From what Ive heard, it nearly matched Tyson V Douglas in the shock amongst boxing fans It probably wasnt as big to the general public beacuse Curry wasnt the star Tyson was but still a ATG upset
Tyson-Douglas still has the edge as an upset. Even though Curry looked the heir apparent to Marvin Hagler as the world's pound for pound best,Honeyghan was unbeaten at this point,and Douglas had lost to moderate opposition.
Upset yes, on a scale of Tyson Jim Douglas? Nothing close. Bear in mind before the Douglas fight Tyson was thought of as INVINCIBLE. I might be stating obviouses, but I have to. Good old scrap though Honey - Curry.
Yes, with Douglas, the only person who I recall thinking he'd have even a slight chance "before" the fight was Jeff Ryan, who still thought he'd end up getting beaten to a pulp. Whereas, although no one thought Lloyd would win, it was felt he would give a good account of himself before being picked off and dismantled.
I'd hardly call it 'great' Wiggers but what I will add though is that Ryan felt that Douglas's patience, which was often his downfall, would be a plus against Tyson as he would aim to pick apart Mike with a slow, steady attack, following up his division-best jab with sharp combinations to the head and body. His downfall, according to Ryan, would be his awful stamina. Good call by Jeff, rather than all this "I felt Douglas could.... (insert post-fight bull**** here by venerable boxing trainer/contender/writer).
Far too modest MDWC. I can never get bored of the Tyson-Douglas fight, despite being a Tyson fan (but not in a way I am with Gatti or Corrales [no Manilow]) it's quality entertainment. One thing that always confuses me about that fight is this - why the f**k was Mike scrambling around for his gumshield? Surely if you're a warrior with fighting instinct, then surely you'd have gone on without it....or was his brain too scrambled?
I loved it. One of my favourite boxing nights ever!!! Although I have to admit, Mike didn't look at the races from the beginning. There was definitely something missing that night, but it needed a certain style to capitalise on it- and Douglas had those tools.
Allegedly Tyson was smashing his way through smoking hot chicks and doing plenty of drugs in the run up to this fight, which will obviously have affected his training regime. Like I said - allegedly.
But was it a case of Ryan showing more insight or just being a little "au contraire" to the prevailing (and let's be honest) justifiable mindset amongst the other sports writers that Buster had absolutely zero chance? I remember Ron Borges being the only writer picking a supposedly decrepit and shot Holyfield to beat Tyson in 96 (pretty much against all logic as well) and getting it right big time but I'll maintain he only did it to go against the grain and not from any insight that he had that others didn't. That said Ryan's rationale was very considered and accurate in hind sight so perhaps he deserves full props. Borges from memory just reckoned Holyfield was bigger,better,more active and used to fighting bigger blokes which is fine but hardly in depth from a technical and tactical perspective.
Of course, there's always that, I think I did it once or twice back in school with a Tyson fight :yep. But he did pick Tyson to win, just felt Buster would have his moments. We all remember that, Borges has dined on it ever since :yep and I can see where you're coming from. But in some instances I think it is genuine, like when Colin Hart picked Leonard to beat Hagler.
Tyson-Douglas can't have been much of an upset, loads of people on ESB called it exactly how it went down
