Mike Tyson and adversity

Razor ruddock and mike tyson were never the same after those two fights

 

I said whatever i needed to say to get that thread going and to start a constructive debate.

 

Buster in a few interviews 15-20 years after 1990 claims he would have busted Tyson up even more compared to the first fight in a rematch which i find laughable because it was Douglas who walked away from the sport and refused rematch offers and everyone knows how his career folded after that. Tyson doesn't get upset about the Douglas defeat, he doesn't even take it personally or belittle Douglas unlike Lewis who continues to mock and insult Rahman to this day in various interviews, but Tyson has hinted in a recent Interview that Douglas is the one who never made himself available for a rematch.

 

Well, why even bring it up at all then? And yes, Holyfield did do this at times, as any other fighter in boxing history has.

 

Sure you did.

 

Sure it did. Meyran doesn't mess up and Tyson wins by KO in the 8th.

Douglas didn't look ready and willing to go. In fact, if the ref had counted correctly I'm pretty sure Douglas wouldn't have argued with the result. Look at his face.

 

Shouldn't this apply to any fighter. And isn't that the smart thing to do i.e. if you can't Ko and opponent then why not win a points victory? Why did Lewis not try to Ko David Tua when it was clear that the later had no chance of outpointing or out boxing Lenni?

 

Because there are fighters it doesn't apply to. Tyson is one it does. The thread topic is Tyson.

 

My GAWD. Every fighter takes a time out when tired to preserve their stamina and energy. EVerybody is making it out to be a Tyson weakness. See the difference?

 

Tyson had heart and mental strength. Its a myth that he folded as soon as he faces adversity. Otherwise he wouldnt have tooken beatings from douglas and ruddock round after round before he found his opening and dropped them.

Theres a difference between mental strength and emotional strength--keeping a cool head in a tense situation. Look at tysons break down on how he prepared himself mentally before a fight:

This content is protected

Those are not the words of a mental midget who falls apart as soon as he faces adversity. Tyson is a more complex person than both his fans and critics are aware of (or will admit). Would you believe this was the same man who cried before a match and needed Atlas to give him a pep talk? The same man who said he never truly believed he was great, Cus D Amato believed in him and thats what got him that far? Eventually he believed in his own hype and turned a vision into reality.

Few other boxers could intimidate and put on pressure like Tyson. On the other hand, Tyson didnt have the quick thinking ingenuity of a Roy Jones or Mayweather to think of something new.

Like others in the thread mentioned, he never had a "plan b" and thats where rhe criticism comes in. Despite his high ring iq and superb technique, power, and athlericism, Tyson was never the best when it came to making adjustments or finding a way to win. This is simply undeniable if you watch his fights with smith and green, it showed he was weak in the clinch and lacked an inside game. Tillis and Douglas were able to execute their stick, jab, and move strategy for the entirety of the fight, Mike was unable to cut the ring off or complerely neutralize their jabs or slow them down. When faced with big tough men who were willing to stand their ground, get rough with him and refused to be another highlight early round KO victim (Ruddock, Holyfield, etc) he was more than happy to slug it out, failed to pace hinself, and got sloppy failing to utilize his normally brilliant technique, head movement, defense, etc. He utterly failed to make any meaningful adjustments against thr supremely talented and imposingly large Lennox Lewis. Even Pinklon Thomas wasnt so much an "adjustment" or "comeback ko" as it was a simple matter of Tyson gritting his teeth and eventually landing enough power punches to make thomas fold under the pressure. The commentators even took note of Tysons body language that he seemed "confused on what he should do since Thomas didnt get knocked out early like everyone else".

So its not a simple yes or no answer.

-Tyson was mentally strong and pumped himself up before fights. This is undeniable and on film. Mike pierced his opponents with his eyes before the bell and at his best, was a true professional and fighter.

-he took monster shots from skilled fighters and didnt go down and even in the fights he lost, he gave it his all.

-however mike had erratic, wild emotions and was easily frustrated in the mental department. He DID lose his cool vs holyfield in the 2nd fight and theres nothing anyone can say to change that. It wasnt just his antics and substance abuse problems, he was always a wildly emotional person and this would be a problem down the line no matter how his career turned out--rooney and d amato being there or not.

-and yes while its true he showed heart and took his beatings like a man, mike never got off the floor to win.

-he also never came back from a severe scorecard deficit to turn things around and win.

All in all, its stupid to say Mike "never overcame adversity" or that he was a "quitting bully with no heart who folded as soon as things didnt go his way. But its also innacurate to compare his adversity to fighters like marciano or Ali who performed borderline miraculous comebacks in thrilling fights. Nor did Tyson ever beat a boxer who was his equal or superior.

Truth is usually somewhere between the two oft repeated extremes.

 

The only thing i see is you getting all antsy that something even remotely negative is being posted about Tyson. It's as if people aren't allowed to post anything but praise.

Tyson seldom stopped foes after the earlier rounds. Others did. Granted Tyson got a huge amount of people out early but others that lasted did so pretty easily at times in the latter rounds.

Bojak is astute (not to mention balanced) in his observations.

 

Great post man.

 

Yeah, defending Tyson seems to be the only point I make these days. But you and others knock the guy for things every fighter in history has done. It's skewed, really. It's like you pick and choose from the Tyson Hater Crew to make your points, which aren't really sound.

You can post negative stuff about Tyson all you want, just makes sure it's honest.

If Bokaj needs to defend his argument, let him.

 

Tyson went past 6 rounds against Tillis, Green, Ribalta, Bonecrusher, Thomas, Tucker, Biggs, Douglas, Ruddock, Ruddock again, Holyfield, Nielsen and Lewis. He went 10-3 with 5 knockouts. He's certainly capable of knocking opponents out in later rounds. I wouldn't say the people who lasted the distance against Tyson did so "easily".

 

People do not give Tyson any credit for the Holmes win under the pretext that Holmes was washed up, Holmes was coming of a 2 year layoff but Tyson get's no allowance for the fact he had faded after he came back from Prison. To be honest he should not be punished that severely for any loss after 1997 to be honest.