Stylistic nightmares.

[VG_Addict]

What were some times where a fighter lost to a fighter below his level because he was a bad stylistic match-up?

[El Kabong]

Shane Mosley vs Vernon Forrest & Shane Mosley vs Winky Wright: Both times Shane was up against lanky long fighters with good jabs and good right hands as well as solid defenses.

Mike Tyson vs Buster Douglas: sure Mike didn't train and sure Buster worked his ass off, but you had to believe that somebody like a Douglas would come in and beat Tyson, maybe by decision, but you never thought you'd see Tyson KO'd. That matchup was very similar to the Mosley-Forrest matchup only Douglas hadn't had any consistency as a fighter and he certainly had never achieved and would never again achieve that success in the ring.....it was a bad style matchup exacerbated by Mike Tyson not training.

[mikeeod]

A few cases come to mind:
Terry Norris vs Keith Mullings
Kostya Tszyu vs Vince Philips/Ricky Hatton
James Toney vs Drake Thadzi/Dave Tiberi/Montell Griffin
Antonio Tarver vs Glen Johnson
Vernon Forrest vs Ricardo Mayorga
Andrew Lewis vs Mayorga
Roberto Duran vs Tommy Hearns
Tommy Hearns vs Iran Barkley
Marco Antonio Barrera vs Junior Jones/Pac Man (first fight)

[Master]

Disagree with a lot of those including Tyson v Douglas and Terry v Mullings.

Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas like Tucker (who had beaten Buster already). Mike looked poor in that fight and almost unrecognisable from the fighter that blew away Berbick and Spinks.

Terry Norris was shot by the time he lost to Mullings, peak Terry would destroy him.

[SugarBoxing]

Disagree with a lot of those including Tyson v Douglas and Terry v Mullings.

Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas like Tucker (who had beaten Buster already). Mike looked poor in that fight and almost unrecognisable from the fighter that blew away Berbick and Spinks.

Terry Norris was shot by the time he lost to Mullings, peak Terry would destroy him.

Second that, also

Kostya Tszyu vs Vince Philips/Ricky Hatton

Kostya Tszyu got soft version of what happened to Tyson before DOuglas, he got cocky, did not train hard enough, relied on his talent and low level of the opponent too much. This has nothing to do with style

[mikeeod]

Disagree with a lot of those including Tyson v Douglas and Terry v Mullings.

Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas like Tucker (who had beaten Buster already). Mike looked poor in that fight and almost unrecognisable from the fighter that blew away Berbick and Spinks.

Terry Norris was shot by the time he lost to Mullings, peak Terry would destroy him.

Second that, also

Kostya Tszyu vs Vince Philips/Ricky Hatton

Kostya Tszyu got soft version of what happened to Tyson before DOuglas, he got cocky, did not train hard enough, relied on his talent and low level of the opponent too much. This has nothing to do with style

Vince was blown out by Ike Quartey in 3 rounds a couple of fights before Kostya. Vince was a big man for 140, had solid boxing skills, and couldn't miss with his right if he tried vs Kostya. Horrible style match up. Ricky was just too physical, in my opinion. Kostya didn't like wars like that.

[El Kabong]

Disagree with a lot of those including Tyson v Douglas

Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas like Tucker (who had beaten Buster already). Mike looked poor in that fight and almost unrecognisable from the fighter that blew away Berbick and Spinks.

OK

True, Tyson DID beat better fighters than Douglas (but that's not the question posed). Now, Tony Tucker was a very good fighter, yes he was better than Douglas, BUT Tony Tucker had injured his right hand in sparring and in the fight vs Tyson he broke his hand early on and therefore was fighting Tyson one handed and was at a serious disadvantage. Tony Tucker could have been the guy to beat Tyson had everything fallen into place, but it didn't. Now the question posed was "stylistic nightmares" and I stand by the Tyson's style wasn't good at dealing with fighters who could move and use range on the night he fought Buster Douglas you saw the limitations of Tyson's style...he had trouble working in because Douglas tied him up, he had trouble landing because Douglas used distance. There were times Douglas slipped up and a prime Tyson would have ended things, but at that moment Douglas just simply had the style to beat THAT Tyson and he did so convincingly winning round after round after round.

