Holyfield...Did he just have Tyson's number?

Thread closed :good

Holyfield was simply a better fighter than Tyson, full stop.

People just make the same excuses for Tyson - late 80's this, prison that...... all his problems were of his own making.

Who during his prime did he beat that was as good as Holyfield?

 

Well lets look at it like this.....

Holyfield was 34 when he beat Tyson and he had been in tough fights or wars with............Dokes, Stewart, Bowe 3 times, Qawi, Cooper, Mercer, Tillman, De Leon.


Mike on the other head had only been a tough fight once prior to his fight with Holyfield and he lost the fight (Douglas)

The Ruddock fight was not a tough fight for Mike because Ruddock never asked questions of Mike the way Holy and Douglas did he just got pounded on for the majority of the fight and took as much as he could take for as long as he could take it, he threw a few spastic attacks at the end of a couple of rounds which made it look like it was a competitive fight for Mike when all it was, was Tyson beating up on him.

What takes more out of you, inactivity (jail) or the all the wars Holyfield has been in ? its obvious to me which would take more out of you but i dont expect the hardcore Tyson fans to concede commonsense :roll:


I think Holyfield inadvertently exposed Mike Tyson. The reason i say that is because Holyfield butting Tyson clearly played its role in this fight and even though you could argue that Holyfield did it intentionally or not the point is by doing it he inadvertently won him the fight because he exposed Tyson's biggest flaw which was his ability to suck it up and come back like a Champion when things are conspiring against you, great fighters deal with adversity and come through regardless, only Mike failed on two occasions to do this and accepted his fate against Holyfield after the 5/6 round when he went back to the corner complaining to Halpen, if you watch the fight closely very little comes back from Tyson after that round it was as though he gave up right there and then.

Holyfield took Mike's heart and lets be honest if you were to pick a fighter from that particular era to beat Tyson with that type of blue print who would you pick ? someone who can take a good shot, is resilient, can suck it up and come back, never gets discouraged and has come through those types of situations many times ? Thats right Holyfield is your man.

Its pretty much a bad style match up for Tyson unless he scores a KO which was also unlikely because Holyfield knew if he put Tyson on his heels and backed him up he would nullify his power and that is what he did both times.

 

I'd pick Holyfield to beat any version of Tyson, but what does it matter.

Tyson had his chance to fight Holyfield in '89 and '90 and '91 but messed up by losing to massive underdog Douglas, pulling out of a later date with an injury then getting nailed on a **** charge.

Later on, released from jail, he avoided a fight with Lennox Lewis and took on the over-the-hill Holyfield instead, and got beaten up by the massive underdog.

So, Tyson's fans can make "prime Tyson" a massive favourite against anyone, but that's what we call FANTASY fights. In reality, Tyson got beaten up by an aging Holyfield despite being a massive favourite.

As for Holyfield, his list of wins is impressive without the Tyson fights. Although everything seems to be scrutinized more than most, and his achievements often spun negatively, labelled an "over-achiever" and "inconsistent" by too many critics.

 

and he might of kept his ear !!!!!

Tyson came out to win , he was an angry man but lost heart an turned from a boxer to a street fighter and still lost , Tyson was a great crowd pleaser and i did like him but i still say holyfield would of taken the result .

 

Agreed.

I don't really see much of a case for arguing otherwise. Tyson seems to be one of those fighters people rate on pre-conceived notions rather than what was shown or proven as his career unfolded.

 

Exactly.

 

:happy

I agree prime vs prime Holy wins. A 87 borderline Cruiser/HW Holy loses but the best of Holy would beat Tyson I think. I just think he's Tyson's kryptonite. I almost feel he embodies everything Tyson doesn't. Almost sort of opposites.

:happy
:good

 

I remember a short interview Teddy Atlas gave in the build up to Lewis-Tyson..... a Sky Sports reporter was asking him about Tyson and what potential he had as a kid etc.... if I can find it I will post.

