Tyson by a mile Tyson was a much larger underdog he was younger than Jones and showed no signs of slipping Jones was mid to upper 30's just struggled in the toughest fight of his career vs the same guy who goes on to KO him Yes nobody expected Jones to be KO'd but defeat seemed possible Tyson defeat was not even a thought what were the Tarver jones 2 odds
this shouldn't even be a debate. tyson-douglas was by far the most shocking upset to ever happen in all of sports. douglas was a 42-1 underdog...come on. whoever said jones-tarver is delusional.
You might be understating it. Buster was probably at a level below Alexander, although he was a contender.
Some Tyson supporters will claim that he was over the hill, even though he was 23 at the time. But you are right. He was in his athletic prime by any standards. If he didn't train hard, or if his technique fell apart when he was challenged by a sharp boxer, that's his fault and should be held against him in determining his greatness.
Jones for me .. The man was virtually untouchable for 15 yrs at least with Tyson it happened over a course of a few rds .A shock still but nothing to getting KO ed in the 2nd .
I think he proved he was better by that performance against Tyson. But that's not the question. We're talking about expectations of Douglas based on what he did before he fought Tyson. Before his fight with Tyson, he was a problematic contender who had shown promise in big fights but had not fulfilled it. There was one particular fight in which he was ahead but then stunk out the rest of the fight (against Tony Tucker maybe?). Alexander had at least some sort of belt at one point, right? I think Alexander would not have been a 42-1 underdog as Douglas was. Probably 10-1 or maybe even less.
Fighters can be great for two different reasons. Physical ability or skill. In cases like Ali, Jones, Whittaker, Hammed... incredible athleticism lets them simply out perform opponents. However, those reflexes and speed are guaranteed to fade in time. Jones had horrible fundamentals but it didn't matter because he could swim without getting wet and look good doing it. The other type of legendary fighter is amazing because of technique. Hopkins, Tyson, Joe Louis... these guys have a longer shelf life because technique doesn't fade, and they can compete as long as their body will stay in condition. Tyson, while known for his power, had textbook perfect technique that gave him that explosiveness. So, to me, watching both guys.. I never expected to see Tyson lose. He was faster, stronger, patient, more skilled and just... beastly. He had an answer for anything the other guy came with and when he didn't have an answer, he just unleashed the fury and KTFO of them. Watching him fight was like watching Flo Jo sprint on the juice or Gianna Michaels shake her boobies...just amazing and unnatural. Jones on the other hand, was amazing but you could see that he was able to stay two steps ahead because of amazing reflexes and speed. It was possible, but unlikely, that eventually he would zig when he should have zagged and get caught.
I was 18 at the time of Tyson's loss and although it wasn't a "Everyone remembers where they were when they heard the news that JFK got shot!" moment, but it sure was close... I think Tyson was quite a bigger name globally, than RJJ ever was.
I was about that same age at the time and I remember exactly where I was (sitting at my desk) and everyone talking about it. The few times I remember where I was when I heard a news story: Space Shuttle Columbia explosion (sitting at my desk in grade school watching it live) Mike Tyson losing to Douglas (again sitting at a desk) My Baby Mamma telling me she was pregnant (chow hall on Keesler Air Force Base) Learning that my dad just died (walking out of a barber shop, opening my car door when the phone rang) 9/11 (driving to work) Reading that US troops were deploying to Iraq (London England, on vacation) Ronald Reagan dying (Salt Lake City airport)