Tucker's hand broken or just an excuse ?

You don't even need a timestamp, just watch the fights, Tucker just stood there frozen in the clinch, Douglas was controlling Tyson and actually landing hard shots when he could. Even when Douglas was backing up he would throw hard counters and respond with combinations when Tyson walked onto him, whereas Tucker would potshot and bounce back. No he didn't, Tyson vs Holyfield was neck-to-neck in the first 6 rounds. Holyfield took far more shots, landed far less shots and TKO'd Tyson on his feet two rounds later than Douglas did and sent him flat on his back.

Idk, maybe because they couldn't do anything to Tyson that way but Buster knocked tf out of him with his own way.

 

I think its the exact opposite, people just can't seem to believe that the answer to the big great Tyson puzzle was something relatively unknown Buster Douglas can do with such ease. So many excuses from Tyson being unprepared to count being long to his team sabotaging him, when the fact of the matter is Douglas simply fought better than anyone ever did against Mike before. Mike was 23, at the peak of his career and went onto have some of his best h2h wins against Ruddock after losing to Douglas, but appearantly he was washed and broken beyond repair for that one night. Sure.

 

Beyond Douglas fighting him on the inside the clinches were no different and Tucker beat Douglas lol, Tyson doesn't usually fight out a clinch. Like I said Douglas beat him soundly with the same tactics Holyfield employed later on, size is overrated, always has been. Holyfield outlanded Tyson in power punches and total punches by a huge margin those rounds were not neck and neck, Holyfield won 8 rounds to 2 before the KO. He beat him up in a good firefight, dropped Tyson multiple times and never got floored.

From first hand experience and observation. Bigger guys fighting tall using their height, longer reach, counter punching and movement to keep range is genrally more difficult for shorter opponents than a bigger guy standing in front of them, trying to smother up close and fighting them on the inside because shorter fighters generally have the advantage on the inside with tighter hooks and head movement, though this obviously isn't universal

 

So is size the only thing you disagree with? Because most of this has literally no contradiction to what I say, beyond Douglas outperforming Holyfield (which is backed by all punch-stats you can find, though Holyfield appearantly took 20 less punches while Douglas landed 92 more punches with 16% more accuracy despite ending the fight a round earlier).

 

Tyson landed over half his power punches against Douglas and knocked him down. Holyfield got hit way less, knocked Tyson down, fought Tyson on the inside MORE than Buster did and wiped Douglas h2h. No excuses just like Tyson gets no excuses for the pitiful performance against Douglas

 

Already said Holyfield had the better defense. Douglas landed a lot more, was more accurate and damaged Tyson about twice as much as well as stopping him two rounds earlier. I think thats more impressive than taking 20 less punches. And you are again excusing Tyson calling it a "pitiful performance". It wasnt a pitiful performance from Tyson, just a brilliant one from Douglas.

 

you can be 23 and completely unprepared for the fight, age is irrelevant. There is a lot of evidence that this was the case with Tyson. Before the fight in Tokyo there was an article in the New York Times - Tyson sabotages his preparations. There are statements from Bobby Brown. There are statements from Tyson's team. There are statements from Mike himself. There is a video from sparring with Greg Page. Finally there is a fight where Tyson is clearly out of shape, is slow and much less active than usual.. Douglas was rated lower than at least 7-8 of Tyson's rivals that Mike dominated.. Am I supposed to believe that the guy who was unable to defeat Jesse Ferguson had a way with Tyson? Did he have something that others didn't? Did he grow a third leg, a third arm

 

Even the commentators claimed Tyson looked strange not moving his head coming forward. Partying and staying up before a day of work can have negative effects, ot isn't far fetched because it happened but ignoring that, Douglas got floored and Holyfield dropped Tyson before stopping him. Tyson landing way more on Douglas, Holyfield did better at controlling the pace. You have to smother Tyson, jab and move at range, push him off and put punches together when he's not in position to counter or you get ran through like Bruno

 

Yeah I don't care about anything Tyson or his team says to save face, nor sparring footages that don't mean anything, Oliver McCall dropped Tyson as well, and it wasn't close to the Douglas match at all. Maybe the New York Times article you mentioned could be a bit reliable, but still. This guy put on the same monstrous performances before and after his fight with Douglas and looked just as in shape physically as he always was. Maybe he looked slow because he was fighting with another fast-handed fighter that was countering the soul out of him? Maybe he was less active because he was getting crushed to bits in exchanges when he opened up? You are only as good as your opponent allows you to be, "out of shape" fighters don't drop their opponents with one punch in the 9th round after taking a truck-load of a beating. Bring up rankings all you want but what really happened is quite simple. Douglas put on a masterclass and he completely broke Peek-A-Boo down. Years later guys like Holyfield and Lewis used the same tactics to dominate Mike as well. People just don't want to believe that their 'Murican terminator Tyson turned out to be much easier to beat than expected. Turns out even the supposed lamb to the slaughter Douglas could do it.