Basically he was asked if he could have been one of the best ever, and he just said no, straight up. Physically he had it all, but mentally he wasn't anywhere near.... and the usual argument (which I agree with) that longevity makes great fighters (and sportsmen generally) and that Tyson was a comet rather than a star.

Tommy Brooks said pretty much the opposite, interestingly enough.

In response to your post, I totally agree. Holyfield had the mental toughness required to beat Tyson, who thrived on opponents showing fear, either at the pressers, the weigh in or in the ring before the bell.

In hindsight I wish I had been old enough to place a bet on Evander, at 25/1 in the UK for the first fight. He simply broke Tyson, and took something from him.

 

In some ways yes, he did.

Perhaps another way of putting it was he had the right combination of intangibles and tangibles that had Tyson's number.

Tyson and Holyfield had been on a collision course for many years before they fought...before Evander even became a heavyweight for that matter.
Tyson was the best heavyweight, and Holyfield the best cruiserweight...it was inevitable that they would fight. Evander was making no secret of the fact that someday he would rise in weight and challenge the big boys.
Of course, Buster Douglas shocked the world before the megafight came off, and there was quite a lot of water under the bridge before Evander and Mike got it on, but Holyfield was on Tyson's radar for a long time.
Tyson, in '89 said of Holyfield :He's definitely one of my favourites; I look forward (to the day) when I can match my skills against his."

It irritates me that Holyfield gets sold short on this board...and let's face it, he does. Not just on this board, but others too.

The man was utterly fearless, and this was one ingredient that was needed to topple Tyson. Holyfield had ice water in his veins...you can bet that whether it was Tyson, Ali, Foreman, Liston or whomever standing opposite him, he would look at that man with the same 'I own you' look he always had. Reputations didn't faze him in the slightest.

Secondly, he had an unshakeable belief in himself, and a belief that he was divinely guided...for better or worse, that made him extremely competitive and very hard to beat.

Third, his will to win matches anybody's in history. He was one intense dude. Remember when Bowe beat him, and Evander came back bigger and better to avenge the loss? The man was on a personal crusade to beat Bowe. The title didn't matter as much as beating Bowe.

All these intangibles played a big role in defeating Tyson. But he also needed a concrete chin and a sound gameplan. He also needed the discipline to carry that gameplan out.

True, he appeared lacklustre and even sometimes mediocre against lesser opposition, but when he was insipired and motivated, as he was against Tyson and Bowe, he was a hell of a fighter.

It's impossible to say if things would have been different had they fought circa '90 or '91,
but he always had those tangible and intagible assets listed above, so there is a good possibility the outcome would have been the same. Who knows for sure though?

 

I seem to remember Tyson being at ringside for Holyfield's fight with Carlos De Leon and he was being critical of him because he had beaten mercilessly on De Leon and could not seem to get him out there, he did in the end of coarse.

I only bring that up because it was as though Mike was on a scouting report.

 

Yes.

In terms of style, he had everything needed to defeat even a prime version of Tyson. He was a durable warrior who was strong enough to keep Tyson on his back heels, sound enough defensively to nullify Tyson to landing one or two shots a time at the most, and fluid enough with his combinations to ensure that he'd be landing his blows in return.

So, with that in mind, I think Holyfiedn really did have Tyson's number.

 

88 tyson beats him but holyfield would be a hard fight for anyone. 80s tyson was the great fighter.

 

No he got to Tyson when Tyson was only a 5round fighter, and Tyson won most of those first 5

 

When you look at the two fights, Holyfield didnt do anything spectacular. He didnt dominate Tyson nor did he befuddle him with boxing skills. He simply weathered the storm until Tyson was so fatigued he couldnt continue. He held and grappled more than he boxed. It was nothing like the Douglas fight where Tyson was completely outboxed and outclassed, so to say he had Tysons number is kind of ridiculous, especially considering Tyson was a far better fighter in the late 80's early 90's and noone should deny that.

 

Good post, I agree Holyfield was a great fighter.