Butterbean Vs Mike Tyson (Why Didn't It Happen?)

I believe Holmes was 53 then. Butterbean couldn't close on him, just ate jabs and 1-2's nearly the entire time.

The commentary to that fight was weird. They're making fun of Holmes's age the entire time, saying he has no business in a ring, all while right in front of them he's completely dominating the fight.

 

Late 40s/early 50s Holmes> 2005 Tyson.

 

That's your logic? OK, my logic is, Tyson beat a far better Holmes than the version that humiliated Butterbean.

 

My logic is that Tyson was a badly shot fighter - mentally, physically and lost to a mediocre journeyman in McBride, so suggesting that the same outcome is a possibility against Bean is not ridiculous. Clearly even entertaining the thought of this causes you emotional pain, I get it.... Reality can be hard for fanboys to come to term with.

 

LOL Yeah, I'm in so much emotional pain because you think Butterbean could have beaten Tyson. Tyson, one of the most over hype HW champs in history. Just having a conversation. We just having a difference of opinion. Nothing more, nothing less. You give your thoughts, I give mine.

 

2-0 Usyk

 

Fair enough, Tyson even now would probably take out Bean