1996 - "Tyson Ducked Lewis" ?

Prime for me isn't lineal, It's a state of mind and conditioning.

Akinwande to Tua and Rahman II would be prime Lewis for me.

 

I get you. What would be Tyson's prime?

 

86-89 & Tilman - Ruddock I.

It's been a while since I seen some of the fights in those periods, looks about right though.

What about yourself Sangria?

 

I like your own definition of a fighter's prime. Not sure I've seen anyone else use your concept. For me, Tyson's prime would have to be Frazier/Ribalta-Spinks. Anything after that is past prime. For Lewis, i would say Morrisson-Rahman II. I have to watch the Akinwande fight all the way through without snoozing to give a proper critique. Lewis wasn't his best for Rahman I but he regained the title in prime Lewis fashion. After Douglas, Tyson got better with Giachetti in his corner but still wasn't all the way back to peak form. Not sure if he would have ever gotten back. Maybe it wouldn't have mattered.

 

Interesting that you don't include Bruno I, what did you see that hints Tyson was slightly past prime?

Oh and don't watch Akinwande again!! Lewis was prime but Akin just spoiled it.

I get your point about Giachetti in Tysons corner. I just think Tyson regained his hunger and the determination to get back to the top brought out the best in him.

 

The fact that he was now begining a stage where he would fight lees rounds and fights over the next 21 months of his career than over any stretch of his career. From spinks to Douglas Tyson would take off (8/5/7) between fights through Douglas, where he had gone 2 fights and 8 rounds...This might not sound like alot but Tyson was fighting much more frequently than most HW's of the day and had gone 6 fights in the previous 12 months and 32 rounds. I firmly believe Tyson needed more frequent action to remain sharp....

Tyson's split from Rooney will leave him without a solid training team and mark the begining of the end for him...D'Amato, Jacob's, Rooney and co. were now out of the picture and realm of influence placing Mike on his own or rather IMHO under the influence of less Mike minded people. Comparing Mike of Bruno I with the Mike of 86 (I would go as early as Ferguson) around Frazier as someone has said previously in this thread, through Spinks is almost night and day.

Less active (above)
Lower punch out put.
No longer systematically works the body, and less frequent use of the jab
begining the lack of combination and head hunter stage (not sure if that is the right wording) of his career.
Defense is now very penetrable, the high guard defense is not as tight, almost nil head movement in comparrison leaves him open to more flush punches where previously that has been difficult to do.

I remember Rooney screaming during matches (Ferguson) go to the body...man Tyson had a nice body attack back then. (Biggs) stop going for the head and throw some combinations, (Holmes) put your punches together, (Thomas) work the jab, (Thomas final round) forget the jab and get him outta there. I don't believe Tyson is as sharp, hungry or focused and now he lacks the leadership to be able to redirect him during a fight or someone to help him remain a versatile fighting machine rather than a ferocious one dimensional power house.

Just my take

 

No I think I clearly stated that Lewis was not at his best in his two losses. I think in the Mcall fight Lewis was not the polishd fighter yet. In the Rahman fight he was basically as badly prepared as Tyson was for Douglas, only everyone excuses Lewis because he was able to revenge his loss, whereas the mythical unicorn of James Douglas has grown into this super fighter for one night only. Douglas visually was a much more appealing fighter to watch than the plodding Rahman, but realistically with all intangibles factored in, he wasnt much better.

 

Good take. I can include the Ferguson fight as a nice test for Tyson pre prime. His future fights with Tillis and Green proved he wasn't there yet and gave him a bit of seasoning. The Ribalta fight was ferocious and Tyson was able to throw some combinations with bad intentions in the later rounds. Was Ribalta coked out of his mind or what?

 

Mike did regain the fire but was a little too wild for me. He showed flashes of 88. In the Ruddock rematch he should have gotten him out of there in the 2nd round. A more disciplined Tyson would have done it.

 

Perhaps, but if we are going to give tyson the benifit of the doubt we need to do the same for Ruddock. Just as tyson was not as sharp and his overall game seemed to slip into looking only for the KO rather than the systematic dismantelings he previously used to achieve those same results, I believe Ruddock had turned into a one dimmensional (or a least less versatile) slugger who fell in love with his power rather than the one who showed much more movement. I beleiev the Dokes fight of 90 was a sign of Ruddock's shift in style....I liken Ruddock of Weaver to Smith, as different from the Ruddock of Dokes-Tyson on a similar plane as Tyson pre and post Spinks. I still think Tyson would beat Ruddock in a prime vs Prime fight but Ruddock was much better in 88 than he was in 91, and needs to be given that same benifit of doubt.

Tyson vs Ruddock 88 or early 89 would have been the best time to guage these 2....a shame that it had to wait untill 91

 

Possibly. Ruddock hadn't made a name for himself till after the Smith and Dokes knockouts. Tyson was to fight Ruddock in late 89 up in Canada. I remember reading somewhere Tyson stated that he would have gotten killed if the fight took place in 89.

 

you could not be further from the truth.. i suggest you go and watch Douglas vs McCall where Buster looking fantastic and dished-out a one sided beating to a very fit and aggressive McCall... Rahman was a bum who would not last 4rds with Douglas

 

Not only did Mcall never really amount to anything of a fighter realistically, he had 16 fights when he faced Douglas.
If you read my post the point was that Douglas was a classier looking boxer, but mentally he was not as tough as Rahman. For that reason his career ended up very similar to Rahman's. One key win surrounded by a string of coming up short and inconsistency.

 

I agree that Buster & Rahman have very comparable records:

(Simple comparison with most of their losses ignored)

Buster:

This content is protected

Tyson

Aging Berbick
Young McCall
Page

This content is protected

Tucker
Ferguson

Rahman:

This content is protected

Lewis

Sanders
Ancient Berbick

This content is protected

Tua
Toney

 

Yes both were decent fighters that scored monumental upsets.