Ah the long count chestnut. Douglas followed the refs count as he should. He could have got up any time but he gave himself maximum recovery time (as opposed to blindly reaching around for his mouthpiece) as a good pro should. Very next round he went right back to punching Tyson’s ****ing head in as he’d done all fight long. Tyson not being focused is on him. It’s a pathetic and weak excuse. He thought he had the game sussed and could dial it in. He couldn’t. Stiff **** I say.
But it doesn't matter. Tyson, out of shape, hit him so hard that Douglas didn't get up for 14 seconds. Those are the facts. I think Tyson, in shape, would have done just as well as Jesse Ferguson or Lou Savarese. You asked how he would overcome the reach difference—just like he did against Carl Williams, Tyrell Biggs, Tony Tucker, or Frank Bruno. What else don't you know, don't you understand, and can't I explain it to you? Maybe watch some of their fights.
I watched Tyson get battered by Douglas plenty of times and Tyson was clueless (like his fanboys of which you are his most pathetic which is saying something) Douglas could have gotten up at anytime. He was clear headed from the get go as opposed to Tyson’s concussed arse crawling on all fours when he got hammered to the floor. Douglas was only down for however long as he was because he chose to take time to fully recover and went by the referee’s count which is the only count that is even relevant. Why don’t you put your Tyson pyjamas in the wash and watch some other fighters. You might learn that Tinkerbell isnt the be all and end all. Your hero worshiping of one fighter is ridiculous for a grown person.
You're confusing appreciation with admiration. Every sane boxing fan knows Tyson was better than Douglas. I've never seen a ranking where James is even close to Mike. If that's admiration, then Tyson is adored by all reasonable commentators, pundits, and fans, and that means you're either a hater, an idiot, or both. If you think about it, you'll know I'm right
Tyson fanboys will swear over their dead momma that he lost all of his boxing experience and ability just because he didn't have his specific, professional spit-bucket-carrier in his corner on fight night.
Where did you read about this? That it's because of this? Do you suffer from persecution mania? Or maybe you're on the wrong forum? I'd love to laugh at these excuses.
No you’re a denialist. I appreciate that Tyson was excellent for a spell but it was brief. Even at his best he was never unbeatable (no one is) but you types spin a story like he was. There’s been some cold eyed sharks in heavyweight history that sure as hell wouldnt tremble at Tyson staring across at them. You refuse to give credit to a very talented fighter beating the brakes off your boy because of some flim flam excuses that were all of Tyson’s own doing anyway. I get that it’s a coping mechanism for you but really it’s just a game. Good fighters mostly win but they can also lose too. It’s the nature of the sport. Learn to deal with it buddy.
Do you know what schizophrenia is? Persecution mania? I'm not the one who has to accept the facts, but rather donkeys like you and mandalas. I have no problem with that. Douglas crushed Tyson, and that's it. And Michael Jordan, at the absolute peak of his career, only made four baskets against the Detroit Pistons. If I were a Jordan hater who couldn't accept that he was an outstanding basketball player, I'd be spewing drool left and right that he couldn't score more than four baskets. If I were a crazy Tyson hater, I'd be spewing drool left and right that he couldn't beat Douglas. The facts are, however, that before and after the fight with Tyson, Douglas never defeated a single top-10 player in his division, not once. And Tyson did it a dozen times. Douglas himself, before or after Tyson, has never been in the top 5 of his division, not even once. And Tyson was ranked in the top 5 for at least 10 years. Tyson also defeated at least 10 fighters ranked higher than Douglas, so either all of these fights were a coincidence or this one fight was a coincidence. You'd have to be a complete idiot to rank Tyson based on one weak fight, just like you'd rank Michael Jordan based on one weak match. But you can do it. I have no problem with that. Idiots are funny, so I don't want you to accept it, just keep proving what an idiot you are.
Who’s saying Douglas is historically better you absolute gronk? H2H though Douglas at his best would pose serious problems for Tinkerbell as we saw. Bringing up garbage about the “long count” or Tyson slacking off in training is a **** weak attempt by Tyson cheerleader’s to invalidate Douglas’s fantastic performance. It’s childish and weak. I rank Tyson where he deserves to be ranked. In the vicinity of the top 10 but not amongst the elites. Getting your arse flogged in your prime by Douglas, getting destroyed by a shopworn Holyfield when you were a heavy favourite, disgracing the sport with the bite because he was losing again, getting annihilated by Lewis and then losing to scrubbers like Williams and McBride (lol) is not the stuff of any GOAT. The comparison to Jordan having one very rare off game is total BS and a total example of the denial you’re in you chump.
Why are you so upset, keyboard warrior? Ranking Tyson in the top 10 is fine by me, and I've never questioned his losses to Douglas, Holyfield, Lewis, McBride, or Jake Paul, so if you put it that way, it's fine by me... but you first ask how Tyson can beat someone with Douglas's arms reach, meaning you don't know he did it without a problem. That demonstrates your utter incompetence. Even if he loses 100 times to some trash, it won't change the fact that he dominated the heavyweight division in absolutely impressive fashion. After what he's accomplished, he could even lose to Mickey Mouse. It's ridiculous that haters focus on his decline like any drug addict, but don't see what he's accomplished. It's pathetic that you're focusing on the fight with Douglas and don't see that he's outclassed many better fighters throughout his career. Take some Nervosol and deal with it, buddy
You’re confused. First off you were giving Tyson alibi’s and bringing up the long count to invalidate Douglas’s win now you’re saying you’ve never questioned his losses?? Só Tyson beat some taller heavyweights (most heavyweights are tall by nature) só that means he really could’ve beaten Buster Douglas too if he felt like it? Sorry but Douglas had as much (if not more) physical gifts and talent as anyone Tyson fought (Lewis and Holyfield excepted). Sure Douglas didn't make the most of these gifts and didn’t have a career that matched Tyson’s but best for best how does Tyson overcome that elite jab, great uppercut, strength and huge reach advantage? Just beating Tony Tucker or Tyrell Biggs doesn’t automatically mean he’d beat Douglas as well. The cliche about styles making fights is as true and as old as the sport itself. Im perfectly calm because I’ve been debunking the Tyson myth so long now it’s like shooting fish in a barrel these days. He was great for a brief period, he had some great accomplishments and reinvigorated heavyweight boxing after a mediocre period but he’s not unbeatable even in 1988 or whenever his só called apex was. He wasn’t this perfect fighting machine because not one of those has ever existed. You need perspective pal.
Tyson knocked Douglas down in 14 seconds. What don't you understand about that sentence? You're asking how Tyson could have beaten Buster – watch the 8th round, time it. That's not an alibi, just facts. Could Buster have gotten up earlier? If he could, why did he risk so much? The fact that he was down for 14 seconds means he needed to recover. But according to you, he might have just wanted to lie down comfortably; I'm open to any excuse you have. You're saying Douglas had great talent but didn't capitalize on it. Damn, he didn't do that throughout his career except for one fight; that's really strange. What excuse can you come up with for him when he lost to White, Ferguson, and Tucker? Buster was never a top-five fighter; Mike was a top-five fighter for 10 years, usually a top-1 or 2 fighter. Your revisionism is pathetic and stupid, though funny in its own way.