Be honest, after the first round, did you think Tyson was gonna beat Lewis?

im not sur he meant it :huh

 

That about says it , I thought it had massacre written all over it after the weight but yeah after the first round , there was a " wait a minute " moment but it past pretty ****in quickly

Even at his absolute best , Tyson would have a hard night with someone as big as Lewis , the size differnece was verging on unfair !

 

Most people before the fight thought Tyson would Ko Lewis.

 

No.

 

I would be lying if I didn't think Tyson had a chance of winning after that first round. I could only remember maybe once or twice, that Tyson had lost the first round.

 

I gave Tyson a shot after the first round but after round two it was clearly all over. A shame these two greats didn't peak at the same time. It would have been a fascinating fight.

My prediction for the fight had been a Tyson KO win inside three rounds. I did however say that there was no chance Tyson would win if it went beyond three rounds.

The Tyson who fought Lewis was shot to pieces and stamina-less. Unlike the Tyson of 86-88 who could go 12 rounds easily and be putting rounds in the bank till the end.

 

Does anyone here even give credit to Lewis for beating an old, uninterested, out of shape Tyson? Plus it took the guy 8 rounds to do it when he could have done it in half that time. Tyson was just there for a payday and nothing more.

 

To answer the OP - NO.

Tyson was ducking LL. The fight showed why.

 

I hoped, more than believed.
Prime Mike could keep enough of that **** up tho to get the win IMO, his stamina was 0 vs LL.

 

''

 

Tyson wasn't that shot. Anyway the MT of 86-88 wasn't fighting LL. A young, prime Tyson lost to B Douglas. I know, in MT huggers minds when Mike lost he wasn't in his prime :blood You can say that about any fighter - if you want to.

In my view LL beats MT in any stage of their careers. Tyson's main chance is to land something big early and stop LL. The longer the fight went, MTs chances would drop sharply.

 

atsch Did you not see the Nielson fight? The Williams fight? The last time Tyson looked half-way decent is when he beat up Golota 2 yrs earlier.

 

Yes he was shot but Lewis still beat the tar out of him quite easily, IMO it would've been a good fight in the 90s that could have gone either way. I just find it funny that Vitali gets credit for LOSING to a shot Lewis.

 

Obviously our definitions of "shot" are not the same. It seems your definition is that if a fighter isn't near his peak - he's shot. Which I think is way off. We can agree to disagree.

I don't think the LL that fought VK or the MT that got owned by LL were "shot". Was MT past his prime - absolutely. But then MT had like a 2-3 year prime - before he lost to BD. According to his fans, you can say that Tyson had one of the greatest post primes ever !

 

No one but a hater would say that, He looked like **** before he fought lewis, and he looked like **** shortly after as well, When Tyson fought Nielson he was clearly a shell of himself, his next bout ends up being against LL. A shot fighter in my veiw is someone whose abilities are Greatly declined, and against Neilson Tyson looked horrible, he was already on the decline when he fought Botha in 99. At 36 he was cleaarly shot. LL was claerly shot when he beat Vitali, he was inactive, came in at a career high in weight, but he still won.