Does anyone find Tyson vs. Holyfield I very overrated?

I think you don't have a clue what you're on about.

Tyson's demeanour changed big time after receiving the cut, you could see him unravel in the space of seconds.

He knew at that moment he was not winning the fight, after it was just survival.

 

Says the guy who pretends that Povetkin caused all the illegal clinching against Klitschko.

 

Are you trying to deny the the footage i posted which was longer and showed far more blatant examples of Holyfields fouling? Do you deny what your eyes have seen , or did you chose not to watch it?

 

It was a rough and trouble fight, do you want me to post footage of Tyson trying to break Holyfield's arm or do fouls only count one way?

The fact is Tyson attempted the most blatant headbutt and came off second best, he couldn't better Holyfield in any department be that clean or dirty.

The bully was bullied in the first bout and that carried over to the second bout, Tyson was in with a superior fighter in every department.

Tyson is lucky that this bout didn't happen in the early 90's because his career would have been finished much sooner.

 

Holyfield is lucky to have fought a mentally and physically past prime , post prison Tyson whose speed and combos were gone..And he still needed to fight like an animal to win

 

No, it was not. Foreman was still an undefeated monster when Ali did beat him, Tyson was not the same fighter and did not have the same aura when evander fought him and previously Douglas knocked him out.

 

Tyson is lucky that he didn't face the much younger and fresher Holyfield who was much faster, fitter and with much more combination punching.

Tyson would have been battered in even worse fashion.

The proof is in the pudding and it's there for all to see.

 

It was a technical master class from Holyfield. Great use of range, defense, timing of lead punches and counter punching. Tyson started effectively but Holyfield and it was fairly even until Holyfield took over from the 5th onwards.

 

Evander's balls were too big for Tyson.

 

He was just more accustomed to digging deep and finding a way when in the trenches.

Teddy Atlas is correct in a way, when Tyson was steamrolling his opponents those bouts weren't really fights. They were more akin to athletic showcases, this is not lessening Tyson's achievements but he's right.

When Tyson was in true fights of physical and mental fortitude he lost just about every single time.

 

Do you really believe the hore**** Atlas spits around?

Young and inexperienced Tyson had to fight with Tillis.
He lost two rounds in a row against Pinklon Thomas in between, like 15 punches needed to put the fellow down.
He lost the first round and another one shortly after Tucker showed him he wouldn´t go anywhere for 12 rounds.
He lost the first round big against Biggs, hence who broke down afterwards.
Both Bruno and Tyson were roughed up more than once after Bruno lost.
He came back against Douglas after a teriffic beating to put him down right before the bell. If that happened in the middle of the round and Douglas got stopped, 1001% of Atlas "quality expertise" suddently shifts around 180°. Is he aware that this treshold is pretty thin?
Tyson was not in real fights against Ruddock? Ok, never mind checking his face after Ruddock 2....

 

not in power

agreed

 

I think Holyfield was digging harder than Tyson at that point as well.

 

Yes I do believe someone who spent years with him and someone who knew his character inside out over some fella off a forum.

Tyson was always that child hiding in between walls....

 

Never said all of them, but it’s very clear, as it is here, that the ‘poor victim’ was really the instigator.

Also, Mike hit after the bell (first-round cheap shot no less) and on the break, etc. One of the dirtiest fighters ever — often tried to break or injure his opponent’s arm and of course the biting.

But let’s throw a pity party for poor l’il iron Mikey by all means.