Holyfield-Tyson 1

That's hindsight and not foresight. There's a reason Tyson was a huge favorite and the bout opened at 25-1. At fight time it got down to 7-1 but that's still one guy as a huge favorite over the other. Hell, Tyson was still the favorite in the rematch & it's only in recent times everyone jumped off the bandwagon.

And it was hardly the same version of Holyfield that fought Buster Douglas either. Or the version that fought Qawi. And Evander's form going into the bout was hardly A+.

 

Ferdie was a good commentator. He became a bit old and sour but I always liked his perspective

 

Evander was considered damaged goods before Tyson 1. He was knocked out by Bowe and Lost to Moorer, both times not just being defeated but looking physically ill. He looked decent against Mercer but then horrible against Czyz ...

Tyson was on fire. Post prison he was destroying everyone. He was in terrific physical shape. Stylistically he was not the man from 86-88. He was wild. He lacked the same head movement. He never went stong to the body. However, his speed and power were still terrific. I feel he looked amazing in crushing Bruno the second time. He was a huge favorite going in. People actually feared for Holyfield's life. The back page on the NY Post predicted a Tyson slaughter victory.

This was an amazing fight. To see Evander hold it together, to stand up to Tyson, King and his group of thugs was unreal. What a drama as it unfolded. Almost no one could believe their eyes.

I feel up to this point , even after all he accomplished, no one really knew how great Holyfield was. Yes he defeated Douglas , but. Yes he beat Foreman and Holmes, but. Yes he had wars with a prime Bowe, again, but. No one really knew even after all this if he would ever have been able to stand up to the Tyson blitz or go the route of so many others ... fold and collaspe under too much speed and power. Could the "blown up cruiser" hang tough ?

Evander Holyfield proved what he was made of. Yes Tyson was not the best Tyson but he was still a hell of a force. That same Tyson destroys 98% of the heavyweights that ever lived. In addition, Holyfield was just as shot from a physical standpoint. From that perspective they were equal.

It was an amazing fight and night. Tyson, at his ulgiest (up to that point at least) , with his ulgy thug henchmen at his side , with DK in his last hurrah, got his ass handed to him in a huge upset. Amazing to watch unfold.

 

I agree good post.

 

Tyson was probably about as near his prime as Ali was in FOTC and Dempsey in the rematch against Tunney. Something along those lines. He was probably a bit closer to his prime than Dempsey against Tunney, actually.

Unlike Frazier and Tunney, Holyfield was several years past his prime, though.

 

As others said, that's better than him not making it to the end AT ALL, which was always the case in the 80's. Bruno's performances against Lewis and McCall were the best of his career.

Hogwash. Did you miss the beautiful, smooth double left hook, uppercut combination that KO'd Mathis? Does that look like a shot fighter to you?

Watch the first round of Tyson-Tubbs. This is Tyson's peak, yet he looks equally "bad" as he did against Mathis. First rounds of Tyson-Tucker: dito. You can always find bad moments if you're looking for them, but Tyson destroyed his opponents with the ease as he did in the 80's, until he ran into Holyfield. This is not saying that he was as good as during the 80's, but he sure looked spectacular and brutally dangerous.




p.s. Freddie Pacheco's commentary is ****ing unbearable. Whenever that ******ed, biased ***** is spraying his verbal **** over the microphone, i turn off the volume. He looked like a complete autistic ****ing ****** during a brief interview on that recent Thrilla in Manilla interview, too.


Pacheco: "First signs of Holyfield getting tired, first REAL signs..." [5 seconds later Holyfield lands a flush right hand and mashes Tyson with a 30 punch barrage to end the 10th, and continues it in the 11th] atsch

 

Probably was one of his biggest wins, but that doesnt change the fact he was bigger slower and stiffer, and a much easier target for Tyson and would have been for Lewis for that matter. Were talking about Mcall too.
How could you not see Tyson's timing was an utter mess against Mathis? He missed just about everything.
Pacheco's health started to deteriorate thats why Showtime let him go. Not a very nice statement you made.

 

The things that Ali and Dempsey had for that matter that Tyson didn't have post prison was that will to win. Tyson would still come out hard in the early rounds and it would take a beating to get him down, but he didn't have the fire in him.

This is what makes fighters overcome against guys who can physically match them or have equal skills, and Tyson didn't have that fire in him to win that you saw against Douglas when he came back in the 8th/9th after getting his ass kicked. Ali would rather die than lose, you can't say the same for Iron Mike post prison.

 

Even when Ali was fighting Norton for the third time, Shavers and later against Holmes. No ear biting, fouling or crumbling from the heat of the battle. You said "Ali would rather die than lose, you can't say the same for Iron Mike post prison" It seems like your using this as an excuse. Thats part of the reason why he aint among the top heavyweights ever. When past his prime he fought cardboard cut outs like Seldon, Bruno, Francis, Norris, etc. When Tyson was in against Holyfield, who he took as an easy pay day at the time and later against Lewis etc, he folded like a cheap tent.

 

I dont think it was meant to be used as an excuse. Its a very real fact that has to be factored into a fighters win over another and is a lot of times confused with bias.

 

Perhaps you're right, perhaps not. Don't see what differnece it makes, though.

And I don't think he staged a strong comeback against Douglas or showed a great will to win. He was forced back to the ropes and taking a pounding when Douglas got sloppy. That Tyson exploited that momentary lapse was not because of strong will, but because of the skill and timing that he still (contrary to popular opinion) had left. It was the mark of deadly puncher who instinctively pounced on an opening when he at last got it. His surge died out very quickly in the next round and then he went back to taking a pounding. Where's the great will power in that?

 

He was a disaster at Leonard-Duran I and that wsa in '82(I believe).

He was sucking Leonard's dick so much Ray's wife didn't have any.

 

Even commentators have their favorites

 

I don't remember the commentators being biased. One of them had Holyfield winning substantially, and 2 out of the 3 were praising Holyfield's performance.

As for the "rewriting history" thing I don't think it's rewriting history to say Tyson wasn't the same guy... I haven't heard anyone say he was actually shot though, which is totally untrue. He was still a good fighter, he had the speed and the power still, but technically he was very past it. He was just made for Holyfield's style at that point. I think a prime Mike would beat him though.

 

tyson still had the speed and power. he just was fundamentally shite and his stamina was not what it was. he hadnt had a fight for 5 years (ruddock 2)

he could of got close to his best if he had of applied himself right