Floyd Patterson v. Buster Douglas

Cannon was a good writer who was not affriad to speak his mind.

Here are a few of his famous quips, some of which were rather sharp.

Joe Louis is a credit to his race, the human race.

Rocky Marciano stood out like a rose in a garbage dump ( Referring to Rocky's competiton

Cannon ripped Bobo Olsen once.

He wrote for Sugar Ray Robinson not to return to the ring as well.

 

You

Your dead wrong .Ringo would destroy Buster, George would be much closer toss up.

 

It is not just a product of training. It is the result of training and a lot of talent. If what you are saying is true then why are big, fast and skilled men like Douglas, Lewis and Bowe so rare? Do you think they are the only ones of that size who trained hard?

 

Douglas was a fast , strong, well balanced stubborn heavy punching heavyweight.. Floyd was a mini version of Tyson with more speed, Peek aboo style and great defence... Douglas beat Tyson, he'd batter and overwealm Floyd..

 

douglas' king kong image is based on how he looked against tyson so a brief remark on this. i don't want to tangle with tyson apologists so these are MY opinions and each man to his own. of all opponents, douglas gave the greatest test for tyson's ability to handle the jab. which other tyson opponent threw 50 jabs in a round? in round 1 tyson DOES bob and weave and keep a neutral distance to evade the jabs and does a decent job of it. only a couple rounds later (maybe earlier than usual for tokyo version) - tyson does what he did in every other fight - stop moving his head CONSISTENTLY and just walk flat. it wasn't just tokyo. some people took it too far to say larry won round 3 in 1988 - but larry landed those jabs because tyson (even in his prime) was walking flat. against ALL TIME GREATS - douglas gets overrated because he looked good against someone who made him look his best. flat flooted, headhunting tyson. joe frazier, rocky marciano, jack dempsey would have made douglas look ordinary.

there's a fundamental difference between patterson & tyson - patterson could think in the ring and change his strategy if things weren't working his way. he was more WILLING than tyson to work the body, time his punches, and do something when clinched. Those are 4 key differences. Believe me, if Patterson could hang in there with prime Ali - he could do the same with Douglas. Yes, Douglas' jab keeps Floyd at a safe distance. Unlike Tyson, Floyd bobs and weaves CONSISTENTLY to neutralize jabs. He has stamina so he patiently hangs in there and throw some mean left hooks to the body. Douglas was a heavy handed guy but he didn't have the Liston like power to overcome Patterson's big heart by making him unconcious. Douglas gives him a heavy beating with good combinations - the rounds are competitive, Patterson is hurt but game & conscious. Patterson's shots to the body do take toll and wear down Douglas. Patterson times some awful left hooks to Douglas' chin and Douglas is shaken and further slowed down. One more fundamental difference between tyson & patterson - actually. Patterson actually knew to fight on the inside rather than sleep there like a huggy bear and do nothing when easily clinched like tyson. whereas douglas schooled tyson on the inside - patterson would hold his ground. he'd score his own shots on the inside. i see either a late round tko for patterson or a decision. douglas is NOT knocking out patterson. just because dougie had an easy time with tyson doesn't mean it'll happen with floyd. patterson would have put on a much better performance against douglas & holy than tyson - he had his attributes too.

the judges would slightly score for douglas on the outside - impressed by his work rate but also noticing that floyd has evaded a good number of them. on the inside - it'd be about even. midrange - probably patterson. difference is - it'd be like this for first 5-6 rounds. patterson would not slow down but douglas would, even if douglas was as game as he was in tokyo. and so the cards would lean to patterson at the end of the fight.

 

too simplistic way of looking at things. floyd & tyson were very different fighters - for the good and the bad. don't insult floyd by thinking that just becacuse tyson lost in tokyo - same for floyd.

 

i do agree with some of your points. however - being 50 lbs heavier does NOT necessary improve your punch resistance or necessarily increase your punching power. douglas did not hit anything like liston and he was just as susceptible to pattersn's KNOCKOUT power as the 200 lb guys patterson fought. he was just as susceptible to patterson's timing & handspeed. it is because of this size difference that i see patterson STRUGGLE in a competitive fight (but ultimately prevail).

 

Skills are learned but some people are utter naturals. They learn faster and apply easier. Some need to do a lot more work say to get to a point that someone else may have attained easier. If the person who attained it easier kept forging ahead they would be ahead of the other fighter by the time he reached the previous heights. No amount of gym work and training can give someone the hand speed of a Leonard or power of a Shavers if they are not up to it genitically. Some people will never see punches like a Jones or Benitez no matter what they do. Emmanual Steward says a McCallum had the talent to learn a new move at times in just a single telling. This is talent too. Of course it must be nurtured and the said fighter must put in the hard yards to make the most of it.

 

Fair call mate.

 

Simpson eh? I'll remember that.

 

Yup. At their bests.

 

The Douglas that fought Tyson would beat Patterson fairly quickly, Tyson had an iron jaw and lasted 10 rounds of punishment against Douglas, Patterson and his glass jaw wouldn't have lasted 5 rounds.