I can't subscribe to the view that a man who looked amazing in only ONE of his 46 fights should be given the benefit of the doubt as some head to head nightmare for " just about every heavyweight." While I agree that he was in uncharacteristically good form that evening I also believe that he was in the ring with a man who he simply had the right style to beat as well as probably wasn't in top form himself and suffering from the consequences of having incompetent handlers. That's a lot to consider when counting on him giving fits to 120 years of greats.
I'm not convinced Tyson was more than 80%-85% of a prime Tyson that night plus his corner was like amateur hour . Douglas for me was just mentally stronger than he usually was also he didn't switch off like he usually did like in the tucker fight for instance . Plus Tyson came within a second of a KO victory that night , a better Douglas than usual but not a super human version for me anyway . Just one last point 15 rounds is a question mark over Douglas
Giving someone problems and beating them are two different things all together, he was a talented fighter no doubt but was missing that little bit extra to be a great or to defeat the greats.
Tyson wasn't himself that evening.. He had boxed all but 93 seconds in the previous year, was working with management who was ill-suited for his style and mentality and looked about as interested in that fight as a kid in Algebra class the day before summer break lets out. I won't subscribe to the notion that a 1988 Tyson blasts out Douglas the way he did Spinks as I feel Buster was a much more formidable opponent for Tyson. But to say that Douglas beats " any" version of Tyson is something that I'd like to see first before writing this off as a no win situation for Mike.
Yeah, the guy has an 84 inch reach going up against a come-foward 5'10 fighter. At most you might argue that's enough evidence to say he (on his "special night") might pose a real problem to short ATG come-forward fighters, including Frazier, but that's about all. Thing is, I think Frazier routinely beat down men who came out and did well for a few rounds using reach and being busy. He came on strong later on, even if he'd taken some lumps along the way. Frazier just worked them over, overtook them, brought a fierce fast pace in the mid and late rounds.
I've never suggested he was great just that he would give problems to those that were. As a matter of fact I haven't even made a pick on my own thread! I just wanted to promote discussion .
Yes I have seen Frazier fight including attending the Bugner fight, in which yet again Frazier ended up with a face like a bag of spanners. Or are all you Frazier fanboys going to claim his legendary ATG status, turns him into Willie Pep all of a sudden as well? Tell you what we'll do, just so everyone can see how pathetic fan boys really are. Lets say EVERY ATG beats Douglas, Bruno, McCall Lewis, Vlad, and numerous others. We'll start with Jimmy Wilde , and Benny Leonard, working our way through to Sugar Ray Robinson, and for the Coup De Grace Marciano, solely because they are all time greats. Fuk Frazier getting bounced around like an idiot by Foreman twice, or mullered twice, and pulled out for his own good one of those times by Ali. Don't mean sh it because Frazier is an all time great. Tell me seeing as Muricans are so obsessed with ATG status, who are the ATG garbage collectors, over there, or how about ATG supermarket shelf stackers? If you haven't got a HOF of ATG's for them, it's about time you did have. The only criteria, is they either have to be over 90 or fukking dead. After all the more idiotic of the fan boys claim size, weight, reach, power are all irrelevant, so if 20, 30, 40, 50 lbs makes no difference according to the morons why not 75, 100, even 150. That way we can truly measure the amount of idiocy of the dyed in the wool fanboys. So nominations please starting with Jimmy Wilde, up to SRR, then just Marciano at Heavy because he is some sort of god on this Forum, on who beats 90% of all the Heavyweight who fought after Liston.:roll::roll:
It fascinates me how within the course of 25 years James " Buster" Douglas went from 1. getting lucky against the badest man on the planet who wasn't supposed to be at his best. to 2. winning in dominant fashion over the badest man when he was clearly in top form. to finally 3. Having a live chance of troubling or even beating any heavyweight in history. Curious to see where he'll stand in another 25 years. The GOAT perhaps? or maybe greatest athlete of the 20th century? or maybe we'll even be referring to him as St. Douglas.
You couldn't be more wrong. Frazier should be favoured for 2 reasons. 1. He is an ATG,, and 2. More importantly he is dead. That Tyson by the way stops Frazier inside 3 rounds ( the version from 88 more than likely stops him in 1 round ), easily. What he would be facing would be a guy lighter, weaker, softer punching, slower, with cr ap defence, who despite all those deficiencies would want to stand right in front of him and trade. Manna from heaven as far as Tyson is concerned.
No.. What he'd be facing is a guy who will constantly be bobbing and weaving while slipping the jab and putting relentless pressure on him. And applying a workrate he's never seen before rather than what he'd prefer to be facing which was a totally unmotivated product of lifestyle problems, too much money who follows him around the ring looking for one punch while his corner treats his swelling with a condom full of water....
Well who the fuk was battering Frazier in most of his fights then, the ref?:roll::roll: Don't tell me Frazier went into the ring with a face that looked like he used it to carry golf ***** around.