I don't see it. Not an inspired Tim. That Bonecrusher rematch was just ridiculous. In a way Tim blew his chances by being so inconsistent on that one. I don't feel sorry for him. He had chances to be a better fighter.
Lewis was old, Tyson was old in their fight. Lewis arguably had at least as much mileage as Mike...perhaps more because of the prison time. There are again, not excuses for either of them. They were both past their prime...hell, Lewis was OLDER than Mike! Having said that, I do think Mike would have given the pre-Steward Lewis a much better fight (maybe even knocked him cold).
Lewis may have been past his best but Tyson in 2002 was totally shot. Don’t make any difference what their actual ages were. Fighters all age, peak and decline differently in their careers. Lewis fought a Tyson that had won the title 16 years before they met. Tyson won the title in 1986 as a 20 year. What was Lewis doing as a 20 year old? Some say Tyson was at his absolute best between 86-88. Lewis was still an amateur then and wouldn’t even have his first pro fight until 89. So to say that because Lewis was actually older than Tyson that that means that it’s just an excuse to say that Tyson lost because he was old and past his prime is just outright crazy.
Pretty simple, really. Tim would have fought Tyson in a unification, but Spoon was stopped in about 90 seconds and had his teeth knocked out by Smith. Nobody thought much of Tim Witherspoon again until 1990 or 1991, when Tyson had already lost the title. And when Witherspoon got close to fighting Michael Moorer, who had moved up, Spoon lost to Bigfoot Martin. Spoon went the distance with Holmes (and lost), with Tubbs (and won), with Thomas (and lost), with Williams (and won), with Golota (and lost) and was stopped by Savarese. Against Tyson, Holmes lasted less than four, Tubbs lasted less than two, Thomas lasted less than six, Golota a full two, Williams lasted 90 seconds, Savarese lasted 30 seconds, ... so odds are Witherspoon survives a couple minutes. Or maybe a round or two. Witherspoon had zero heart. If he wasn't knocked unconscious, he'd have quit.
There is a reason why guys like Dempsey, Marciano and Frazier all retired at the age of 32. Those swarmer type fighters don't age well and Tyson was well past his sell by date. Lewis was older but he was far more potent and it was clear just watching the fight how much each of them had left in the tank.
Fighter vs. fighter and level of skill Mike should knock out George in 2 or 3 rounds. But stylistically. I might pick George to be honest. The style was all in favor of George, which is why he wanted to fight Mike so much.
Then why did he turn it down? "Neither Duva nor Finkel was available for comment yesterday. Foreman, however, drew little sympathy from King or his advisers. "George tried to be a 'cutie-pie' and got outfoxed," said King's matchmaker, Al Braverman. "We had offered him $20 million to fight Tyson and he turned it down. That was his biggest boo-boo. Plus he was guaranteed $10 million for two other fights on HBO this year. Actually, I think George was afraid of getting his butt kicked by Tyson." https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1991-07-18-1991199099-story.html
I think this had a lot more to do with it than anything else. Look at the lengths Witherspoon (said he) went to in order to dump King. If he wasn't talking out his ass, that was pretty indicative of King's striking unpopularity with certain fighters. George said he was more afraid of Don King than Tyson, and I believe and sympathize with that.
Tyson was the unified HW champion two years before Lewis turned pro. By the time he fought Lewis over 14 years later, he had taken beatings against Douglas and Holyfield in the first fight. Lewis had suffered two one punch anniliations, but had never taken sustained punishment in any fight. Tyson definitely had sustained more mileage and was much further removed from his prime form than was Lewis. I find it hard to believe that any knowledge able, unbiased observer would claim Lewis had as much mileage as Tyson at the time they fought. So, you are either biased, lacking insight, or both.
Neither fighter is a favorite of mine, so no bias. I do seem to have been lacking insight, however, and can see that your points are totally valid, thanks for the correction. What I meant to press was the fact that Lewis was older than Mike, but ultimately that pales in comparison to the points you made. I still think prime Mike would have knocked out pre-Steward Lewis. I don't pick Mike at all after Steward entered the picture, including the former on his best day.
I'm fairly certain Tyson would have beaten Witherspoon. Tim had a strong right hand but not alot of mobility. As far as those critizing Witherspoon for being inactive or lacking motivation? You go to work and bust your ass in a sport like boxing and have your boss rip you off for over 50% of your earnings. Then comeback and tell how motivated you are to come to work tommorow.
Holyfield was far closer to his prime than Tyson was. The Douglas loss was his own fault, no defence there. But being dropped for a long count isn't exactly a clinic. Lewis did destroy him but Tyson was so shot it was unbelievable. He shouldn't have been in the ring with Lewis. 36 is young for a HW? So was Jack Dempsey prime for the Tunney fights?