 

His reflexes weren't fast enough, Douglas' jab and combos were too fast. Tucker was landing plenty on him as well, he just wouldn't commit as much.

Douglas had a flash knockdown and Holyfield dropped Tyson purely because he was off-balance. Holyfield as I said just showed better defense, he didn't land nearly as much as Douglas nor was he as accurate, and he didn't hurt Mike as badly either. I disagree with him controlling the pace better too, the first 6 of those rounds were actually competitive, both were rocking and landing on each other, Tyson straight up couldn't do anything against Douglas.

 

That wasn't a flash knockdown Douglas was down for about 10 seconds, plus many scored it a shutout for Holyfield despite it being competive rounds. Tyson has slipped faster punches, he showed no head movement even when the oncoming punches werent jabs, you say Tyson coming in less prepared doesn't matter and has no basis in regards to his performance but the consequences manifest from lazy overconfident behavior all the time in real life, Douglas was brilliant and used all the tools to limit success from Mike, but the main premise i disagreed with was Tyson falling because Douglas was the first the big skilled guy he faced which is false.

At the end of the day Tyson has beaten better heavyweights than Douglas

 

He spent like 5-6 seconds just sitting down and waiting the count, the rest was just him absolutely dominating and boucing Mike around whereas Tyson-Holyfield had actually competitive rounds with Tyson landing on and rocking Holyfield plenty until round 6. Yeah Ali didn't show much head movement against Frazier either lmao, you can't just randomly move your head, you need to see the punches and the rythm of your opponent to do so, Tyson couldn't do that with Douglas because he was both fast and was timing Mike perfectly, so he had to use the high guard more, that's also why he didn't move his head that much against Ruddock, he couldn't read him and didn't want to risk headbutting an uppercut.

There is literally no evidence for Tyson being so lazy and overconfident besides some hearsay and personal interpretations. If Mike beat Douglas that night nobody would even bring up him being supposedly unprepared, all this narrative comes from people not believing Mike just lost so badly to someone the whole world looked over, so there HAS to be a reason for it.

Career-wise, sure. H2h-wise Tyson never beat anyone that fought against him as well as Douglas did and I'll die on that hill.

 

Its not really comparable, Frazier was eradic and Busters speedy timed shots being the reason Tyson couldn't figure out his rhythm therfor not being able to dodge is circular logic, in addition to Tyson facing other fast opponents. If anything its because Douglas restarted Tysons rhythm every time the clinch broke, that was 50% of the fight, slowing down Tysons action before pushing him off to create space and box on the backfoot, got him into an awkward position many times over. Douglas also disguised punches behind the jab, but Tyson looked disinterested in that ring compared to all his other fights, I am not in a minority who observed this.

Holyfield won 8 of the rounds before stopping him, got hit less, never got dropped, landed more power punches Tyson, dropped Tyson twice, wobbled him more times. Ruddock also fought a good fight against Tyson, stood in the center of the ring longer than Douglas did, had much more power than Douglas but still lost. He fought well but Tyson has beaten superior boxers with better resumes at the end of the day. Styles make fights, an age old statement

0 evidence ? Tyson didn't bother to watch any film because he underestimated Douglas, saying he beat everyone that had already beaten Douglas and he's right in that regard. Bobby Brown was there in japan with Tyson. He disregarded Douglas, stayed up partying with hoes regardless of whether or not it had any effect.
https://www.bloodyknockout.com/feat...on-led-to-greatest-upset-in-sporting-history/
https://talksport.com/boxing/833065/mike-tyson-party-training-sparring-buster-douglas-1990/

 

…..So you do agree that it was Douglas who prevented Tyson’s head movement efficiency? Ok. Its common for a boxer to seem disinterested when what they are doing is not working, Tyson wasnt overly enthusiastic against Holyfield or Lewis either.

They were something like 2-3 going into the 6th round, thats competitive. We already went over this a million times, I dont consider better defense + flash KDs better than far greater shot landing with more accuracy, power and an earlier finish in a much more one-sided match. Yeah because Ruddock didn’t box half as good as Douglas did, you are just bringing up random things at this point, they may have better resumes or better careers overall, some might even beat Douglas in a fight, but not one person Tyson beat performed as well as Douglas did. None of them fought with such skill and intelligence.

Great, more hearsay. He supposedly didnt train but looked rock-hard in the match and still had enough to drop Douglas in the 9th round after getting brutally beaten.

 

I agree with your take on the Holyfield vs Tyson fight which was much more competitive than people remember.

However Douglas also took some shots, check round 3 and 4 where Douglas staggered. Tyson also won the 6th, was competitive in the 1st, 8th and in the 9th before Douglas had him retreating to the ropes.