Do you consider Tyson to be a H2H top 5 heavyweight?

I have Ali, Lewis, Liston, Johnson favored over Tyson. I'm on the fence with Foreman. Don't think he can win a decision, so it comes to whether he can knock Tyson out early. Will he be able to get away with pushing Tyson away from him as he did with Frazier? Will prime Tyson's head movement and peekaboo defense allow him to avoid the shots Frazier couldn't? Will Tyson plan to bring George into the deep water of the later rounds or will he try for his typical early round onslaught? Will Tyson get discouraged if George doesn't fold and he's eating George's bombs? Lot of food for thought. All things considered, I have Tyson in the 5-7 HTH range.

 

I used to give mike serious **** for losing to buster but on further review I reach this conclusion.



I think sometimes just crediting douglas with the victory isn't really enough: it wasn't just another day in the office for him, he went through a series of unfortunate events go preparation against an opponent who happened to have a style clash which fit perfectly with douglas's elite a game.

I think a less motivated douglas certainly loses to a more motivated tyson.

Either way when I view peak tyson I view 86-88. His head movement and overall defence significantly declined after spinks imo.

There is every chance that douglas was a great fighter who only fought that way 1 night.

There is also every chance that douglas was a good fighter who fought his socks off and exposed the weaknesses of mike.

However there is also every chance that mike prepared poorly.

I think an objective view is somewhere inbetween; mike wasn't **** for 1 night and douglas wasn't a great who pulled it together for only one night.

Reviewing douglas's career from about 86-90 shows that of a pretty good fighter with fluid movement and a very good jab. Reviewing tyson's career shows a man changing from a defensive great into a wrecking ball. Either way the 90 version of mike should have been good enough to destroy any less than very good boxer.

I see mike as two fighters: an expert at slipping with great reflexes and pinpoint accuracy, then the sadistical monster who wanted to kill a man as quick as possible.

In a more obvious way it's like wlad: from 00-05 he was a carefree aggressive fighter in his prime. From 05-now he's been a methodical expert at controlling range cautiously again whilst prime. The first wlad loses to a lot of greats but the second doesn't.

Buster battered a prime tyson, just not the one I use in fantasy matchups.

 

I understand what you're saying. Again I think its more of a popularity thing. People liked Tyson's style, and for a time he did look unbeatable. I dont hear people saying Tyson was the greatest of all time in 88, not even really on this site. I think a lot more people call him overated because of how his career ended, but whatever its just opinions.

 

I think it's ******ed to judge anything about him on how his career ended.

I'm exclusively talking about what people say about '88 Tyson' and how they imply that '88 Tyson' was a million miles away from '90 Tyson'. I've seen people say that stuff about '88 Tyson' plenty of times.

 

I don't give a **** about Buster Douglas. Me being appalled at how people overlook his effort is exactly the same as how much I'm appalled at how a lot of people excuse Duran's victory over Leonard as it being Leonard fighting the wrong fight. I'm equally appalled at how people excuse Leonards victory in the rematch with how Duran wasn't prepared etc.

I'm only trying to be objective, there's no agenda. Credit to those who win fights.

Obviously I'm not saying lets all give Maxim a ton of credit for doing Robinson in, you see my point though.

 

surely though, as a light hitting LHW maxim will have prepared for a long haul fight knowing his best chance of victory would come down the stretch.

yes robinson was boxing his socks off, but partly because he was putting a lot of effort in the early rounds, fighting at a pace he just couldn't keep up with in that heat.

also not giving a **** about buster is a bit harsh he's given us the sports greatest upset :good

 

you know what I mean. Maybe I went overboard a bit but people assume you're a fan of someone if you give them credit, I needed to offset that perception.

Maxim was lucky against Robinson. Come on man, you've seen the fight. Credit to him for outlasting Robinson then

:good

 

The things he did prior to the Bruno fight were a big part of his success. His defense, his mentors and preparation. They were big factors that made a big difference in how Tyson performed. Enough to make a massive difference in my opinion. It wasnt just a one fight fluke either, he was sloppy and hit worse than he had ever been in the past against Bruno, one fight out with his new team. I believe Tyson had faced fighters equally as good as Douglas in the past who could have exposed the same thing that Douglas did, had they been in Tokyo that night.
I think if a fighter is not mentally, spiritually and physically prepared for a fight, he can be a million of miles away from his best, no matter their age or physical appearance.
Fighters also gain and lose confidence as a fight goes on. The lack of preparation probably mentally weighed on Tyson as much as the success Douglas was having did on him. It was a perfect night for Douglas and he took advantage of it and it helped him get through some spots in the fight where he had failed in previous fights.

 

yeah but it's much much worse in the general. objectivity doesn't wash over there lol. in the same thread I'll get called a *******, ***** and an old man viewing the classic era through rose tinted glasses

I'm only a fan of bruno so if anyone ever sees me talking him up they can feel free to chop me down, and every so often I'll issue a post like

"if bruno had stamina and didn't train like a body builder he'd be the goat"

lucky, without a rematch it's impossible to say and an unfortunate viewpoint imo. the temperature wasn't a big secret, nor was maxim's punching power. robinson should have fought a better fight and paced himself, but who's to say with less movement and punches maxim couldn't tag him more often? In a way it's not much worse than any fighter blowing his load in the early stages of a fight just to be chopped up down the stretch.

 

Rather than trying to explain your stance in a fancy manner and attempting to sugar coat the much publicised theory of Tyson being a shadow of his former self in 90, a theory I've heard a million times, and one I used to advocate, then please just come out and say it. If what you're trying to say is that Tyson in 90 was a million miles away from what he was in 88 then more power to you and on that note I'm out of here. You know my opinion.

 

yeah, as I say, credit to Maxim on outlasting Robinson. He never chopped Robinson down though, he simply outlasted him tbh.

Much respect to Joey Maxim though.

 

he never had to though did he, what with robinson burning himself out and all (literally).

yeah credit where credits due

p.s. don't go thinking I'm a maxim nut hugger now

 

Not trying to sugarcoat anything. You seem to be getting irritated and your changing what you originally said you "meant" in an earlier post. Either way, no problem, I disagree with you. I think the same thing applies to many fighters. Roy Jones aint Roy Jones without his speed. Lennox Lewis doesnt achieve his greatness without Emanuel Steward. These are all real things that became similar factors in a similar time period, and a very real part of boxing.

 

With Tyson I think if you put him in the top 5 H2H you're recognizing his abilities at this peak. And when he doesn't make the top 10 or is in the lower part of it, you're also recognizing that almost anyone who watched he while he was fighting in his prime expected more out of him in terms of career accomplishments, but unfortunately flaws were revealed later in his career.

Neither is doing him a disservice and neither is unrating or over rating him in my opinion.

It's a very balanced approach.

 

in your opinion.