Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by William Walker, Jul 28, 2020.
Don't think so.
Tyson was never the same after losing to Douglas,
In hindsight it was too big a jump from fighting easy opponents to fighting someone like Holyfield, I am sure Team Tyson fell for the Bobby Cyz performance and thought this would be easy work
Holyfield was much lighter and less muscle bound, it could be argued he was stronger and hit harder in the second half of his career
Many years ago yeah.
I don't see it, the speed and snap and gone from his punches compared to his mid to late 20's.
The younger Holyfield would have hit Tyson with every punch in the book.
Exactly, Tyson had already had his arse handed to him by a lesser fighter in Douglas. Evander Holyfield would have done exactly the same in 1990 but more convincingly.
It was a huge upset. As for the fight itself, yeh I think it is overrated
Negative. Holyfield got hit more by old Larry than Tyson did. Mike Tyson fought a younger better version of Larry
What the hell has that got to do with the price of bacon?
That's not how boxing works, all that matters is how they match up to each other.
Holyfield had Tyson's number, two fights show that.
If Larry 88 says Tyson would always have his number , than it also proves 88 Tyson would have Holyfields number.
I think most of us were highly sceptical of Tyson's ability to come back to the top, and remained sceptical based off the McNeeley farce and an awkward performance against Mathis Jr.
But the Frank Bruno fight was seen as a fairly good test. Bruno was considered to be at the height of his game, bigger and better if anything, than he'd been before, legitimately ranked near the top of the division. Tyson had the 1989 performance (not one of his best but still a prime one) as a gauge.
He ran through Bruno easy enough.
No one in the division at the time was obliterating top heavyweights like that.
I think some people are more in denial now about how far Holyfield had fallen by '96.
The historical revisionism of this fight is quite widespread.
It proves nothing, you are comparing apples with oranges.
Compare apples to apples and you will find Holyfield owned Tyson twice, facts.
That was Brunoz last ever fight. One fight before Tyson , he went life and death with McCall who had just gone life n death with a geriatric Larry Holmes. Tyson obliterated Holmes SEVEN years earlier.
Frank was finished in that rematch.
James Ali Bashir said Tyson was never the same again when he and Roddock beat the primes out of each other. Soon after Tyson was carted away to prison for 4 years.
The Tyson who fought Holyfield was little more than an impersonator of his former self.
Andrew giving Bowe a leathering doesn't mean he would do the same to the 1992 version of Bowe.
Well the bouts they had tell me he would, Golota was a stylistic nightmare for Bowe.
Golota was not a Holyfield who was a good 30lb lighter than Bowe.
Tyson had two bites of the cherry and never came close to beating Holyfield.