A prime Mike Tyson (86-89) in the UFC

Never came close and big deal. Tyson runs through many decent mid level MMA dudes then gets tied up, dumped on his arse and beaten. End of story. What if mike had trained MMA from a young age? Well that wasn't the question so who knows.

 

thats probably the same thinking james toney had. do you know how close to impossible it is to hit somebody while theyre shooting on you?
even more so when you go for an ankle pick or the like.

 

No matter what age Tyson would of entered the UFC it would end up exactly how Jame's Toneys did, if you can hit like a truck but have no take down defence it aint gonna do **** when you have a 240lb plus trained wrestler shooting in at you waist height like a missile.

 

Tyson would have demolished anyone who stayed upright with him. The rest is just a question mark and will remain that way.

 

they might not even take him down or even if they did, young tyson had the power and explosiveness to get up. Most fighters who are good in defending against takedowns usually rely more on speed, strength and explosiveness than on technique. Tyson had plenty of the first three and could easily learn the fourth.

 

james toney couldn't do anything when he was taken down because he was out of shape and was just basically a fat blob waiting to get beaten up. If he had the explosiveness and speed of a young man, taking him down and keeping him on the canvass would be difficult

 

rubbish

keep telling yourself that mate.

 

Wow do boxing fans that have never street fough or fought MMA ever have their heads up their arses about how well boxing translates into a fight whereby grappling etc is involved. Does boxing skill help one become a far far better overall fighter? Damned skippy it does, big time there is no doubt. Does great boxing skill translate effectively OVERALL to FIGHTING on its OWN? No it does NOT. Was Tyson so incredible that his boxing was so great that his boxing would overcome all other aspects of a MMA style fight? NO way but not because Tyson wasn't so GREAT. I agree with the thread starter, Tyson is probably the best natural choice of boxer that could make some noise in MMA style fights. I feel Tyson's striking was so powerful and quick he would have TOASTED many a MID LEVEL fighter. Why? His foot speed, hand speed, body speed was so good he would fend off take down attempts leaving fighters dazed or dropped cold. However, BOXING ALONE does not translate effectively overall into MMA style fights. Thus IF Tyson began WALKING through decent MMA style fighters by blitzing them before a take down could be secured, well EVERY MMA FIGHTER stepping in the cage with him, fighters there after would OBVIOUSLY change their tactics. Once a fighter is aware that another dude has unreal punching stand up it becomes way EASIER to never trade with that FIGHTER. It becomes way EASIER to engage with feints to TRADE when really only focused on absorbing the blows with the arms/elbows held in position to then secure a hold tying ones opponent up. the truth is even the best boxers are going to have a hell of a time landing flush on a opponent that wants ZERO part of TRADING. Well I mean a skilled opponent of MMA. For instance, forget ONLY taking Tyson down by diving low grabbing a single or double leg take down, that as a single strategy alone would suck. Let Tyson dictate what takes him down, if Tyson is prepared only for low take downs then sucker him into throwing bombs to defend against a fake low rush and back off at the last split second and tie up with him letting him come down on you ala werdum, big nog etc etc. I don't think Tyson would be able to pick up big nog like Bob Sapp did, lmao, even if he could if big nog survived what Sapp did to him slamming him into the canvass, well I see a guy like big nog taking Tyson to school as soon as they began rolling on the Matt. Anyone that beliefs Tyson would just take all the top MMA fighters out is DREAMING without FACTUAL FIGHTING experience. Even if Tyson takes out a guy with great grappling experience ONCE with a early quick power shot that one does not recover from, well big deal, the next dude that he comes across is going to take him down soon enough and why? Percentage wise the ADVANTAGE in a ring goes to the fighter that does not want to get hit. Thus its way EASIER to NOT get HIT rather than to HIT another. That changes CONSIDERABLY when both fighters are trying to take each others head off but DROPs dramatically when one fighter has no intentions of trying to take the others head off. Sure Tyson is so good he could BEND this LAW considerably, however, against the Creme of the crop Tyson would be living on borrowed time until he hit the canvas, was wrapped up, exhausted, beaten and or submitted. Look at Kevin Randleman against Fedor? Randleman was FAST as hell. Powerful as hell. Had excellent grappling background witch Tyson does not have. Thus Randleman is the symbolic physical spicimen that had such ABILITY he was too fast for Fedor. The result? They tie up quick, randlemans speed/ability takes position on Fedor, power bombs him right on his head and neck. Fedor takes the impact and keeps fighting for position on the ground, gets it and arm bars Randleman. That's how Tyson would go down, except Tyson would not be nearly as good on the ground as Randleman. Randleman was a very skilled wrestler, however, wrestling does not translate perfectly into MMA fighting. It translates into fighting better than boxing just as BJJ etc does. But no single martial art translates perfectly into MMA fighting. Thus even with Randlemans ground experience his ground experience sucked when it came to submissions/defending submissions at the top levels. So you think that Tyson is going to take one of these dudes down and use his speed and power to overwelm them on the ground or even if they tie up? Sorry, that's not going to happen. As I said, even if it happened it would happen once or twice against decent opponents and then Tyson would get beat. For another perspective look at the Tyson vs Peter McNeely, lol, fine Tyson is just out of prison and has already lost some foot speed etc. Regardless he is still a total beast dispite loosing a half step here or there. From the opening bell Peter rushes Tyson constantly using his size and slobbish weight advantage to simply push/shove/hold Tyson at the same times Tyson is trying to unload. The result? A easy 88 second win for Tyson correct? (( 88 seconds or whatever it was )) Not in my EYEs, what I saw was McNeely for a full minute stopping Tyson from landing a flush strike by SWARMING and retreating from Tyson. Now consider that McNeely did this with large padded boxing gloves on and consider that this is harder than without boxing gloves as its harder to get hold of your opponent. Then consider that when you can grab hold of your opponent its easier to shove and push them around as one can use their opponents point of balance to push them off their point of balance. Thus if pushing is resisted in one direction use ones GRIP to ASAP reverse in the opposite direction. Well McNeely wasn't holding Tyson significantly and he still managed to push and shove Tyson around at CLOSE RANGE for a full minute simply by coming out with full focus simply expending a good amount of energy. The result was it took Tyson over a minute to start finding that big oafs head flush subsequently taking him out like butter. Regardless, Tyson is not going to have a full minute of range finding before some skilled MMA fighter ties him up and takes him down and all McNeely was doing was bum rushing and blitzing Tyson even while still throwing wild punches witch made it way easier for Tyson. Truth be told Peter was not really trading with Tyson because he only threw when Tyson was off balance for the most part, but even so, get the best boxer of any gym, put a big dude with decent conditioning and atheltic ability in a ring against a skilled boxer and watch how difficult it is for that boxer to score a clean knockout in less than a minute when the opponent simply goes nuts in the ring like a maniac blitzing in, pushing, tying up and then retreating only to stop suddenly and attack full force to survive ONLY. Its ****ing hard as hell to take a rampaging big oaf out with a clean flush shot in less than a minute. After a minute or so the maniac is going to stop bouncing around so much and usually get taken right out big time. However, if that maniac is a guy like Cain etc, Well they won't run out of steam and before they even get significantly winded Tyson is going to be on the ground and in TROUBLE. That's just the way it is.

