Did Buster D overperform ? or did Tyson underperform ?

Douglas would always have been a nightmare. The victory was too complete, mike barely got a look in. I think mike would have won the rematch cause buster would never maintain that form, well he didn't.

 

Douglas was always a pretty good frontrunner, and he decided to go "banzai" in this one. He got to Mike early, and Mike was unable to pressure him sufficiently to make him fold, which in my opinion, was an option throughout the entire fight even though Douglas was winning handily.

He caught lightning in a bottle, imo. The fight developed in a way that was decidedly coincidental. Replay the fight three months later and I'd bet the house on Tyson.

That said, massive respect for Douglas that night. He came to knock Mike out and he did it. He put it all out there against the most feared heavyweight in decades, undefeated, expected to have a long reign, as a massive underdog. A legendary performance.

I don't know what mental deficiency caused him to show up fat against Holyfield, though.

 

That uppercut didn't make Douglas fold

 

This is a forgotten factor. Tyson wasn't in his best shape, but I think most of him looking bad was Douglas making him look bad. He had got his respect and made him buy his feints and set the tempo for the entire fight.

Tyson tried to get his jab and combinations off, but Douglas wouldn't let him settle into any kind of rhythm. That was the key to the fight.

 

That uppercut came late in the fight, by then Douglas was too confident, too mentally strong and too far ahead to develop any self doubts.

Had that uppercut come in the first round, things may have been slightly different.

 

True, feints seem to have almost become a lost art. You rarely see it being used now, the most recent high profile fighter to use feints was Maidana against Mayweather and it served him well

 

Nah, think feints are quite commonly used. Pac for one uses them frequently. And of course Floyd.

But perhaps the tempo of modern fights sees them used a bit less today. And perhaps they've also become more subtle.

 

But it didn't. Douglas seemed confident from the first second of the fight to me.

 

Both.

It was a perfect storm of factors.

 

Buster got KO'd in that fight (round 8 long count). It was a fix. Howa bout that warm water balloon in Mikes corner and no competent cut man or trainer.

 

No he didn't.

There is absolutely no requirement for a count to be exactly, or even approximately, ten seconds.

 

Douglas timed the count perfectly, is that you Don King???

 

Yeah I guess 14 seconds will work, eh ? When did he start the count? And than pushed Mike back to the corner?
Rory Calhoun in Mikes' corner ? Get real dude !

 

You miss the point here.

The count is however long it takes the officiator to count to ten. It doesn't matter it it takes twenty seconds. The fighter is entitled to take the full count to recover, and he is entitled to assume that it ends when the word ten is said. In practice it would be almost impossible to ensure that it was exactly ten seconds.

So no, Tyson does not have a case for having knocked Douglas out.

 

I agree with that. A downed fighter relies on the referee to make it clear how long he has to get up. What fighter who's just had his brain scrambled a bit is going to say to himself, "Y'know, the referee is on 'six', but I'd better get up 'cause I think I've been down closer to nine seconds."

Anchor punch legitimacy arguments aside, this illustrates how badly Liston got screwed in the second Ali fight. In another time and place, with different fighters, Ali-Liston 2 would have been declared "no-contest" and a rematch would have been mandated. But I digress... that's a subject for a different thread.

Edit: wow, I can get away with typing "screwed" but not the proper spelling of C00ney or R1dd1ck...