How much of Mike tyson s potential did we see?

I suggest you go watch the 6th round in their first bout and the second fight especially the later rounds. Why do you think he was throwing low shots? He was doing all he could to survive in there. You're talking wet if you believe it's anything remotely similar to Holyfield/Tyson.

 

He was throwing low blows and butting him with the shoulder from the beginning. holyfield was fouling tyson plenty as well. Tyson had just as much success vs holyfield as ruddock did against tyson, which was to land some good shots but never be in control. actually i had tyson ahead vs holy before he went down, cant say ruddock was ever ahead vs tyson.
In fact now that i think about it tyson was having equal if not more success vs holy in the 3rd round of the rematch before he bit him than ruddock ever did against tyson. Now if you deny that then you're just being biased.
i saw the 6th round ruddock was landing some good shots, tyson smiled at him and told him to hit him again, then fired back. again he was buzzed maybe but the legs looked fine, and tyson put him away the next round whether the stoppage was 2 seconds early or not.

 

We saw his full potential and I don't think people appreciate his streak of invincibility in the 80s as much as they should. He made world class fighters look like chumps with incredible consistency, and that's why a lot of the 80s fighters are badly underrated today.

 

Tyson tended to freeze when hurt with that vacant look, it happened in the 6th round in their first bout but towards the end of their second bout he was on the verge of another Tokyo. If Ruddock had more ability he would have beat Tyson that night, one punch with nothing else wasn't quite enough to beat him.

 

i agree that ruddock would have beat him if he had more total ability

 

As I remember it, many of those fighters were regarded as chumps before Tyson beat them.

Not sure that was always fair to all those individuals but there's no doubt the heavyweight division was in the doldrums at the time.

 

They were never considered anything special, but revisionsts act as if they were a bunch of spastics. Very few people could dominate those versions of Berbick, Spinks, Tucker and even old Holmes the way Tyson did.

 

tucker especially, tucker looked SUPERB that night, legs to move 12 rounds, handspeed to land triple left hooks on tyson, a great chin and good power.
Thomas showed up in good form as well, he proved that when he came back from being OUT after the first and won a few rounds before getting stopped. tubbs had a very good chin and tyson knocked him out with one punch, look at the trouble bowe had with a far worse tubbs, tyson dominated punished and ruined biggs and bowe still had trouble with him later as well, thats not even a knock on bowe these guys were still good fighters even then!

 

He cleaned out a whole division, despite being very young and rather small for a HW.
His lifestyle/Buster Douglas/Prison all combined to finish him.
Post prison , his career and image were carefully managed/ prolonged, when much of his talent and appetite had gone.
He fulfilled most of his potential.
For a man who seemed destined for disaster, he seems to have turned his life around.

 

Of course. Tyson was number 1 in the world at the time and a dynamic aggressive KO artist. I think everyone would agree with.
It's revisionism to pretend the opposition was better than it was too though. I think the were an average crop, and a lot of them were considered not in their best form at the time too. It's what it is. The fact that Spinks and Berbick had picked up the titles by 1986 indicated a very weak division to many.

 

No he didn't.
Buster Douglas was in the same division at Tyson came unstuck against him.

 

Well ok, yes.
Previuosly Tyson had beaten Tucker who had beaten Buster, so it looked that way.
Prior to the Tokyo fight, nobody was saying they questioned Mike's dominance because he hadn't yet faced Buster.

 

It was certainly a time when a new era and a new man was due.
As you say, most of the guys on the scene had swaped titles. It was a bit like the old saying " if you stay in a barbers shop long enough, you'll get a haircut"
Well if you were a heavyweight in the early- mid eighties and hung in on the scene long enough, you picked up a title.
Tyson rose through the ranks from nowhere. He was untested against the main guys right up to winning the title, but he didnt miss anyone ,apart from Witherspoon, after winning it.
There were very few young quality heavyweights who were 'on the up' at the same time as Mike . Possibly only Tyrell Biggs and Tony Tucker.

 

I think it's obvious Tyson was still improving. He showed good infighting ability against Tubbs, which came almost a year after the Boneclutcher bore. He also showed more patience and a better selective offense against a savvy veteran like Larry Holmes. There was room for improvement but truthfully not much more.

People say he never fulfilled his potential, but like a few have stated before he accomplished more than most ATG's ranked above him. Tyson also fought against good opposition. A buddy of mine compiled a system showcasing where ATG heavyweights rank based on their opponent's win/loss record. As you can see, Tyson is ranked second only to the "Greatest"...

1) Ali 56-5-0 (37ko's)
Opp W/L/D-1975-319-72
Opp Winning %-83.5
Winning %-91.8
Overall Ranking: 87.7

2) Tyson 50-6-0 (44ko's)
Opp W/L/D-1334-213-17
Opp Winning %-85.3
Winning %-89.3
Overall Ranking: 87.3

3) Lewis 41-2-1 (32ko's)
Opp W/L/D-1124-240-23
Opp Winning %-81.0
Winning %-93.3
Overall Ranking: 87.2

4) Marciano 49-0-0 (43ko's)
Opp W/L/D-1502-515-88
Opp Winning %-71.4
Winning %-100
Overall Ranking: 85.7

5) Louis 66-3-0 (52ko's)
Opp W/L/D-2749-711-185
Opp Winning %-75.3
Winning %-95.7
Overall Ranking: 85.5

6) Holmes 69-6-0 (44ko's)
Opp W/L/D-1482-384-50
Opp Winning %-77.3
Winning %-92.0
Overall Ranking: 84.7

7) Frazier 32-4-1 (27ko's)
Opp W/L/D-942-196-36
Opp Winning %-80.2
Winning %-86.5
Overall Ranking: 83.4

8) Foreman 76-5-0 (68ko's)
Opp W/L/D-1727-609-96
Opp Winning %-71.0
Winning %-93.8
Overall Ranking: 82.4

9) Liston 50-4 (39ko's)
Opp W/L/D-1178-447-100
Opp Winning %-68.3
Winning %-92.6
Overall Ranking: 82.3

10) Holyfield *26-10-2 (17ko's)
Opp W/L/D-1445-119-22
(*Only counts Heavyweight fights)
Opp Winning %-91.9
Winning %-68.4
Overall Ranking: 80.2

11) Dempsey *61-6-9 (50ko's)
Opp W/L/D-1554-486-444
(*6 fights with no info)
Opp Winning %-62.6
Winning %-80.3
Overall Ranking: 71.5

12) Johnson *84-13-14 (45kos)
Opp W/L/D-1653-537-322
(*Does not include all bouts with no info or his 17 newspaper fights)
Opp Winning %-65.8
Winning %-75.7
Overall Ranking: 70.8

 

Thats a really interesting system
Interesting rankings also !