The Myth That Buster Douglas Was Only Good For One Fight

This impression is true for some but not all.

Before first bell in Tokyo, Bob Sheridan waxed lyrical (correctly) about Busters talents.

However, he also accurately identified that discipline, focus, conditioning and desire weren’t always in place for Douglas - these are no mean attributes and, when any fighter is in possession of same, they often separate great fighters from very good boxers.

For one night, with those attributes in place, Buster was GREAT (or at least posted a performance worthy of a GREAT fighter) but he was, by no means, a journeyman otherwise.

Sheridan also famously mused “Which Buster will we see tonight?” or words to that effect.

I guess the perception of Buster’s abilities otherwise might’ve been unduly suppressed and/or underrated in the face of the growing belief in Mike’s invincibility - which had reached its own mythical status.

It’s not a case of “isn’t hindsight wonderful” to state that the 42-1 odds against Douglas going into the fight were OTT.

Finally, Buster probably didn’t help wayward perceptions with his follow up first defence against Evander - probably Tokyo and the Holyfield fight are the two that Buster is most well known for among casual fans.

 

he was only beat mike tyson level for 1 fight. lucky for him that was the fight.

 

He went all in for that fight, was not about luck.

I know someone that won a lot of money on that fight because he knew Douglas was that good and thought he would be highly motivated.

 

i didn't say it was was lucky he won, i said he drew the right guy on the right night.

 

He could have been that good on another night also it just he did not have a fight that important.

 

he did. hw title defenses are the pinnacle. got crushed.

 

Douglas was a very good fighter he was great for 1 night.....he could dominate and impress in fights but always seemed to falter eventually....he just didn't live up to his potential until he fought Tyson but afterwards he went right back to his usual underperforming ways. He had health problems with weight issues later and may have been starting to show it earlier in his career

 

I think I read somewhere that that McCall stated that Buster was good to Tyson leading up to the fight... I too think Buster had a good 4 year buildup to the fight

 

If one requires a certain sampling of fights and performances against a reasonably varied range of opposition types in order to bestow greatness upon a fighter (and bestow greatness upon any one of his included performances, said fights being part of the required mosaic to properly inform us of true “greatness”) then, by definition, so called “greatness” can’t be confined to just ONE fight and the ONE example ONLY “resume” actually disqualifies itself due to the very lack of other examples.

We can try and judge absolute skills demonstrated in any given fight and project for their successful application against other opponents - but degrees of success are often heavily weighted in relativity - eg - stylistic meshes, etc.

Buster doesn’t have any other so called GREAT performances to uphold - though he has many very good performances, including some that only presented as “very good” for part of the fight.

So, I guess in that regard, we can factor those “other” performances in determining how successfully his Tokyo performance might translate against a broader range of opposition.

Some say the Ali that beat Williams in 66 would be unbeatable.

However, imo, consciously or unconsciously, the perception of that pinnacle performance was also “supported” by the material evidence of Ali’s other performances in the years in and around the Williams’ fight.

 

I believe that the downfall of James "Buster" Douglas, in the next fight against Holyfield, contributed a lot to that opinion.
A disaster in terms of fight, and a disaster in terms of physical (added 15 pounds compared to Tokyo) and mental form.

 

I rate him about on the level of Morrison, they're gonna lose to Holyfield and Lewis 10/10

Tyson was the right place at the right time

 

Buster Douglas is the Jack Sharkey of the 80s/90s. At the top of his game, he was a threat to anyone in the division. However, his frequent psychological and conditioning issues prevented him from reaching his full potential.

He was more often average than not, but he was still definitely capable of being great.

 

IIRC Douglas' mother died a little before the fight. She dreamed of his son becoming a world champion.
Making you deceased Mom's wish a reality: Douglas got all the motivation he needed for that sole fight.
Afterwards the fire was gone and Douglas just let himself go.

 

The problem with Buster was consistency. For most of his fights he was mediocre. He showed great potential against Tyson, but that was it. Quitting against Tucker did him no favors. Getting stomped by Holyfield over a rookie mistake is probably what did him in career wise.

I think it’s more accurate to say Buster needed a lot of motivation for a fight like he showed against Tyson, which was motivation he rarely had. The moment he had a chance to continue it against the next guy, he failed horrribly.