All we hear when the Buster Douglas loss is mentioned is the excuse that Tyson wasn't 100%? But, how many of Tyson's opponents were 100% when he beat them? How many other world champions were at their best when they ran in to adversity, dug deep and found a way to win? Douglas beat him fair & square, no excuses needed.
Some of them absolutely get a pass. Larry Holmes for example is often excused for being too old and unprepared. Michael Spinks, Tyson’s biggest win, is routinely written off. Similarly, Holyfield didn’t get full credit against Douglas. It just happens, hardly distinct to Tyson. Roberto Duran springs to mind.
And people forget Buster wasn't 100% too, but he still beat thas ass. Tyson fanboys are quite something tho. They excuse Mike for all the loses, but trying to paint the picture like Larry Holmes was still Larry Holmes in '88 or ignoring the fight Spinks' legs were shot to bits by the time he fought Mike. They are still very good victories and 2 best guys he could have fought during his reign, but if 23 year old prime Mike Tyson can have a "off night" and Buster's victory is being belittled, Mike doesn't have any very good wins on his resume.
Yeah, agreed. To your original point, with Tyson-Douglas I think it’s a mix of his fans making excuses but also the shock..it was so against form for both of the boxers, and Douglas cemented that with his non-effort against Holyfield, which a good number of pundits picked him to win. Buster definitely got credit for the win, he undermined his own legacy. And again, fair point, but I think if often comes down to popularity. Holmes gets a pass against Tyson but Pinklon Thomas doesn’t, etc. On some of the threads I’ve seen on this board, Liston gets a pass for both losses against Ali.
Yeah, the one quality opponent Tyson had during his first reign who definitely was at his peak, Tucker, had a confirmed hand injury going into the fight, but still all the obsession is about Tyson's shape, motivation etc. On this board there are just a few who do this, though, but they are quite vocal about it.
Holmes was 38 and Thomas 27, though, but I agree that Thomas aged very quickly. He looked an old man in there despite being in prime age. But probably a lot down to choices he made.
Tyson fans and I was certainly one could only have a genuine complaint about the count Douglas received probably nearly 14 seconds, Tyson himself also got a long count in that fight. The fight itself Douglas produced a great performance, deserved win and Tyson and his fans can have no excuses when the fighter takes the opponent lightly, trains sporadically and prepares badly. I only ever feel sorry for fighters that get jobbed on the cards or suffer a freak injury in the ring. The amount of fighters that compete with some sort of niggling injury is high, Tyson had only himself to blame that night.
Duran definitely qualifies for this. If he lost, he and his idolators are quick to say, “well, he just wasn’t ready. He didn’t train.” I suppose the suggestion then is to simply wave off the fight, as if it never happened. When discussing Duran and his career having done that, the discussion becomes quite easy and pleasant. Nothing but chest-thumping victories to talk about. not sure why so many consider losing a fight here and there to be a simple mathematical equation of worth. There’s far too much gray area in boxing to make such simple mathematical equation work. Anyway, that’s too much of a tangent.
Duran another that would self destruct great fighter but would eat and drink his way out of shape between fights then crash weight, Hatton obviously not in Duran's class another one. You cut corners, it's simply a ticking time bomb of when it will catch up, HW you can cheat the training weight class not being the issue but lack of motivation, drive and giving yourself the best chance to win negates excuses in my book. You will lose in the ring and maybe a lot more besides, your health.
All name fighters have their fans making excuses, even Tyson's most famous contemporaries (cf Lennox with Rahman, Holyfield with Moorer and Bowe).
The majority of Tyson's best opponents had asterisks* his biggest supporters never acknowledge or simply dismiss. Thomas had heroin issues, Tucker broke his hand, etc. I only bring this up when the inevitable dissertations show up excusing his loss to Douglas, Holyfield, etc.
But that's the thing, Tyson according to Holyfield was the hardest working fighter he'd ever seen, even more so than himself. That never gets mentioned though does it, that he would have been in much better condition than all of his opponents.