Mike Tyson:Overhyped?

Holyfield was already slowing down some time before the Mercer fight. He was losing the spring in his step.
Of course he was even a lot more further gone against Rahman.
And, yes, his style changed.

It's called declining. When certain things leave certain fighters their styles have to change. Eventually their ability to use any of their skills leaves them too.


But Holyfield always was a headbutter. Almost all good aggressive fighters are !

 

I agree.
There's no way Tyson wouldn't have done something similar again if Mills had just docked him a million points or whatever and said carry on.

God knows, maybe he would have bitten Holyfield's jugular ! vampire style

 

The difference is, Tyson elbows didnt/wouldnt have changed the result of the fights. Holyfields headbutts in the first fight were a major turning point.

Tyson has admitted he felt of losing his composure.

He was fighting the same way hes always fought.

It really doesnt matter what people think, in Tysons head he obviously thought he was levelling the playing field. Maybe thats why he bit Holyfield, he couldnt find any other way of intimidating Holyfield so he decided to bite him and put some fear in him?

That was pretty bad acting and cringeworthy

 

I agree with your assessment of Tyson and Holyfield's dirty fighting repetoires .


But I think Holyfield always had the butt in his arsenal.

This 26 year old Holyfield :

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3oyrq4Q5gM[/ame]

And the finish of the same fight :

@ 8:25 replay

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83KFbSEZXO0&feature=related[/ame]

 

I thought Holyfield beat him up the entire fight, more or less.
True, after the 5th or 6th round it was more obvious that Tyson was going to get KO'd and had no real chance.

Well, that's it. He lost his composure completely. on something as silly as a headbutt and a cut eye (happens all the time to boxers).
To be boxing at all, you need to remain composed within certain boundaries.
He wasn't. So he wasn't fighting well at all. You have to be mentally focussed, not just performing in some emotional rage.
the guy had a meltdown.
I think we all agree on that point.

I have a higher estimation of Tyson than you then.

...... instead of trying to win the fight !?
In other words, he quit.

 

Yes he was declining in skills too thats why he added the butt to his offense. I dont know how you can argue that he didnt use his head a lot more after the Tyson fight. :huh

 

I'm not.
I'm just saying he was already a "headbutter" earlier in his career.

 

Holyfield became an intentional headbutter. I dont think he was earlier in his career.

 

Holyfield definitely became an intentional butter, but fighting dirty is part of the game. Bowe hit low, Tyson elbowed, hit low and butted, Holyfield did likewise and Lennox held and hit a lot.
I won't even mention Marciano.
****, even 'gentlemanly' Frank Bruno fought a filthy fight on occasion. (Coetzer, Tyson etc.)

 

I think after the Witherspoon loss, when George Francis was brought in to train Bruno, the major shift in Bruno's style was more of the dirty fighting !
I remember Francis alluding to this quite a bit.
Not that he was a saint before, but he became quite a foul fighter after, with the rabbit punches and holding at hitting to an extreme degree.

 

You mean -

Tyson beat SHOT Holmes who beat SHOT Ali who beat Foreman 6 YEARS EARLIER.

Credibility. You have NONE. :hi:

 

I don't know how unprepared goes over so well for Lennox as an excuse for his losses. That man was laid out by one punch on two occasions in the early going during two different title reigns. That wouldn't ever happen to Tyson. If his chin were to be exposed as being that disgraceful, I wouldn't be a fan. Point blank, period.

Against Douglas, he took an unbelievable amount of punishment for the better part of ten rounds until Douglas unloaded the last unbelievably crisp, flush combination to finally get him out of there. Against Holyfield, he wasn't even on the canvas when the fight was stopped. A bit melodramatic. Everything after that, he was shot fighter anyway. And even then, Lennox was shocked at the punches he was able to withstand.

Interesting you bring this up, though. Tyson didn't use an excuse at the time.

[url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-231600/The-animal-trainer-Tyson-act.html[/url]

 

"Mike Tyson was good enough at his youthful peak to be considered among the best heavyweights in history."

 

Glad to see fans realize that fouling is as part of pro-boxing as punching.

Both Tyson and Holyfield were masters, and in each of their fights, they fouled each a large amount in what looked like a pier 6 brawl.

Ironically, the headbutt that damaged Mike the most was entirely his doing, and always looked to me as if HE might have been going for a butt.

Holy was always a rough fighter. He even sparred a bit dirty.

I enjoyed it. Rugged boxing is the right kind of pro boxing. I tend to get angrier at referee's who unfairly enforce rules-See the Mares-Agbeko fight. Throw low all you want if you want to mix it in with body shots, its on the referee to take away the incentive and level the playing field on the score cards.