Anyone else feel the typical Mike Tyson 'flaw' is over-exaggerated?

If you stand up to him, can take his shots, can nullify him without being negative (Bonecrusher ) and if you can beat the **** outta' him for round upon round, yeah, you might beat him.

 

i dont question his heart or chin! some of the shots he has taken are unbelievable! and always took a beating round after round to get him down. its the 2 losses at the end of his career that haters (seems to be hardcore klit fans lately) hold against him. even though untill he tore his acl and gassed he was beating williams round the ring. his main trouble was training, or lack of, the last chance he had to get the glory back was holyfield 2, if he hadnt had bit him it could have been a ****ing awsome fight because he had actually trained for it.
unlike the 2 weeks he did for the first, he thought holyfield would be a push over having heart problems and looking like **** in his last fight. but holyfield is as tough as nails though!

 

Watch Berbick push Tyson back, watch Ruddock go for big shots on him.


The two fighters he lost to when he could still muster the energy round after round had to not only have there best performance ever but to hit him so many times, that it would cause death to other fighters.


From a technical stand point he went downhill after the Spinks fight-

But what we saw from 1985 to 1988 was head to head some of the best stuff ever in boxing history. The fact he was still relevant in 2002 some 14 years past his best night confounds this.

 

I see your point, I think it does affect him mentally if you stand up to him and are able to take his shots but it takes more than that otherwise Ruddock would have beaten him.

Douglas was relentless that night, really fought his socks off as opposed to Tyson who had been **** farting around in training shagging japanese hookers and the likes.

Holyfield just had his number imo, I think he is a better boxer, has a chin to hold up to Tyson and can dish enough punishment back. He also forced Tyson into his fight and made him make mistakes.

The less said about Lewis, Williams and McBride the better, he was a shot fighter.

So in all the argument has some weight but it is only one factor.

 

Completely disagree. Mike Tyson visibly folded in the Holyfield fight. I think it was the 6th round he went disconsolately back to his corner complaining to the ref about head butts. It seemed like one of those scenarios where by you need to look at yourself for answers but you start blaming someone else rather than sucking it up, being a man, and getting it on with it. Tyson pretty much just existed in the fight after that round from what I remember. Also, if Mike was gassed, its because he threw the kitchen sink at his man and he was still standing. You cant throw power punches with every shot and it not start to tire you out. I dont care how fit you are.

 

The myth is that Ruddock stood up to Tyson. He pretty much took a pounding but stayed in their taking a pounding. He threw a few ****** flurries at the end of a couple of rounds to make it appear like he was in the fight, but he wasn't. He was taking a beating from what I remember.

 

He hit Tyson some unreal shots in their second fight anyways, only seen highlights of the first one tbh. Terrific effort by Ruddock in the rematch, and a testament ot tyson toughness and balls to.

 

No offense but you would wanna believe that if you were a Mike Tyson fan trying to push the assertion he didn't fold mentally. Mike Tyson is in-control of how he paces the fight so its on him if he gassed himself out. I dont believe he did though. Its not coincidence to me that Tyson lacked character outside the ring aswell as in it. To me he fought like an animal cause he was a scared fighter. By fighting the way he did he could project his insecurity & fear onto his opponent and not have to fight WITH! it, cause fighting with fear is what takes balls. Doing what Floyd Mayweather does takes nerve. To not get flustered and lose composure when someone is trying to reign punches down on you is a real skill of temperament. Holyfield was 36 when he beat Tyson. He's been in many more wars, and was coming off bad losses to Moorer & Bowe. If anybody has a case to say they weren't the same fighter, its Holyfield. He looked shot to **** against Moorer & Bowe.

 

The two fighters that beat him close to his prime? He was a long way off his best Vs holyfield. I'm not a huge Tyson hugger but no-one beat him at his best.

 

This is what I'm saying but I would disagree that his punch resistance wasn't top drawer either. Not a massive guy and stood up to big shots from much bigger guys. He was incredibly hard to stun, let alone finish.