advantage.

If you don't like imaginary hypothetical questions dont look.

Yes the fighters I mentioned were greater than anyone Tyson fought ever. They had it all, Duran would have been a bigger, stronger and more ruthless version of Tyson.

[Ron Swanson]

We are being asked to imagine a scaled down version of Tyson. If he was at heavy, very fast, hard to hit, powerfull and takes a good shot from men 30lb heavier than him, the biggest hardest hitting men in boxing, you have to imagine he has these same attributes at welter where he is fighting men of equal weight and not of 3 or 4 weights above.

Mike was a heavyweight smaller than the size of old heavyweights dealing with modern size heavies. There hasnt been a shorter world heavy weight champ.

Its a hypothetical question but suddenly Mike would lose all his great attributes?

Like I said, the size difference Mike was dealing with, as in weight, is like Pacquaio and mayweather fighting at super middle. Are their skills that much that they could dominate over that much bigger men?

At welter he may be short but he was at heavy, only difference is his opponents are now the same weight and cant hold and lean in with their strength advantage.

If you don't like imaginary hypothetical questions dont look.

You simply aren 't thinking. So Tyson fought men 30lbs heavier. Okay, Tyson was 218-220 in shape. That means he was fighting people with around 13% body size advantage. PAC and Floyd have already moved up a greater percentage of body size. And they did that to fight guys far far far more skilled. Lennox Lewis might be able to beat any heavy ever. And he made Mike look useless. Now make LL 122lbs and put him in with Morales, what happens is Morales beats the dog snot out of him because the smaller guys are light years better. The big guys best skill is being big, all other skills follow off of that. Make Tyson 147 and he'd be 5 foot tall. He wouldn't be trying to get by a slow clumsy heavyweights reach, he'd be trying to get past the reach of a fast on balance skilled fighter. Tyson was what he was, a physical phenomenon taking advantage of oafs. All things equal the superior skill of smaller fighters verses bigger fighters if you make the bigger guy smaller the skills win out. A big mans advantage is size. You can't take size away and seriously think they still have the advantage, they just aren't as good. Watch a heavyweight fight, any heavyweight fight. And then watch a welterweight fight, any welterweight fight. The skills are not even comparable.

I probably repeated myself about four times because it's late and the argument lacks reason.

[ross]

We are being asked to imagine a scaled down version of Tyson. If he was at heavy, very fast, hard to hit, powerfull and takes a good shot from men 30lb heavier than him, the biggest hardest hitting men in boxing, you have to imagine he has these same attributes at welter where he is fighting men of equal weight and not of 3 or 4 weights above.

Mike was a heavyweight smaller than the size of old heavyweights dealing with modern size heavies. There hasnt been a shorter world heavy weight champ.

Its a hypothetical question but suddenly Mike would lose all his great attributes?

Like I said, the size difference Mike was dealing with, as in weight, is like Pacquaio and mayweather fighting at super middle. Are their skills that much that they could dominate over that much bigger men?

At welter he may be short but he was at heavy, only difference is his opponents are now the same weight and cant hold and lean in with their strength advantage.

If you don't like imaginary hypothetical questions dont look.

You simply aren 't thinking. So Tyson fought men 30lbs heavier. Okay, Tyson was 218-220 in shape. That means he was fighting people with around 13% body size advantage. PAC and Floyd have already moved up a greater percentage of body size. And they did that to fight guys far far far more skilled. Lennox Lewis might be able to beat any heavy ever. And he made Mike look useless. Now make LL 122lbs and put him in with Morales, what happens is Morales beats the dog snot out of him because the smaller guys are light years better. The big guys best skill is being big, all other skills follow off of that. Make Tyson 147 and he'd be 5 foot tall. He wouldn't be trying to get by a slow clumsy heavyweights reach, he'd be trying to get past the reach of a fast on balance skilled fighter. Tyson was what he was, a physical phenomenon taking advantage of oafs. All things equal the superior skill of smaller fighters verses bigger fighters if you make the bigger guy smaller the skills win out. A big mans advantage is size. You can't take size away and seriously think they still have the advantage, they just aren't as good. Watch a heavyweight fight, any heavyweight fight. And then watch a welterweight fight, any welterweight fight. The skills are not even comparable.

I probably repeated myself about four times because it's late and the argument lacks reason.

Heavyweights fight at their natural weight. Mike Tyson COULD have moved down to cruiser using todays "suppliments". He weighed just 215lb when he wiped out Holmes!

Manny and Floyd have mived up to their more natural weights. Much closer to what they walk around at, just like Mike was at heavy

Mike Tyson was fighting at the weight he walked around at. Could Canelo be competitive at light heavy?

As for the difference in skils between heavy and welter. Show me a fighter like Tyson who can stand in punching range and not get hit just using head movement.