Lennox Lewis vs Mike Tyson, prime for prime, who wins?

:good

 

.... Actually, i just posted that picture because of its aesthetic value.

I'm a big Lewis supporter, but i don't think their actual fight tells us much about how a prime for prime matchup would've looked like. Okay, we know Lewis wouldn't be intimidated. But as for Tyson being mentally beaten after one round: he was much more resilient when he was still young and motivated. Like you i don't really care much for excuses on his (fan's) side for the Douglas and Holyfield fights, but fact remains that Tyson kept trying and trying and trying against Douglas and all his fights before that. He couldn't turn the tide, and maybe he won't be able to against Lewis, but i think he's gonna go out on his shield just like he did against Douglas.

If he was ever going to quit or get frustrated in his prime, it would take someone like Ali, who must be the most annoying opponent to fight in every aspect, ever. But even at that, i see him going until there is nothing more to give.

I'd predict Lewis to win 2 out of 3.

 

Once Tyson drops a cowering Bruno in the first few seconds of the fight, Bruno collects his courage and proceeds to bring in Tyson's head and fast punch the back of the neck like his life depends on it; this, from a true powerpuncher in Bruno, yet not a peep of complaint from Tyson.

Compare this to the comical contrast of Ali immediately refusing to take hapless Wepner's crude, not nearly as powerful, slow-mo rabbit stabs. No doubt, at the time, Tyson was a warrior.

As for Bruno not being truly knocked out, I think he pretty much took a ten-count when he fell to Bonecrusher Smith. As has been said, he had heart to take his lumps, but once he was hurt, you could reach for your hat.

 

You sure you've seen this fight Chris?

 

Where did he stop trying to win against Douglas?

 

I'm still trying to figure out exactly when he started fighting.

 

No doubt it is fascinating to puzzle over the enigma of Mike Tyson and you make astute observations:

Of course I read your analysis of Lewis' windows and absolutely agree.

You are absolutely correct in pointing out that Tyson got the huge break of someone plucking him out of an urban cesspool and giving him a shot. And Tyson made the best of it. He could have self-destructed in a million ways well before champion Holmes felt compelled to ask Tyson to show him he could kick his butt. As for all of us in life, in the end no one could make it happen for youthful Michael Tyson but he himself and he certainly did.

As for D'Amato's overlooking character, we know perfectly that character, dealing with and exploiting fear, "the hero vs. the coward ("It's what he does that makes a guy a hero!"), taking care of yourself in and out of the ring, even after retirement, as Mickey plagiarized to Rocky, were hallmarks of his methods, and the young, thus still ideals-susceptible, Tyson gulped it down into his psyche.

As I have said before, the philosophy was working, but what do you do when your entire support system begins to die on you? Lorna...D'Amato...Jacobs...gone. And enter an entourage from hell in Givens...mother-in-law Ruth...King...an adulating, corrupt world at your feet when you're still not much more than a boy. How many times have we seen it?

Was D'Amato perfect as a mentor? Most certainly not. Is anyone? But with the right sustained influence (again, to me nothing but love is at the heart of the greatest warriors), Tyson might have continued to develop into the greatest heavyweight of all time. Then again, his demons of indiscipline in personal life could have gotten to him eventually, regardless. Who can say?

As it is, Tyson went as far as he could, no more, no less. He showed us unparalleled, rousing ability in the ring (I concur with your conclusion on his devastating prowess), but fate and Tyson's own choices tragically and fascinatingly gave us instead a Camelot that was all too short.

As for his rantings, at his best Tyson strived to be courteous and understated. He said it in a TIME interview: "I don't intimidate people by talking. I intimidate people by hitting them." Yes, he was a yawning predator lion, lumbering around secure in his superiority. Only when he lost it did we see those hideous public meltdowns.

 

He was trying nonetheless. Credit goes to Douglas for negating Tyson's possible effectiveness. This fight wasn't all about Tyson being out of shape with his mind in the gutter.

