1934 Baer vs 1988 Tyson

Go home

 

Ruddock had one of the best left hooks in history. Fast explosive and compact . A WIDE left hook would be Frazier. If he was half the things ppl claimed on here he would not have been able to hit Tyson with such flush shots BC Tyson was not easy to land on.

There's nothing technical about Baer ,he makes Wilder look like Joe Louis in technique. He wouldn't get by half the guys Tyson fought let alone Tyson.

 

Is this thread a joke?

 

Ruddock bombed wide and from the hip, just like Baer. It's clear as day in the video even posted in this thread in his defense.

Frazier baited his opponents into reaching and caught them unexpectedly over the top of their punches. He had a short reach, what do you expect?

Ruddock landed on Tyson because he was unorthodox and confident in his ability to take Tyson's follow up shots. Baer had success for the same reasons. Those wide shots look telegraphed from our living rooms, in the ring, it's hard to figure out where those type of punches are looping, and are hard to defend. It's also hard to time guys who don't set up their punches by traditional means. Ruddock and Baer could explode with their best punches out of nowhere without using a jab or a set up. And in the case of Baer, he threw very unusual combos.

Baer was a better overall fighter than Ruddock.

 

Ruddock has great am background solid foundation even wins over Lewis and former top Holmes sparring partner .

Baer doesn't even resemble junior Olympic qualities.

Ruddock landed on Tyson BC he had a fast explosive punch and a 82 inch reach who had the power to keep Tyson off him at times and push him back in spurts.

Ruddock would hurt Baer...badly.

 

No. It's deadly serious.

 

So what? A wide punch from the hip is a wide punch from the hip, regardless your background or sparring partners.

[url]https://streamable.com/uprfq[/url]

Good thing he was a professional heavyweight champion and not an amateur.

And Baer had a fast explosive punch, an 81 inch reach, and power. You're deluding yourself if you think Tyson would get through a fight like this untouched.

My money is on the more durable brawler in this match up. Good fight while it lasts.

 

I'm talking about Boneclutcher Smith, oh wait.......

 

Using a "really good jab, accurate combinations, and movement" is what got you knocked out against Tyson. That's what he was built for dismantling. These supposed Tyson fans don't even know their own guy, it seems.

 

If you guys are using Douglas as a benchmark..you are aware how important his right hand lead was to that fight? Right..?

I swear, people on this site don't watch the fights, or they just develop ideas and can't shake them in the face of visual evidence.

Douglas did not beat Tyson with "the jab and movement" alone, his jab only worked because of the right hand lead that was completely throwing Mike off rhythm and catching him every time.

[url]https://streamable.com/089k1[/url]

 

Ruddock's hook was not wide otherwise it would not place itself close to a uppercut like punch. The gif only shows I'm correct as his elbow has minimal if any out torque to it.

Baer couldn't even beat 5'10 Uzcudan . He has no chance against Tyson unless he was on a 24 hour binge.

 

1934 Max Baer was probably better than anyone Tyson actually did beat. So people ripping him should bear than in mind too.
Baer in 1934 was coming off the best win of his career over Schmeling and 13 straight wins, he was still relatively unruined by the limelight and relatively injury-free. He was 25 years old and seasoned and hungry.

I'd rate 1934 Baer clear above Trevor Berbick, who was prbably Tyson's best win.
I'd rate him above Tucker and Rudock too.

 

Uh, minimal torque actually extends/widens your arm, hence a wide punch, though there are more factors to that such as the angle. Dear god, this is what it has come to...

if you can't call this punch wide, you are being dishonest. It might literally be the widest hook ever thrown!

[url]https://streamable.com/uprfq[/url]

And the sad thing is there is nothing even wrong with it, you are just so terrified of Baer having anything remotely in common with other men in the same sport, you will sink into almost comical denial.

 

Go back to your Mike Foreman alt. OH WAIT.... He was booted because he was found to share the same IP address as you (along with some other posters).

 

I don't get the implication here. Why emphasize Uzcudan's height? You think that's why Baer lost?

This fight was fought within a year of the Frankie Campbell tragedy with Baer in an early career slump.

It was a 20 round fight in 110 degree heat under the sun between two durable brawlers. The sole judge/ Jack Dempsey went on record stating that he awarded the fight to Uzcudan on the sole basis that he looked to be in better shape at the end of the fight. The reason was that Baer's corner was ill prepared for the heat, while Whitey Brimstein brought bottles of ice water to throw on Uzcudan and make him drink inbetween rounds.

Dempsey stated "Baer was the much better fighter that night." and thought he won more rounds, but he was the sole judge and it wasn't a fight judged on points. I could see fighters better than Baer losing in such a way to Uzcudun under those circumstances, especially Jack's method of determining the winner.