How good was Tokyo Douglas

My opinion is that Douglas fought the fight of his life that night in Tokyo. I thought it was going to be another early KO for Tyson. Douglas had the perfect strategy, his head was on right, everything clicked. But unfortunately Douglas was not always that "on". I think we saw a lot of what Douglas was about in his loss to Tucker. He was a top heavyweight, but not the very best. Probably he could have done better against Holyfield, but I don't see many circumstances in which Douglas wins that fight.

Bottom line is I think Douglas's current standing in history is about where it should be. His win over Tyson was one for the ages. But he was not generally as fabulous as he looked that night.

 

Also, consider rust. The Williams fight in the year before lasted like 30 seconds.

 

Douglas didnt have the intestinal fortitude of an all time great, but he had the skills. He did fight through some adversity that night, and he almost didnt get up. Something pushed him to get back up, when in the past, he decided he had enough. Douglas was a very skilled fighter, but his chin and willingness to take punches were not always the best. He could have won the title against Tucker and faced Tyson at his supposed best. Tyson didnt take Douglas seriously because Douglas had lost to his sparring partners and a guy he beat by UD. That version of Douglas that showed up in Tokyo required a solid corner, and a mentally prepared Tyson.

 

Douglas wasn`t that good in that bout, it was fairly averge stuff, Tyson just sleep walking and Douglas landed slightly sharp 1-2`s.

 

Yes, this is true. Every one who says Douglas had Tyson's number tend to gloss over this fact. A Tyson who was clearly not at his best physically nor mentally dropped Douglas with a single shot, and very well may have won if it was not for the long count, and even accounting for that had a very serious possibility to end matters had that shot come in the beginning of the round rather than then end.

 

lol

 

I've glazed over a few posts and may have missed this claim. Can you point me to it.

 

But that has nothing to do with the different intangibles they presented Tyson.

I don't think Ruddock would beat the fully motivated Douglas. He didn't take much of a punch himself. Everyone thought it would be over when he found Morrison's chin but alas.

He's a one trick pony and James defensive instincts would certainly hold him in good stead for that. He could also knock out Razor.

We are at a bit of an impasse. I've said numerous times Douglas stifled Tyson's attempts to get off at his favored midrange via excellent pinpoint (varied too) footwork, giving angles, punching back with variety and generally really mixing it up.

Obviously you don't see that at all which is fair enough.

I agree Tyson was a bit off and had lost a bit from around the Spinks period.

I've argued myself that i think an in shape and motivated Tyson would have won.

I stand by that but with a touch less conviction. Even in shape and motivated people have told us his style had diminished a bit (definitely correct to a point, what point is the argument) so Douglas may have gotten past that version anyway.

Who knows, maybe Douglas would have severely tested any Tyson. The more i watch it the more i realise just how brilliant he was that night. It's far from a case where everything is on Tyson. It takes two to tango and Douglas sure as hell tangoed that night. The assets and skill on display were immense IMO.

 

History is filled with almost men and almost moments. The way Douglas came out the round after getting dropped puts a lot of doubt into any projection of Tyson stopping him with more time.

You are right tho he'd have to watch out bigtime for a quick ref stoppage as the scorecards show the fix was in.

True. He did what he had to and did it brilliantly.

Perhaps, perhaps not. I'd certainly not discount it. It's impossible to be overly confident either way if one is to be honest IMO.

Buster does not disagree - he's said himself that he would have beaten Tyson in a rematch. Most of your post is pure speculation slanted Tyson's way.

 

THE H2H GOAT

 

"Douglas was far better than Biggs. Better mover, much more power, more creative and far superior combination punching."

He was not. And we´re excluding stamina at that point too. If I remember correct Douglas looked gassed before getting hurt against Tucker as well.
You´ve Tuckers better feet, chin and stamina vs. better offense and the jab (while he looked not that much better jabbing with a jabber [Tucker]).

I like how some see a fighter winning the rematch easy after getting dropped like a sack of potatoes from a single punch (that wasn´t that hard to begin with). A safer bet would be a fellow who simply soaked up the heat and could win rounds too (a version of Tucker with more agression and better jab).
Like others pointed out, maybe Douglas looked as goot as he did because he didn´t face too much heat.

 

Maybe McCall vs Lewis would be a stronger analogy then. People are more split but generally, McCall is not seen as a fighter that would always have Lewis' number despite not being at his best in the rematch.

 

Me saying Douglas was a better all round fighter than someone in no way equals i consider him better "in every aspect of the game".

Douglas did get a bit gassed against Tucker but i think it was more mental wear than anything.

The guy that won their fight simply wanted it more IMO. nobody wanted it more than Douglas against Tyson in what was an atypical thing for him if anything - fully motivated, great training camp and huge hunger.

Douglas showed excellent stamina against Tyson given how often he punched and how much he put into it.

I'll take Douglas' footwork of the Tyson fight over Tucker's. It's obvious IMO how much better his footwork was against Tyson. Tucker had a good chin. The thing is i never said Tucker didn't have a better chin.

Well again I've never said that.

Also to say the uppercut that Tyson dropped Douglas with "wasn't that hard to begin with" is absurd to put it frank. He dips down and gets great leverage into a fully fledged uppercut. It's a HUGE punch. Replays from different angles clearly show the immense power he got into it. It was the type of punch that often ends fights.

The fact is Douglas beat Tyson and Tucker didn't. Regardless of perceived condition Douglas did something Tucker didn't remotely come close to doing and did it in style.

And most top shelf posters will simply see it as Tyson being down and Douglas being up. That's the prudent take. It was a combination of both factors. There was a lot going on for both men coming into the fight and all of that combined to give us the greatest upset in Heavyweight history.

How much both were up and down is of course what people debate to this day. Trying to put almost all the eggs to one side of the basket or the other in this case is extremely unbalanced IMO.

 

No boxer is much good.
The best ones are just average ones who land a few extra decent punches, or avoid a few more, or get their punches in first.