Mike Tyson 120-106, 119-107 and 19-107 over James(Bonecrusher) Smith.

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by ripcity, May 4, 2009.


  1. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,143
    13,097
    Jan 4, 2008
    Fair enough.

    But Tyson matured extemely early (at least physically) and his body was more or less full grown at 29. He still had to reach his peak, but he was only one year away from one of his best perfomances. And very much of what he showed against Tillis he would also show in later fights. The timidness in clinches and propensity to lose fairly much of his intensity after 5 rounds etc.

    Still, it was a very good perfomance from a 19-year old, no doubt.
     
  2. lefthook31

    lefthook31 Obsessed with Boxing banned

    20,862
    138
    Jul 6, 2007
    If you look at actually when Tyson started to regress, yes. I never really considered Tyson to be past his "physical prime" , even when he got out of prison. He still had a lot of ability, he just completely got away from the discipline and fighting style that made him so special and effective.
    You also have to take into consideration that Tyson had a lot of fights in a short period of time, because they didnt last very long. He was very active over a four year period and stayed in good condition in the gym under Rooney. I think the difference in the Tyson that fought Tillis, and the Tyson that fought Spinks was huge.
     
  3. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,143
    13,097
    Jan 4, 2008
    Ok. I don't.
     
  4. josak

    josak Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,018
    16
    Jan 4, 2007
    Tyson wasn't at his peak when he fought Tillis. There's actually a video of Tyson sparring Tillis later in his career (87/88'), and the difference is huge.
     
  5. lefthook31

    lefthook31 Obsessed with Boxing banned

    20,862
    138
    Jul 6, 2007
    fair enough
     
  6. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    Alot of ATG fighters struggle when they step up and fight there first "name" opponent for the first time....Look at Marciano against Lowry, Tyson against Tillis, Liston against Summerlin, Johnson against Choynski....it happens. I don't think the Tillis fight shows how to beat tyson, especially when during tysons title reign others tried a similiar approach that Tillis fought against tyson, and it failed to work.
     
  7. Chris Warren

    Chris Warren Active Member Full Member

    964
    10
    Apr 22, 2009
    Alot of ATG fighters struggle when they step up and fight there first "name" opponent for the first time....Look at Marciano against Lowry, Tyson against Tillis, Liston against Summerlin, Johnson against Choynski....it happens. I don't think the Tillis fight shows how to beat tyson, especially when during tysons title reign others tried a similiar approach that Tillis fought against tyson, and it failed to work.

    Ted Lowry wasn't a named opponent. He had 60 wins and 58 loses in his career which makes him a bum. Which shows who bad Marciano was doesn't. Being beat by a bum who only weighed 175 proves he would knock out Lewis, Bowe, Foreman, Lyle, Ali, and Frazier in 1 round. Amusing

    Tyson had no peak, he fought 3rd tier fighters and set ups. People who got in the ring and just went down the moment they got hit. Tyson showed he could never overcome being knocked down. Once he went down he stayed down. Tyson never showed he could handle somebody fighting back. The only thing Tyson showed was he could beat up bums and get knocked out by people who werent afraid of him.
     
  8. Jersey Joe

    Jersey Joe Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,820
    7
    Mar 8, 2005
    Tyson vs Holmes was a 21 year old fighting a 38 year old - a 17 year age gap.

    Marciano vs Louis - widely cited as a young champ beating up on an old has-been - was a 28 year old fighting a 37 year old, a 9 year age difference.

    Lewis - Tyson, by contrast, was a 36 year old fighting a 35 year old - a 1 year age gap.
     
  9. Jersey Joe

    Jersey Joe Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,820
    7
    Mar 8, 2005
    You can't say a boxers prime is only 2 years. Physically a prime should be minimum 7-8 years, like early to late 20s. After 30 you can use declining physical ability as an excuse, but at 22? Come on.

    This is just making excuses for a boxer who gets lazy and loses focus. Discipline and focus in training and in the fight are part of what makes up boxing skill. If Tyson was "past his prime" at 23, then that is his own responsibility and can be fairly held against him when ranking him as a boxer. It's not like Ali or Leonard or Roy Jones Jr at 33 where their speed had waned through no real fault of their own.
     
  10. lefthook31

    lefthook31 Obsessed with Boxing banned

    20,862
    138
    Jul 6, 2007
    Agree. Looking back at a fighter like Tyson one could say he had a physical prime and a fighting prime, because like I said in a previous post, I didnt think Tyson had physically declined even in 96, but he got away from the things that made him so effective.
    The same can be said for Lennox Lewis, his "fighting prime" came later in his career after he had couple fights under Emanuel Steward, even though he had already been a champion.
    Riddick Bowe on the other hand's physical prime was over very early due to the shots he took against Evander Holyfield in two grueling fights.