 

Tyson had trouble with bigger men, even in his prime. However, he was far more explosive, had better defense, and head movement then the version that actually fought Lewis. I can see it going either way. A lightning quick left hook that finishes Lennox, or a masterful boxing lesson from Lewis that frustrates Mike into pressing the action too much. I wouldn't bet against Lennox.

 

I think we agree that Tyson did what he could with what he had. What he had inside wasn't as much as most of his fans contend, but as deficient as that was compared to say a Marciano or a Louis, combined with what he had outside (physical ability that exceeded both) was enough to make him the phenomenon that he was.

Tyson was not emotionally developed enough -simply put not strong enough of an individual to fend off the wolves that came calling.

I used to believe that had Tyson's supports stayed intact, he may have exceeded Ali and Louis in terms of greateness. I don't believe that anymore. This conclusion boils down to his style, which relied on the powers of youth. Even a speed demon like Ali had the size and strength to pull of some great wins after that speed faded. Tyson did not.

Granted, Tyson slipped early partly because Rooney was gone, but I'm very sure that his style of fighting was destined to burn out by his mid-20s anyway. To be effective, Tyson had to be flexible, fast, and maintain power in his punches for as long as possible. Remember that he was really a small HW. His style was hectic. It burned lots of energy early. Once Tyson slowed down, he'd have had to rely on power and technique more exlusively. It was his speed -of punches in bunches, of head movement, and yes of foot, that was his biggest asset. Without that, Tyson would have been more like a Tua. And a Tua is more beatable than a Tyson.

 

Tyson didn't expressly give up, but he wasn't fighting like a man hellbent on winning either.

There are times that a fighter knows he's beat -he's either outclassed, tired, hurt, sporting an injury, etc. He's fighting, but it's not in a way that suggests that he is committed to winning come hell or high water. He's just going through the motions. He's conceding the fight without doing something extreme. Duran did the latter agaisnt Leonard in II and the former in III. Was he "trying" in Uno Mas (III)...? Not really.

Most of the greats that we speak of don't have this very human quality. They want to win and are searching for the big shot or are playing possum or whatever... they 're not giving up in any way shape or form even if they are injured going into the fight or hurt badly or out of condition. There are legions of examples -Holyfield said after the first loss to Bowe that the whole time he was looking for opportunities even as his legs buckled or he was stunned. He's always thinking about how he's going to win, never about laying down. Take a look at Battling Nelson's attitude against Ad Walgast after 40 rounds in their rematch for the premier example. It's the power of positive thinking, supreme self-confidence... whatever you want, but it is not an attitude like Jones' in Tarver III or several of Duran's or Tyson's fights.

To his credit, Tyson didn't leave the ring in disgrace... what he did though was a form of capitulation. It happens alot. The ring is the place where spirits are broken and you can walk down to your local boxing gym and see it every day.

 

I see where you're coming from but I think you've mislabeled it. Tyson knocking down Douglas in round 8 is a very good indicator that he was committed to winning. Tyson finally saw an opening and capitalized.

What is true is that Tyson wasn't fighting with a *strategy* that suggests he's committed to winning. Tyson did absolutely nothing strategically to turn the tables in his losing bout. He just kept doing what he was doing even if he was failing miserably. I think you and a lot of people are confusing failure to change strategy vs lack of will. Big difference. For the life of me, I can't figure out why Tyson didn't throw more body shots when he saw the success of a single left to the body of Douglas in round 3.

 

Not really. There comes a time when you get bored of making or hearing excuses. When you realize that in life no one gives it to you - you have to take it. Tyson may have had bigger challenges than us but he was also provided with bigger tools. He just chose to be a loser and feel sorry for himself. Too bad self pity was hardly good for anything. We all have our challenges in life and we either face them or suffer the consequences. Tyson is no different. Boo - hoo!

 

That's not aesthetic value. There are much better photos from the Lewis-Tyson fight where you see Lewis landing his deadly overhand right. However, none of those photos compare with the Douglas fight or even the Holyfield fight because in the 2002 fight - Tyson is clearly bald, fat and hardly looks like the vintage Tyson that was so famous.

 

God DAMN! If it wasn't for your awesome avatar...you'd get a fitting reply! :good