Mike Tyson: Best Opponent For His 1995 Comeback

True but Mike got less than 8 rounds of work in the 4 fights before facing Holyfield. Maybe a few fights before facing Bruno and Seldon, who might not have been champs if Tyson fought them 1/2 a year later, would have given Tyson more rounds and taken more rust off. McCall would have been a good choice.

 

There was too much to lose for King to put Tyson in with anyone more than a McNeeley type, but he should have taken a few more fights before fighting for the title or at least made sure he got some good solid rounds in, but then again they figured Holyfield would be the one who provided that.

Im sure if Mcall would have defeated Bruno and Tyson had to face him, he would have made sure he was capable of going 12, because Oliver was for sure going to be there the course.

 

Exactly, i don't know why anybody defends King's choice of opponents for Mike Post-Prison. Picking guys likely to be demolished early would've been ok if Tyson had a lot of fights at regular intervals... but he didn't. When Tyson faced Holy in '96, he only had fought a one-sided 17 minutes in the ring after his 4 year 2 month prison layoff, meaning he was severely rusted. Even though McCall lost to Bruno, i still think he would've been a great super-durable choice of opponent, to shake off rust in a long fight against.

 

I actually thought Bruno was a tougher opponent for Tyson than McCall was at the time. Bruno looked MASSIVE.

 

Agreed Kalasinn,

Its no wonder Holyfield took him apart relatively easily, in hindsight as you mentioned Mike had done **** all since his release, & against obscure opponents (save for a gallant Bruno) & its a true shame that King & Co. were that blinded by the fact that Holyfield would be a walkover.....I guess its a good thing the bubble burst?....:think

 

Looks can be deceiving, just look at the chiselled physique of one Bruce Seldon :smoke

 

Depends really. Bruno beat Mcall and took his title. He barely made it to the final bell. Mcall was a bad fighter. He was limited and fought down to his opponents level. He should have beaten Bruno just by pressure, but he held back and allowed Bruno to finish.
Bruno was probably more of a punching threat to Tyson, but Mcall was the better fighter to get rounds with. Tyson would have had to work very hard and put his punches together to get a stoppage against Mcall. I think he would have beaten Mcall, but he would have had to work a lot harder than he did against Bruno to do it.

 

Nobody too tough or that would frustrate or make him look bad... Guys like Larry Donald,Oliver Mccall, Raymercer are terrrible calls and you guys would make horrible managers... Any of those guys capable of pulling an upset over a rusty Tyson.. Hell they might have even given a prime Tyson trouble (especially Mercer).... I mean you got a rangy mover with a good chin,, and too tough as nails punchers not good... Id say after 2 or 3 fights then yey.

SOmeone better than Mcnneel that might take him a few rounds but fall.... Like a Melvin FOster,Ray Anis,BOris Powell or his later opponents Talented and slick but small and light punching guys like Mathis,Norris. WHo probably would have only lasted a round or 2 longer.

Today id probably pick like an Sosnowski,CHisora,Mormeck type opponent.... All would be kod between the 1st and 5th(Sosnowski) rounds.

 

I agree with all of your post and especially the part in bold.

 

Tyson's first 2 opponents out of prison were perfect. Bruno and Seldon were dusted off too quickly, and by them being titleists that automatically puts Tyson to the top of the division without getting enough rounds in. He would have to defend against Holyfield, Bowe, Lewis, Mercer, Moorer, Foreman, Golota who were at the top of their game yet Mike was not.