How long does Jim Braddock last vs 1988 Mike Tyson?

Yeah, Joe Louis “lasted” longer against Braddock than he did Max Baer. Call me crazy, but I rate Joe’s latter performance more highly.

Not to be a braggart Vic, but Louis wouldn’t last 30 seconds against me - and you certainly don’t want to face Joe when he has expectant, Honeymoon balls.

 

I don’t think Tyson ever went the distance in a loss.

Jim might be able to float him for 6-8 rounds but no way he could carry him the full 12-round distance.

 

Seriously amazing the shots Braddock took from Louis - the type of punches that were knocking other guys dead.

The facial damage incurred was severe prior to the KO.

Though only about 200 lbs, Braddock wasn’t small in natural terms - 6’2 1/2” and reasonably framed.

Photos with later champs and contenders told the story.

As someone pointed out earlier, Braddock hadn’t fought in 2 years when he faced Louis. He was also 32 yo.

His durability was an outstanding feature to his fight against Louis.

 

Tyson has cracked several solid chins, Berbick, Holmes, Thomas, etc. A smaller heavy with leaky defense and no outstanding qualities other than his toughness and scrappy, spoiling style can only delay the inevitable. As tough Braddock is, the fact he's vastly outgunned in basically every category (hand speed, power, size, ring IQ, defense etc) means he'll get broken down relatively quickly. He doesn't even have the style or skill to make it an interesting fight or drag things out to last longer.

Braddock lasts 3 rounds tops. Tyson either lands a clean, vicious blow rendering him unconscious or batters him until his face is disfigured and the ref needs to save him from himself. Still, I think Braddock might manage to hold his own and look good even if for just a minute or two, he was very awkward and scrappy and won't just roll over the first time he gets hit. Might resemble Tyson's bout with Mathis Jr or Frazier vs Chuvalo.

 

It's funny how people have the convenient cut off for Tyson's prime just before the Douglas loss, but in h2h discussions people are more than happy to use the Ruddock fights as proof of Tyson's toughness.

 

Gets even funnier when you analyse the first Bruno fight and identify some weaknesses in Mike’s game - you will then be told the wheels were already falling off Mike at that stage. I get that Tyson wasn’t quite prime vs 10-1 underdog Tillis - but Mike was near enough to prime and shortly thereafter he tracked back on to his steam rolling ways.

Also, even if a fighter is pre prime, meaning not quite yet the whole package but most boxes already ticked - he can still exhibit weaknesses and vulnerabilities that carry through to his prime to some degree - as we saw play out in Ali’s pre prime, prime and post prime career in respect of his susceptibility to a quality left hook.

 

I agree with that. Excuses for Mike’s defeats are plentiful to this day! That’s because he was an (almost) unbeatable warrior! No sarcasm…he was! In the minds of us fans anyway…

It’s like when Thanos beat my hero Hulk in a helluva Marvel comic fight. I believe and I will not be changing my mind, that Hulk had been boozing the night before, whoring around and not working out. But worse, he had fallen out with his training partner! No way was he in any shape physically or mentally to fight a fit and motivated Thanos! No way at all!

***Thanos and Hulk are of course fictional characters and any resemblance to any real life people or situations, in let’s say, the boxing world, is simply coincidental…

 

Good and fair assessment

 

I think the Bruno fight was t probably the first time we had actually seen Mike hurt by a shot. I’ve said this before and certainly here in the UK it was spoken about…had Bruno had his wits about him and gone for broke after hurting Tyson, it could have been he and not Douglas, who would have inflicted Tyson’s first defeat.

 

Vic - Haha, it's not pleasant when our superheroes cop a hiding. On the rare occasions my man Supes has *** handed to him, it has also put me down for the count. It's just not right.

Frank made things nice and rough in there for Mike - and he did hurt Mike pretty solidly, perhaps more than those single shots by Tucker and James Smith. Pretty sure Tyson himself said it screwed him up. I actually give Mike great credit for that fight. He did appear to get a bit frustrated and angry, but he went on with job. Rather than look for any deficiencies in Mike, I credit Frank for the strategy he employed and further credit Mike for fighting through it. A champ doesn't necessarily have to be under the weather to find himself in a tough fight that wasn't forecast prior to, that's simply how some fights go and the type of unknown, rough terrain that champs can often find themselves yet still have the right stuff to prevail.

 

Very true in all you’ve said. Mike himself said it was like being hit by a bomb and he didn’t know whether he was knocked out, knocked down or still upright and yes, of course credit to him for taking advantage of Bruno’s hesitancy and fighting through it and ultimately winning a convincing KO. Tyson wasn’t just a KO artist with good movement and fast hands etc. He also had a pretty solid set of whiskers.

But Frank, Frank, Frank, tut, tut, tut. He could have made it so much more difficult for Mike. I think that’s what separates the Greats from the Goods. If that was let’s say, Holmes or Lewis or Louis or Ali who caught Mike with that shot, I suspect at the very least what followed next would have seen Mike flat on his back.