Boxers Prime years

[irishny]

Originally Posted by bballchump11

So youve never seen prime Tyson have you?

I dont know how simple I can make this.

So im going to resort to caps.

IT IS EASY TO LOOK LIKE A HARD TO HIT,WEAVING,DUCKING FAST,THUNDEROUS PUNCHER WHEN THE GUYS YOU FIGHT ARE SLOWER,LESS SKILLED,AND CANT TAKE A PUNCH THAT WELL.

WHEN YOU FIGHT MORE SKILLED FIGHTERS,WHO ARE FASTER,STRONGER AND CAN TAKE A PUNCH,YOU DONT LOOK THAT GOOD!!!!

Thats what happened to Tyson against Holyfield.

Its like seeing guys play basketball in Italy and they're raining 3 pointers, rejecting guys and hitting windmill dunks for fun, you put them in the NBA and suddenly everyone is that bit bigger,stronger fitter and more skilled and suddenly they're not doing all those things anymore.

They havent gotten any worse,its just that now they have less time and space on the ball and arent physically as dominant anymore.

[bballchump11]

Originally Posted by irishny

I dont know how simple I can make this.

So im going to resort to caps.

IT IS EASY TO LOOK LIKE A HARD TO HIT,WEAVING,DUCKING FAST,THUNDEROUS PUNCHER WHEN THE GUYS YOU FIGHT ARE SLOWER,LESS SKILLED,AND CANT TAKE A PUNCH THAT WELL.

WHEN YOU FIGHT MORE SKILLED FIGHTERS,WHO ARE FASTER,STRONGER AND CAN TAKE A PUNCH,YOU DONT LOOK THAT GOOD!!!!

Thats what happened to Tyson against Holyfield.

Its like seeing guys play basketball in Italy and they're raining 3 pointers, rejecting guys and hitting windmill dunks for fun, you put them in the NBA and suddenly everyone is that bit bigger,stronger fitter and more skilled and suddenly they're not doing all those things anymore.

They havent gotten any worse,its just that now they have less time and space on the ball and arent physically as dominant anymore.

So you're telling me he didn't have as good of head movement, speed, defense, footwork or overall skill vs Frank Bruno in the rematch because his competition got better.

[Hands of Iron]

Jesus Christ.

[bballchump11]

Originally Posted by Hands of Iron

Jesus Christ.

yeah feel me

[PH|LLA]

I would say from 29-32, but there's a lot of exceptions

[Hands of Iron]

Originally Posted by bballchump11

yeah feel me

This is why I'm glad Duran is my second favorite fighter of all-time by natural occurrence. Tyson comes with too much baggage and too many stereotypes embedded into people's brains. It gets old repeating the same shit over and over. And over and over.

[irishny]

Originally Posted by bballchump11

So you're telling me he didn't have as good of head movement, speed, defense, footwork or overall skill vs Frank Bruno in the rematch because his competition got better.

Having seen both fights, he beat Bruno worse in the second and looked every bit as impressive.

[turbotime]

Originally Posted by Hands of Iron

This is why I'm glad Duran is my second favorite fighter of all-time by natural occurrence. Tyson comes with too much baggage and too many stereotypes embedded into people's brains. It gets old repeating the same shit over and over. And over and over.

Don't bother. Irish also believes that Pac beat a prime Morales in the rematch.

[Hands of Iron]

That signature quote...

[irishny]

Originally Posted by turbotime

Don't bother. Irish also believes that Pac beat a prime Morales in the rematch.

Ah,another fantasist who believes because one of his favorite boxers lost in his late 20s,that he must have been past prime.

Seriously guys, does it really make you feel better to make believe that your favorite fighters always had an excuse for losing?

For Tyson fans

Douglas:Mike didnt prepare right.

Holyfield 1 and 2: Despite being 29/30 and in less wars than Holyfield, and coming off a dominating victroy over WBC champ Frank Bruno and massive bookies favorite, he was "past prime". (Mike apparently had a prime that lasted about 6 months sometime in the mid to late 80s)

And well if he was padt prime at 29/30,theres no point even going into Lewis etc.

Tyson fans sleep well knowing that their hero was "unbeatable" in his prime,which apparently lasted about a year... tops,in his early 20s.



Morales fans

July 2004(aged 27) dominates a top class Carlosd Hernandez and takes his IBF belt

Nov 2004 (aged 2 goes toe to toe with ATG Marco Antonio Barrera, and loses controversially

Mar 2005 (aged 2 beats rising superstar Manny Pacquiao in 10 rounds.

Sept 2005 (aged 29) moves up to lightweight, gets beaten by Zahir Raheen by UD, suddenly gets declared shot.

Jan 2006 (aged 29) fights Pacquaio in rematch,gets stopped in 3. Match is apparently irrelevant since some point in the last 9 months Morales has suddenly become "shot"

Therefore Morales never really got beaten by Pacquiao since he was past prime and meant nothing.

Morales fans sleep well in their beds knowing their hero never got beat like a red headed stepchild.

[jeffjoiner]

Originally Posted by bballchump11

I was planning on doing the math and hopefully making a chart between the corelation of a fighter's debut age and retirement age, but I forgot how to do the math I learned in statistics

I could give you the parameters, but in the baseline data is so subjective that your conclusions would be meaningless.

This is another one of the intangible conclusions of boxing. This isn't baseball which is a legacy of statistics.

[turbotime]

Originally Posted by Hands of Iron

That signature quote...

Pretty much the only time I've ever seen cobra in the General.

[D4thincarnation]

Originally Posted by bobotnaman

when is a boxer considered prime?
not too young and inexperience.
not too old and not physically hindered.

On average a boxer has 15 years before decline starts setting in.