Was Tyson V Holyfield in 1991

Ok my mistake i had forgot that this was after Tyson loss to Buster.. Ok he was not considered pfp best. It was Chavez who had replaced him at number 1 after Mike loss... This was considered more even matched but Tyson was still considered the slight favorite.

 

It would have been a different fight. That was the warrior brawling Holyfield. It would have been what was expected by the media and Tyson would have overpowered him and come out victorious.

 

The 1988 Tyson would,I'm sure.

 

I'm contented with the fight they had in 96. Arguably the biggest and most career defining fight in their career.

 

I'm not quite content with it myself. 91 would have been a totally different fight and outcome. The 96 fight for some reason is the only Tyson loss I can watch. Maybe it had to do with the "Finally" tagline for the fight.

 

Actually, Holyfield-Tyson II was shaping up as a doozy. They both came in a bit better than the first fight. I don't think the second one was going past six or eight rounds, if Tyson hadn't disgraced himself and the sport.

 

Do you believe Holyfield would stop Tyson again?

 

Today? Hmm.. Probably. Tyson is shrinking, for some reason.

 

Tyson wasnt the same fighter. In no time during his comeback did he look like the fighter that faced Razor Ruddock. The same can be said of Holyfield. He was a different fighter in 90-91.

 

There's possibly 5 versions of Tyson to distinguish from. The original Team Tyson, the Snowall/Bright Tyson, the Giachetti Tyson, Post prison Tyson and the ghost/shell/shot to **** Tyson.

What do you feel are the main differences between the Rooney trained and the Giachetti trained Tyson? Was Giachetti successful at getting Tyson back to form or do you feel he was missing something? Or was it that Tyson simply didn't listen to Giachetti?

 

Defense in the form of head movement and counterpunching, which is massive for a short fighter always coming forward.

When Tyson was at his best, he could come forward without worrying about being hit, and his opponents found out quickly how difficult he was to hit cleanly, so their offensive output went down and they looked to hold and tie up more because Tyson was so good at making his opponent miss and using his speed to counter their miss. The Giachetti trained Tyson still gave guys like Ruddock a lot of confidence to throw punches, because Tyson could be hit much easier.

 

I disagree with lefthook31 on the likely outcome of Holyfield-Tyson in '91, as we have discussed it several times before.

Suffice to say, I think Holyfield wouldn't have been as careless against Tyson as he became against Bert Cooper, and I reckon Tyson was almost all done mentally after the Ruddock fights and had already slipped technically.

 

ACTUALLY IN 91 TYSONWAS AN 8 TO 5 FAVORITE:smoke

 

Holyfield never displayed a more disciplined style until after the first Bowe fight. Not with Foreman and not with Bowe, so I think those would be the fights to have a more disciplined defensive approach if Holyfield was the thinking fighter you say he could be at that time, because both guys were bigger than Tyson and physical fighters.

I think it took Holyfield getting his butt whooped and a couple camps under Emanuel Steward to understand the importance of less brawling and more thinking in the ring. In 91, Holy wasnt there yet.

 

Then some advice do not ever be a bookie, but if you ever are, gives us a shout, and I will set up an account with you!!!

Remember a bookie is there to make money, so fight odds to a large degree reflect public opinion over actual chances of winning.

Tyson would of been a fairly warm favourite in 1991, and at the time I figured him to win fairly comfortable (but with hindsight, I think Holyfield would of won).

In Britain Tyson was a fairly comfortable favourite perhaps 3/1 on with Holyfield 5/2 against.