"Iron" Mike Tyson vs. James "Buster" Douglas - 1987

It never happened!

Round 8 remember? The first KO cancelled out the second.

We Tyson worshippers repeat that mantra to help us sleep at night.

 

ah my mistake Unforgiven. if a primed determined Douglas turned up in 87 it would definitely be a tough fight for Tyson. I could see Douglas winning on points, but I could also see Tyson scoring a KO, he did hurt Douglas in their actual fight after all and in my view he wasn't in top form. Under these circumstances you would also have to consider Tyson seeing Douglas as a much bigger threat than he did in 1990, I'd wager him and his team would be more prepared. Its a great fantasy match up thats for sure.

I'd have to disagree with you in that if Tyson lost in 87 he would have a ton of excuses as he did in 1990. All he would really have is his life being a bit hectic and pressure at a young age, in comparison to him losing his wife, his long time trainer, his entire team, Don King ruining him, skills visibly slipping etc.

87 Tyson losing would be a lot more damaging unless he avenged the loss very quickly. I guess Tyson detractors could say he was very lucky to lose when he did, with the excuses and circumstances as they were, he achieved a lot before that point and it was almost put in a time capsule, many don't see fault in pre 1990 Tyson, and as a fan I dont agree with that view.

 

1987 Tyson should do better, yes. Whether he can do well enough to beat that "Tokyo" (or similar) version of Douglas, I don't know. I have my doubts.

Well, every time a huge underdog upsets a champion, we get a ton of excuses.
That's just the nature of the sport.
Maybe not as many excuses as we get for the 1990 loss, but many of the same ones, I think.
Douglas was a guy with losses to Jesse Ferguson and Mike "Giant" White on his record by 1987, a draw with Steffen Tangstad ...... Tyson was, what ... 10-1 favourite or more to beat an undefeated Tucker in the real timeline, so you'd still expect Douglas to be some massive underdog ..... they'd always be some explaining to do.

 

Well I think when it comes to Douglas, it was a one off performance, but that performance was simply awesome. I think he would have troubled a lot of great fighters that night, he had it all, that jab was just killing Mike. But my theory is, as evidence has proved, it was a one off. Tyson would have beaten him in a rematch if it happened, and he would have beaten any Douglas at any other time.

But as you say, Buster was a skilled big guy. I think you simple cant discount the fact that although Tyson was under prepared, it was so one sided. To win in that fashion has to mean something either way, in my view it means Douglas had tools Tyson would always find hard to overcome. but with more focus and energy I certainly wouldn't rule out a Tyson win either, he proved he had the power to hurt Buster even though he was spent by the 8th round. I see a Tyson KO or Douglas on points.

I sit on the fence a lot there, as I do with prime Tyson v Holfield discussions, I see either winning. And I think thats just down to how good they were on that given night, as with any match up its difficult to pick a winner when both are great. detractors would find that silly as the fights happened, and there was a winner. but circumstances are circumstances...

I agree about Bowe, I always thought he had the tools to give Tyson some serious problems.

 

I'd have my doubts as well to be honest, I cant discount how soundly Douglas beat Tyson, even though I believe Tyson wasn't on his best form that night. The fact Mike couldn't do a lot with Buster has to come into it. I just think there is room somewhere to see Tyson catching Buster.

yep I think Tyson would get a few excuses, but the usual level. there would be a lot more room to argue than there was in 1990. In 90 a lot of people believe Tyson was at his very best, i think its fairly easy to discount that, it was all his fault but the reasons for his lack lustre performance were there, he might not have been as unprepared as some say but he definitely wasn't at his best. in 87 it would be harder to argue a Tyson loss I think, there were already doubters and their theories would be proved correct.

I'd agree with you that maybe I overstated how much of a threat Tyson and his team would believe Douglas was, unless he looked awesome in a few fights leading up to their fight. so yeah, maybe the taking lightly excuse would come into it. One thing is for sure, Tyson would have to win the rematch fairly handily. This becomes a different subject though, if we are talking about Douglas being in great form that one night, Tyson is saved really, because its likely he would win the rematch.

 

1987 ? Tyson 1st round ko then.

 

I think Mike would stop Douglas in 2 or 3..

 

Tyson won in 1990. KO 8. The Long Count, remember? Getting old sucks huh!

 

You more than likely actually believe that as well you little Tyson nuthugger you......

 

Douglas was overcomitting with the jab when Tyson caught him with the uppercut, a well trained Tyson would have timed that jab much earlier.

 

Is there any real evidence of the Tyson with this sustained superior head movement, focus and footwork in 1987 ... that he would maintain that over 12 rounds?

Because he didn’t against Tony Tucker that year. I’d argue that he never did. In his shorter fights early in his career, yeah, but there’s a lot of one-two-clinch in Tyson going back to Quick Tillis — the first time he was ever extended against a bigger (and not nearly as big as Tucker/Buster/Bonecrusher/etc.) big man.

I think that Tyson is an urban legend. You see it in spots against Biggs and Tucker, but not sustained throughout entire rounds (at least not from the midpoint on). If you really study him, apart from his speed and power — and, yes, savagery and killer instinct — one of the main features you will notice is that he fights in spurts, a big punch here and there and then one or, more often, both of his hands slip under the armpit of the bigger guy to supplicants to engage in a clinch ... which the opponent, to be fair, is usually quite happy to oblige.

 

Your eyes aren't deceiving you. Even the primest Tyson was prone to lose steam and lapse into "one punch head-hunting" and coming in straight lines without moving his head, when in longer fights. In some fights he lapses very early. Became a fairly predictable attrition fighter.
To Tyson's credit, he made sure he had lots of short fights by KOing the opponent fast !
Also, opponents who lasted were made aware early and were put in fear of when he'd have his flash of brilliance so went on defensive, and he piled up points chipping away at them a punch or two at a time.
Tucker actually landed on him quite a bit, from early on too.
Tyson was a great fighter but the flaws were always there, they weren't just something that came when Kevin Rooney left. (In fact, back in 1987 some people questioned whether Tyson needed a better, more experienced trainer to help refine him and iron out those flaws ! .... ironic now, isn't it ?)

 

And better yet, Tyson was still improving with every fight. He hadn't peaked yet. Maybe similar to Ali pre exile. Who knows what we could've had on our hands. "What could've been", every Tyson supporter and that statement...right?

Tyson lost focus in fights. Check out the Ribalta bout and how many times he looked disinterested.

 

And how the hell do you know he hadn't peaked and was still improving, give us a detailed explanation why.

So you admit Tyson lost focus in fights, not a smart habit when facing someone who is skilled and can bang.

 

1987 - If Douglas was in shape and motivated he could potentially test Tyson before being stopped in the mid to late rounds.

1990 Rematch - With all the **** going on with Mike outside the ring an in shape Buster would be almost a pick em perhaps Mike a slight favourite.