 

Paragraphs.

 

How many ****ing times do people have to keep telling you, use paragraphs you stupid thick ****.

 

Did not read atsch

 

Tyson regularly got tied up by fighters he fought.

As soon as he gets tied up/falls in to a clinch with a UFC fighter he's finished.

 

A latineg'd version of the wikipedia article for paragraph. Perhaps this will get through to him:

A PARAGRAPH (from the Greek paragraphos, "to write beside" or "written BESIDE") is a self-contained UNIT of a discourse in WRITING dealing with a particular POINT or IDEA. A paragraph consists of one or more sentences.[1][2] The start of a paragraph is indicated by BEGINNING on a new LINE. Sometimes the first line is indented. At VARIOUS times, the beginning of a paragraph has been indicated by the pilcrow: ¶. A written work—be it an essay or a story—is about an idea or concept. An essay explains it; a story narrates it. To help the reader understand and enjoy it, the explanation or narration is broken down into units of text, or paragraphs. In an essay, each paragraph explains or demonstrates a key point or thought of the CENTRAL idea, usually to inform or persuade. In fiction, each paragraph serves to advance the plot, develop a character, describe a scene or narrate an action—all to entertain the READER. All paragraphs support each other, leading the reader from the first idea to the final resolution of the written piece of work. Many students are taught to use a MINIMUM number of SENTENCES in a paragraph such as three or five—although length is not a determinant in defining a paragraph. Professionally printed MATERIAL typically does not indent the first paragraph, but indents those that follow. For example, Robert Bringhurst states that we should "Set opening paragraphs flush left."[4] Bringhurst explains as follows. "The FUNCTION of a paragraph is to mark a pause, setting the paragraph apart from what precedes it. If a paragraph is preceded by a TITLE or subhead, the indent is superfluous and can therefore be omitted."[4] The Elements of Typographic Style states that "at LEAST one en [space]" should be used to indent paragraphs after the first,[4] noting that that is the "practical minimum".[5] An em space is the MOST commonly used paragraph indent.[5] Miles Tinker, in his BOOK Legibility of Print, concluded that indenting the first line of paragraphs INCREASES readability by 7%, on the average.[6] Other techniques are possible. Lines can be outdented to SIGNIFY the start of new paragraphs.[4] Another technique is to insert vertical space between paragraphs. This CREATES what is SOMETIMES known as "block paragraphs". Some keyboarders use a double carriage return to create this break, whereas typists using WORD processing applications may use increased leading to create a more pleasing space between paragraphs. Many published books use a device to separate certain paragraphs further when there is a CHANGE of scene or time. This extra space, especially when co-occurring at a page or section break, may contain an asterisk, THREE asterisks, a special stylistic dingbat, or a special symbol KNOWN as an asterism. In literature, a "detail" is a small piece of information WITHIN a paragraph. A detail usually exists to support or explain a main idea. In the following excerpt from Dr. SAMUEL Johnson's Lives of the English Poets, the first sentence is the MAIN idea: that Joseph Addison is a skilled "describer of life and manners". The succeeding sentences are details that support and explain the main idea in a specific way. As a describer of life and manners, he must be allowed to STAND perhaps the first of the first rank. His humour, which, as Steele observes, is peculiar to himself, is so happily diffused as to give the grace of novelty to DOMESTIC scenes and DAILY occurrences. He never "o'ersteps the modesty of nature," nor raises merriment or wonder by the violation of truth. His figures neither divert by distortion nor amaze by aggravation. He COPIES life with so much fidelity that he can be hardly said to invent; yet his exhibitions have an air so much original, that it is DIFFICULT to suppose them not MERELY the product of IMAGINATION.

 

Didnt read