Did Tyson have a weak pain threshold??

I think Tyson came well prepared for the Holyfield rematch. He lost the first 2 rounds because of implementing a riddiculous outside boxing style. He finally showed some remnants of the old vintage Tyson in the third round where he was really mad with Holyfield by peppering him with body shots which staggered Holyfield and won Tyson the third round.

Had it not been for the ear bite, god knows what would have happened during the remainder of the fight because Tyson really came in shape, had trained hard for the rematch and was more elusive and fast this time around.

 

It's very hard to know what went through his head in that fight. He seemed to just lose the plot for some reason, but what got to him was frustration rather than pain, I think. It was not like he was getting beat up, he was well in it. He was actually having his best moment in the fight just before he started with the biting.

 

Holy would have knocked him out. Tyson took the easy way out.

 

He looked a lot sharper in the rematch but he was shot mentally. He couldn't handle anything not going his way, you could see that Evander's early success had him concerned even without the head butts. With that mind set it would never have been a long fight imo, Tyson was an angry guy, he would have melted down. Physically he was a beast that night though, its a real shame he couldn't hold it together.

 

Can't imagine Tyson taking the type punishment Frazier took in fight one with Ali and winning. Can't see Tyson taking the beating he took against Ali in fight three and coming back to make it an even fight. Frazier was down twice against Bonavena and came back to win. No one doubts Fraziers heart because of these type performances. These are lacking on tysons resume and why his will to win is questioned by not just me but just about every noted historian.

 

The way I see it is that Tyson was an on top fighter, I don’t necessarily see that as a fault because when he was at his best not many could get him into that “from behind” position (yeah I know this is sounding dodgy). I’d agree that going by the evidence you couldn’t with certainty say that Tyson could come back from a beating to win cause it never happened. But the question is would he have to?

He had the speed and power to beat a lot of all timers without needing to go to the depths, its reasonable to say he could KO Frazier early for example. Added to the fact he has shown some resilience in his career, it not like he has never faced a challenge. I think it takes a very tough fighter with a combination of qualities to get Tyson from that on top position, those are the ones I rate above him on my top ten. Just because another fighter has gone to the depths does that make them better on the ATG list as well?

 

Ok. Can you imagine Lewis taking these punishments? Lewis went down with just one punch to the face 2 times from absolute journey men.

Is it Tyson's fault that 90-95% of the fighters he fought were not good enough to put him down on the Canvas? Heart is a very subjective term. I think Tyson showed plenty of toughness and heart in his defeats, the ability to stand on your feet for 10 whole rounds while taking powerful shots from Big punchers is heart.

 

lol amazing

 

Good point, its going back to judging Tyson differently from other greats, how many great fighters could have done what Ali and Frazier did? It is subjective, how you judge greatness, is it how much of a beating you take to come back, or being supreme in your field like Mayweather?

 

The only journeymen you'd know anything about, would be truck drivers.

 

One of the major criteria for all time greatness is the ability to come back in a losing bout against top opposition to win. It proves ATG toughness and will to win. Many historians did not rank Ali on top until after he beat Frazier in Manila as an example. Historians site Jeffries win over Sharkey, Dempsey stopping Brennan and Firpo as well as Sharkey, Louis come from behind kos of Conn and Walcott, Marciano stopping Walcott in a bout he was losing and Charles with his nose split in half, Ali in his bout with Frazier 3. Historians find it very difficult to rate fighters who did not show this type of intestinal fortitude over those that did.

 

Tyson was so dominant at such a young age that he never had to make adjustments to his strategy. He had a magic formula that always worked. Much like the big kid or the exceptionally fast kid in junior sports, they often struggle once the others catch up physically because now they arent bigger or faster, so too Tyson didnt have coping measures when his go to plan was nullified.
Tysons pain threshold was fine, he took beatings from Douglas and Holyfield before succumbing, it was his ability to deal with adversity, and resulting lack of mental resilience that was not of the highest calibre

 

Lewis was a good enough fighter than he didn't have to take the amount of punishment Tyson took, so it's a mute point.

 

How is that worse? Tyson was years removed from his prime and that was a match-up that meant nothing.

Vitali quit in a bid for Byrd's world heavyweight title, in his prime.

Sorry, but the latter is 10x worse.

 

As for the question posited in the OP, not even going to dignify that with a response. Tyson was no Monzón but nor was his pain threshold low, even by HW champ standards.