28 years ago today...

[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

[Britkid]

I wasn't around back then so wouldn't know, but it definitely is possible that he was ranked #1 over Sweet Pea because when he KTFO Spinks, Pernell was coming off a loss JLR a few short months before. It was a bullshit decision, but still technically a "loss", so Sweet Pea couldn't have been #1 at the time Tyson beat Spinks.

My point was 'The Ring' did not rank fighters pound for pound before 1995...

In 1989, yeah Whitaker despite the Ramirez fix... I mean robbery (so sue me Senor Suleiman), was not pound for pound a contender for the #1 spot, but Chavez was. And some had the Kid from Culiacan ahead of Tyson, pound for pound.

This says Tyson was Ring ranked P4P no.1

The Ring Magazine's Annual Ratings: 1989 - Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia

Is it a mistake?

No. that is right, it was the first ratings after their comeback. The KO magazine did an annual poll to decide the best pound for pound fighters, but when The Ring became part of the KO/World Boxing/Boxing 87 et al group, they eventually took over the poll, with a record of the previous polls, that date back to 1980.

KO (April 1995)



The Ring (April 2007)

[bradlee180]

^ Notice how Britkid doesn't acknowledge the bradguy's name when stating that bradguy was in fact RIGHT about the Ring's pound-for-Pound in 1989. What did I say about some guys just can't stand to be wrong?

Britkid's post should've read:
"bradguy was right, I was wrong, The Ring did in fact rank Mike Tyson as #1 pound-for-pound in 1989 just as bradguy said they did. And Chavez was in fact Ring's #2 P4P, also just as bradguy said. Please forgive me, bradguy; you are The Man!!! Here's to you, bradguy, as a token of atonement for my disrespectful, pretentious behavior. CHEERS!!!"

...But kudos to you, you have a passion and you have a solid argument, but there are always different sides to the story. And you will notice I have no issue playing Devil's Advocate, to create a debate.

...and you will come to understand that I take nothing personally in an internet forum as I post inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in the online community, such as in a forum, chat-room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response OR of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

[Beanflicker]

Hahahaha, and winner by 11th round TKO... Bradguy

[Britkid]

Hahahaha, and winner by 11th round TKO... Bradguy

I was robbed, I reckon this Bradguy is paying Mendoza, Sulaiman et al...

[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.

[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!

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.

He may not have been the same fighter but was Mike any better? Not fighting or even training for 4 years!!? That he had any success at all after prison is testiment to the natural ability he was born with.

Holyfield has been proven to have bought steroids and of your naive enough to believe he never took them then your are deluded. Holyfield as and was a cheat.

[Beanflicker]

Holyfield has been proven to have bought steroids and of your naive enough to believe he never took them then your are deluded. Holyfield as and was a cheat.

He was holding them for a friend...

[ross]

Holyfield has been proven to have bought steroids and of your naive enough to believe he never took them then your are deluded. Holyfield as and was a cheat.

He was holding them for a friend...

He actually is quoted as saying he bought them for his dad!

Holyfield is a cheat and a joke and its frustrating to see morons disregard the evidence against him (tiny bollocks, lack of testosterone, heart problems, being caught red handed paying for them etc) and continue to rank him higher than he deserves. Lance armstrong got stripped of his titles, why nt Holyfield and every other dirty fucking cheat?

[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.

[Beanflicker]

Holyfield is a cheat and a joke and its frustrating to see morons disregard the evidence against him (tiny bollocks, lack of testosterone, heart problems, being caught red handed paying for them etc) and continue to rank him higher than he deserves. Lance armstrong got stripped of his titles, why nt Holyfield and every other dirty fucking cheat?

To be honest, I'd be shocked if Mike wasn't using at some point, but he never got busted like Holyfield did so whatever.

[Master]

Holyfield is a cheat and a joke and its frustrating to see morons disregard the evidence against him (tiny bollocks, lack of testosterone, heart problems, being caught red handed paying for them etc) and continue to rank him higher than he deserves. Lance armstrong got stripped of his titles, why nt Holyfield and every other dirty fucking cheat?

To be honest, I'd be shocked if Mike wasn't using at some point, but he never got busted like Holyfield did so whatever.

Do not tarnish all fighters with the same brush. Tyson was probably taking marijuana than PED.