How Long was Mike Tyson's Prime?

it's not that simple. it's circumstantial. he could be washed up by 1971 f he ran into george foreman or muhammad ali. or he could last until 1976 etc if he avoided jail and those two monsters.

 

ahhh..thanks. i agree. expressed in 2 lines what'd take me 2 paragraphs. "absolute prime" is abstract and circumstantial whereas "prime" is more practical. you used the simpler, clearer, and better terms "peak" & "prime" which i like.

 

The never-ending mythology surrounding Mike Tysons prime years is astonishing. His destructiveness in the 80s is what draws people to the subject but i would submit to you that Evander Holyfield could have always beaten him.
The fights people stand in awe of, are Berbick, Spinks and Holmes ..
Berbick was an average fighter with terrible balance and no defence, Spinks was a scared fighter and Holmes's reflexes werent as sharp as they once were and Holmes's style always relied on reflexes as well as speed, like RJJ.
Tyson did lose the shoulder roll in the 90s but all fighters as they age lose something that they once had in they're arsenal. Truly great fighters can adapt with the passing of time, Tyson couldnt, whether thats because of his personal problems or because he was surrounded by 'yes' men instead of a proper team i dont know .. I may be in the minority here but i believe that Tyson was over-rated, he was a brilliant, exciting, destructive fighter, pure box-office but for me he always comes off second best against Holyfield, late 90s Lewis, a younger Holmes and i'd actually give a young, hungry, in-shape Bowe a great shot at beating an 80s Tyson ..
Tyson reminds me of his hero Jack Dempsey, his acolytes will tell you that his destructiveness in his prime would have been unstoppable but give me a true boxer like Ali, Louis and Holmes over these power punching KO specialists anytime

 

1986-1989

87/88 was the version that had a chance vs any HWT in history.

 

I think if Cus D`mato had lived for another 5-8 yrs Mike`s prime would have lasted longer, he would have kept his head straight when he started to live badly in 89-90.

He was like Tyson`s father, once he died & Mike fulfilled Cus`s dream by becoming the youngest ever champ, slowly but surely Mike went off the rails.

We as fans were robbed of something really special, Tyson was special, people have short memories, Mike had a shot at eclipsing Ali & Louis but such is life, it wasnt to be.

 

Pretty much how I feel about Tyson. I applaud him for bringing interest to the dead HW division, but the following article(Mike Tyson: Who Has He Beaten?) sums up exactly why I feel this way.
http://www.thesweetscience.com/boxing-article/1134/mike-tyson-beat

Watching fighters with great chins & unquestionable hearts like Ali,Holmes etc,....it is hard for me to rank Tyson who was stopped a half dozen times(basicially quit in Holyfield II & Kevin Mcbride) i his career.

The article agrees with my opinion that all things cosidered that Tony Tucker & Razor Ruddock were his most impressive victories with Pinklon Thomas a close third. The manner in which he won was impressive ,but the competitio was lacking(through no fault of Tyson of course).



I have been lurking a couple weeks & was curios to know what knowledgable Boxing fans like yourselves think about this article.
Hope to post from time to time .

 

I think he was still dangerous til aboput 90. I think he was making a decent efffort to fight the tougher guys. Keep in mind that ruddock was seen as as the most dangerous Heavy at that time..Mike demanded to fight him so he can prove to the world that:


"ruddock aint the baddest man everyone says he is"

mike Tyson

To me this showed he had heart that EVERYONE underrates nowadays:-(. The ruddock fights were classic. Two YOUNG guys in there PRIME.

 

Doing fairly well and losing a large lopsided decision and beating Tyson non-stop from pillar to post for 10 rounds as Tucker's former KO victim Douglas did are two different things.

You haven't made your case Axl Rose. I just can't see why a prime or peak(if you wish) Tyson with his jab,with his well timed counterpunches thrown in combination and his elusiveness could not have been a tough prospect for any heavyweight in history.

 

Again proving the boxing adage- "Swarmers have short primes."

 

In my opinion, his prime was from '86 to '97: he still looked great in destroying Bruno in '96, and looked better against Holyfield than against Douglas in '90. He wasn't the same fighter in the 90's as he was in the 80's though; his peak was clearly during the 80's, more specifically against Spinks or Holmes in '88.

 

There's no ****in' way Tyson was even within seeing distance of prime by 1997.

 

I thought his one-punch power was at its peak,after his release from prison upto the second Holyfield fight. On the other hand he seemed to be punching 'in a groove'.There was no longer any subtle variation of angle and range.
I attribute this to his years of weightlifting in prison.

 

tyson became a fairly one dimensional fighter relatively early in his career....in his brief but stellar prime, he was a wreckin machine, but he soon abandoned the lateral movement, and even, to an extent the brutal up and down combos, becoming a fighter who walked in..(and retreated) in a straight line and traded on his speed , power and aura..he relied on his oponents being scared witless..(bruno 2, seldon amongst others spring to mind..) and relied on one shot power....he paid the price for this fistic laziness, and was never the same fighter after his 0 was taken....

 

'86-'89.