What if Rahman would have defended against Tyson instead of the Lewis rematch?

Ah, yes, but he did beat Clifford Etienne !
(you know, the guy who spend half his fight with Fres Oquendo on the canvas)

 

He hit Clifford Etienne hard, as he was still capable of doing.

Clifford decided he didn't want to walk through shots like that to win.

A completely legitimate KO1, but not proof that Mike could beat a world class fighter.

Rahman would get up. Count on it.

 

Exactly.

Etienne was a guy that they knew would hit the canvas too often, or not get up at all.
He was a fringe contender, not one of the top-flight.

It's like saying, yeah, I think in 2003 we can still beat Marvis Frazier. And that's perhaps being generous to Etienne.

 

We call those puncher's padding.

Good fighters who don't take good punches. If you're managing a guy who can really crack but you fear can't win a championship, those are the guys to manuever him to a big money fight. Semi-credible and credible opposition that have decent resumes and skills, but are not at all likely to sustain your guys punch.

Etienne wasn't a fix, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a bought and paid for win.

 

This

 

Agreed.

 

Funny the main boxing magazine not sure if was The Ring or Boxing Illustrated that came out shortly before the fight had interviewed a lot of top trainers and boxing people who said Etienne was the guy to end Tyson. This was going to be the guy who stopped Tyson from making money.
Personally I felt Tyson would stop him in one round but I was surprised to read that.

Going back to Rahman he would go the same way as Etienne. Rahman was not that much better than Etienne and thats not saying much for Rahman or Etienne.

Really? When did Rahman ever get up? Never.. When he was hurt he flopped around the canvas or got knocked out as badly as Etienne did.

 

Got up against Maskaev in the rematch. Got up against Wlad. Actually went out to fight after being fouled by Tua.

If you cant SEE Rahman is superior to Etienne, there is little point talking with you.

 

The rahman who turned up for the first lewis fight was very well conditioned and fought a great fight.

Tyson would have to hit him early but stay on top of him with a sink or swim attitude basically.

Rahman could certainly outlast tyson of 2001, but by the same stretch he could also be blasted out within the first few rounds.

 

Yeah youre right should have rephrased that. He never got up with any conviction unless you want to count the Corrie Sanders fight which was a mess. :rofl

.

Rahman was better not superior.

 

I agree. A well conditioned Rahman against the 2001 version of Tyson who fought every other year and didnt train enough to fight a long fight would be in trouble in the second half of a fight against Hasim, but Tyson wouldnt need to go that deep. Rahman was just too easy to hit and once you had him hurt he was doomed.

 

After 1991, he only fighter Tyson beat who I'd put in Rahman's class was Frank Bruno, and that was way back in March 1996.
Bruno was psyched out by Tyson - who at that point still had a serious reputation that other world class HWs took notice of.

In the meantime Rahman had beat Lennox Lewis, and had previously proved how tough he was against Tua, who hit him just as hard or harder than Tyson and did so after the bell at that !
He's 28 years old and at his prime, not a great fighter, but a fair one, and strong as an ox.

Tyson since 1997 had been a car crash caricature. Fighting second- and third league heavyweights and acting crazy.
By 2001 he was 35 years old, and not a young 35. Kid Dynamite was no more.

I tend to rate the fighters on their current form first and foremost.
Rahman was doing good in the top flight in real fights. 2001 was his peak. Tyson was talking about eating babies and was smoking weed and living in strip bars.
And some of you guys reckon he was "not right" for Douglas, need to understand how far behind that he has fallen in 2001.
There's a reason he looked so pathetic and painfully outclassed when he fought Lewis. The guy was utterly shot and utterly incapable of even training right for the fight. He was long gone.
He was nowhere near good enough to be the champion again.

 

George Foreman fought a guy like that in 1990 names Adilson Rodriguez. Rodriguez was ranked in the lower part of the top 10 and the fight was broadcasted on the undercard of Tyson vs Tillman. Adilson was a halfway decent boxer with a respectable record, but also with a glass chin.. it was that victory that landed Foreman in the ring with Holyfield.

 

Bingo.

Tyson had nothing left, and any top 10 heavyweight would have handled him.

I can't diss punchers padding, though. Seeing as it makes up 70% of my record.

 

Did Maskaev hit him as hard as Tyson woud have? Thats the thing. Tua didnt really land anything on Rahman until he hit him at the bell. We saw Tua go rounds with guys who didnt have the greatest chins but knew how to simply move to their left and keep their left hand glued to their chin and pop their jab to avoid the lefthook (Izon, Wooden, Maskaev, etc). You cant really compare Tua to Tyson because even around this time Tyson could throw more than a lefthook and Tua really could not.

Was Lamon Brewster as good as Rahman? He could punch and box a little yet he lost by wide UD to Etienne.

Its not about Tyson being that good, but how mediocre Rahman was and the whole division for that matter including Etienne, Brewster, Maskaev, Izon, Briggs, Botha, Golota, Grant all of them! Thats why these guys were swapping wins with each other. The only guy who was consistently beating all of them around this time (late 90's) was Tua, but half the time he was losing every round before lowering the boom. Rahman didnt do anything special or show some great chin in the Tua fight. When Tua finally connected Rahman couldnt even recover during the minute rest.