[SugarBoxing]

Disagree with a lot of those including Tyson v Douglas

Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas like Tucker (who had beaten Buster already). Mike looked poor in that fight and almost unrecognisable from the fighter that blew away Berbick and Spinks.

OK

True, Tyson DID beat better fighters than Douglas (but that's not the question posed). Now, Tony Tucker was a very good fighter, yes he was better than Douglas, BUT Tony Tucker had injured his right hand in sparring and in the fight vs Tyson he broke his hand early on and therefore was fighting Tyson one handed and was at a serious disadvantage. Tony Tucker could have been the guy to beat Tyson had everything fallen into place, but it didn't. Now the question posed was "stylistic nightmares" and I stand by the Tyson's style wasn't good at dealing with fighters who could move and use range on the night he fought Buster Douglas you saw the limitations of Tyson's style...he had trouble working in because Douglas tied him up, he had trouble landing because Douglas used distance. There were times Douglas slipped up and a prime Tyson would have ended things, but at that moment Douglas just simply had the style to beat THAT Tyson and he did so convincingly winning round after round after round.

Tyson style was DESIGNED to tackle style of DOuglas and Tucker and ... Ali .... And Master says that since prime Tyson won over Tucker so easily, stylistically, Douglas would be even easier. There was NOTHING special about DOuglas, and bloated motionless Tyson managed KD him with the only clean shot in that fight.

[SlimTrae]

Disagree with a lot of those including Tyson v Douglas and Terry v Mullings.

Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas like Tucker (who had beaten Buster already). Mike looked poor in that fight and almost unrecognisable from the fighter that blew away Berbick and Spinks.

Terry Norris was shot by the time he lost to Mullings, peak Terry would destroy him.

Agreed.

@mikeod: anyone good/great puncher with a chin was a bad matchup for Hearns!

Edit. Pavlik never should've fought Bhop.

Hop can't beat fast paced fighters like Calzaghe. Joe beats him 3 outta 3. Albeit close in each fight.

[Sleepwalker]

De La Hoya was all wrong for Mayorga.

They can fight 1000 rounds and Oscar wins 998 of them.

[SlimTrae]

Pacquiao can't beat counter punchers (with respectable power)
Morales fight one to all Marquez & Floyd. If Bradley had any pop to his shots he wins both.

Yes Pac can take punches, but he responds recklessly.

Edit- another reason why his 2nd fight with MAB doesn't make highlight reels. Marco wanted to counter, so Pac couldn't get off.

[mikeeod]

Disagree with a lot of those including Tyson v Douglas and Terry v Mullings.

Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas like Tucker (who had beaten Buster already). Mike looked poor in that fight and almost unrecognisable from the fighter that blew away Berbick and Spinks.

Terry Norris was shot by the time he lost to Mullings, peak Terry would destroy him.

Have to agree to disagree. I feel like Buster's size, boxing skill, and jab were perfectly suited to punish the much shorter Tyson. Style-wise, Tyson is made for Douglas, as he was for Holyfield, and would have been for foreman.

Norris was always chinny, so in my opinion, while he was a superior athlete and technician, guys like Simon Brown, Julian Jackson, and Mullings would always have something for him.

[Master]

Disagree with a lot of those including Tyson v Douglas and Terry v Mullings.

Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas like Tucker (who had beaten Buster already). Mike looked poor in that fight and almost unrecognisable from the fighter that blew away Berbick and Spinks.

Terry Norris was shot by the time he lost to Mullings, peak Terry would destroy him.

Have to agree to disagree. I feel like Buster's size, boxing skill, and jab were perfectly suited to punish the much shorter Tyson. Style-wise, Tyson is made for Douglas, as he was for Holyfield, and would have been for foreman.

Norris was always chinny, so in my opinion, while he was a superior athlete and technician, guys like Simon Brown, Julian Jackson, and Mullings would always have something for him.

Terry Norris was highly skilled and talented and the only criticism I can give him was his lack of control and possibly weak chin. His defeats were not because of his style, he beats almost everyone because his skills were of the highest order.

Jackson had freakish power and would have lost 9 times out of 10 against Norris. Simon got outboxed in the return to prove my point. Terry was finished by the time he beat Mullings and just broke down. His trainer said that his fight against the Aussie was when he realised that he was finished at the top level.