Did Tyson really duck Lewis in 96?

It was one of the reasons that Lewis was viewed as a risk, for sure.

Tyson fans revise history as they see fit and make Ruddock into some damage good that was there for the taking, but for those of us that actually were around it was very surprising and very impressive that Lewis dismantled him as he did. The loss to McCall lowered his stock, absolutely, but he was still seen as one of the best in the division. Definitely as more of a threat than Seldon and Holy.

 

You Tyson's fans...

Foreman's win over Frazier is seen as one of the great performances in boxing history, so don't know what tree you're up there. Also Frazier's decline was just as much that he stopped taking training very seriously, but still that win is a laaarge part of Foreman's rep as one of great destroyers.

Ruddock was a favourite going in and Lewis taking him out like that, like nobody did before or after, was a real introduction. Believe me, I actually watched it live on TV.

And your logic is strange and backward. I mean, it's a fact that Tyson ducked him. Your reasoning is like saying Tyson didn't really lose to Douglas because he beat Tucker who beat Douglas. But it doesn't alter reality. He did lose to Douglas and he did duck Lewis.

For a third and last time - then you will have to continue on your fan quest without me - Tyson evidently preferred better risk/rewards than Lewis, who still was seen as one of the best and most dangerous in the division. He first payed Lewis and then dropped a belt rather than facing him and choose Seldon and then Holy, who was seen as washed up but still brought an audience, instead. Those are the facts, the history..

 

Hard to tell for sure but it's feasible that Tyson was n't quite as confident in his abilities post-prison as he was prior to it. Mike always studied boxing and boxers and more than likely realised that it was mainly down to Lennox' complacency that he was caught by Oliver McCall's ko punch. Tyson knew that he could beat Frank Bruno as he'd already done it and Evander Holyfield looked finished after being stopped by Riddick Bowe in their third go and he looked decidedly underwhelming in his victory over Bobby Cyz. Lewis was quite rightly looked at as a more risky proposition.

 

It had been scheduled (and, obviously, canceled in 1991) yet suddenly it has to take place just as Lewis becomes Mike’s mandatory and Holyfield looks washed. Hmmm.

Tyson gave up a belt to avoid facing Lennox. That’s a duck by every reckoning with every other fighter in every other situation in history. There’s no way around it.

(But of course for Tyson fanbois — and I’m not saying you’re one — then his situation is different because he’s a special snowflake … just like his losses really don’t count because he has excuses, you see.)

 

Think I'm one of the few here who thinks Lewis ducked Byrd, when he dropped a balt rather than facing him. So maybe, just maybe, I just call a duck when I see one? There are actually those who can do that, crazy as it might sound.

 

Never mentions that Tyson was offered 45 million either.

 

It doesn’t matter what he was offered. He was the mandatory challenger and thus he could allow it to go to purse bids and take his cut of what was bid. He’s not obligated to take an offer instead of it going to purse bids — in fact, Lewis’ side gave Tyson/King/Showtime a number and said ‘meet this and we’ll fight on your network.’ The response was crickets so Lewis and his team said, ‘fine, it goes to purse bids.’

At this point, Tyson decided to drop the title rather than put it up for bid and face Lewis.

Those are facts. It doesn’t matter if King/Tyson/Showtime offered $13.50 or $13.5M — he’s the mandatory so he can choose to take his percentage in a purse bid. Which is what he did. And then Tyson noped the **** out and ducked.

 

Lewis ducked Byrd, Ruiz and hung em up instead of facing Vitali in the revancha. 3 ducks to Tyson's 1.

The truth is a hard and bitter pill to swallow.