I agree with tyson... (holyfield heabutting)

I agree - it is clear that he did butt him, still stupid move from Tyson.

 

I definitely agree, although Mike shouldn't have taken a chunk out of his ear and maybe changed his tactic and went for the body or something, I don't know what I would have done, but I would have been pissed too.

Man I hope we can see a Holyfield-Tyson III.....

 

I agree with you regarding the first bite (but still a pretty stupid move), but how can we as fans explain the second bite when he knew the ref and everyone was looking for it? he had to know the fight would likely be stopped. Although i think tyson could have well beaten holy that night, i've gotta think tyson didn't want to go at that point.

Side note: everyone gives holy tons of credit for beating tyson and many say holy beats any tyson. although i give big props to holy, you know holy was on every performance enhancing thing he could get his hands on at that point. how else is there to explain his phenomenal resilience, stamina, snap on his punches, and recovery (and lack of hair) in the tyson fights.

 

tyson won't beat holyfield in a fight 3 either,evander has got his number.besides hes stayed active as well

 

At the time of the first fight I was cheering for Holyfield, but now in hindsight and after rewatching the fight several times my conclusion is this:

Tyson was winning the fights until round six. The fifth round was clearly his best and Holyfield was stunned a few times. Nothing indicated early in the sixth that things would change. Holyfield did better than expected in the fight, since many belived he would just be blown out of the ring in two rounds, but he was not winning. Then he headbutted Tyson hard, causing the cut and then followed up with a hard low blow that made Tyson cringe and only AFTER these two fouls did he turn the fight around.

Could Holyfield have won without the fouls? Maybe. But it seems more likely that the fouls had a significant effect on Tyson, physically and mentally as well.

 

a third fight between them would be far more entertaining then what we had to look at last saturday

 

Tyson has always has a fragile mental psyche. Even when he was a teenage amateur he walked out of the ring in a rage because "His opponent wouldn't fight him".

This is no secret.

Holyfield is a dirty, rotten ******* of a fighter who's headbutted a guy at the same time he's low blowed him.

That's an even smaller secret.

 

Holyfield "purposely" headbutting Tyson is BS. How come Holyfield was never warned for "intentional" headbutts? How come no points were taken? Because they were unintentional.... that's why. Holyfield owns Tyson.... And Tyson was hitting after the bell first (which is a foul in itself)

Tyson wasn't used to someone standing their ground when Tyson would charge in with the left hooks. Holyfield would duck or dip his head (tuck his chin) when Tyson would throw a left hook. This was a strategic move used by Holyfield to null Tyson's left hook. After the first fight Tyson admitted that the clash of heads was caused by both of them, he himself admitting that the clash of head were accidental.

In the second fight, Holyfield was whooping Tyson and roughing him up. Again I didn't see any intentional head butts on Holyfield's part. I seen him dip his head and tuck his chin. Tyson was winning round 3 so I don't know why he flipped out. He landed some of his best punches of both their fights but Holyfield was still there and that probably discouraged Tyson. But I didn't see any intentional headbutting on Holyfield's part.

Not saying Kirk is using this as an excuse for Mike losing but most of Mike's fans blame headbutts for the reason Mike lost. Holyfield was/is just a better boxer/fighter and was ready for Mike. He wasn't intimidated or scared.... he stood his ground and fired shots back. Mike wasn't used to someone standing there and fighting back.

 

If you find it entertaining to see guys getting serious brain damage, yes.

 

Meh. He could have done what other fighters do and started butting himself, or started hitting low. There are all kinds of ways to get away thing things, and it's not as much about the ref catching you as it is about the other guy giving back what he gets. Holyfield was a better fighter and a better boxer, and I think Tyson just got frustrated.

 

He still shouldn't have reacted the way he did.

In one of the few sports where you're allowed to express your anger by beating someone in the face (can't exactly do the same when you're annoyed in a game of snooker or football for example), Tyson failed to channel his anger that way and lost it.

I'm not exonerating Holyfield, but Tyson did go too far when he instead had the opportunity to get revenge with his fists instead.