Mike Tyson v Corrie Sanders

I like Tyson better:good

He was a great ATG talent. Sanders was a great perennial contender.

 

This forum is ridiculous. Tyson has a very easy time with Sanders. The fact Sanders gave the Klitschkos trouble says more about the Klitschko than anything else...

 

Bruno turning southpaw means nothing compared to a fighter who's been a southpaw fighting orthodox guys his entire career.

And c'mon man, don't be a hipster doofus. The straight right is the necessary punch here for an orthodox fighter against the lefty if he's looking for the knockout, not a left hook. There's been 5 heavyweight southpaw beltholders in history and it's always the right hand that takes them out. I've seen more right hooks knock out good southpaws (Ibeabuchi-Byrd) than left hooks.

Between that and your denial that being a southpaw even matters, the best advice I have for you is to learn enough boxing to pretend you know what you're talking about better.

Hell, you probably don't realized you just admitted Tyson wouldn't be able to find good southpaws to spar against to prep for Sanders because Moorer was the only game in town.

Which is not to be confused with my original point, which is entirely unchanged. It's not that Sanders destroys Tyson. It's this:

We have no frigging idea how Tyson would handle a good southpaw. Maybe he tears Corrie a new one. Maybe the adjustment isn't so smooth. We simply don't know.

Now good day and bugner off. :good

 

Tyson's sparring destroys Sanders in one round , but Tyson against Sanders??
Thats just too a difficult and too complex situation to comprehend.
How come Tubbs was never undisputed Champnut

Only in Kli**** landatsch

 

Is this some kind of joke? Sanders was B level fighter at best. Tyson by 3rd round homicide.

 

What's difficult is understanding why the hell you're still here. Bet welching nonce.

**** it. I'll serve your bet for you. Mods, boot my ass out of here. I can't be on a boxing forum where the left hook is the knockout solution to an orthodox heavyweight fighting a southpaw. Peace :hi:

 

Lewis didn't have a great chin either. Getting starched by Rahman is something that shouldn't happen to top tier fighters with decent whiskers.

And no, Corrie Sanders did not have a better chin than Mike Tyson. His chin was shaky, at best - which is why he was taken out by Rahman. And hard-hitting monster Nate Tubbs, don't forget!!! :rofl

The very fact that Tyson lasted against Buster Douglas, shows he has a better chin than both Lewis and Sanders.

This is a fairly non-controversial fact among boxing fans. I can therefore only assume you are trolling here, suggesting that Tyson's chin is worse than Sanders!:nut

 

But douglas' jaw though wasnt up to much. Ko'd by a man who couldnt get out his own way Mike White and a debutant david bey. atsch

 

I think you're twisting this around.

You said on another thread, that after the loss they wanted to rebuild Wlad.

But here you are wording it as though Sanders didn't want to fight him again.

It seems obvious to me, that big brother was sent in to restore family honour.

 

[dinovelvet] Sanders could't hurt Rahman. It looked like Sanders put it through the ropes , but he really slipped.

LMAO Ever hear of specsavers? They might help you see the monster left Sanders uppercut that blew the sweat spray off Rahman's head like a volcano. Also, ffs, let's give Rahman some credit. He came into the fight in great shape, he took a shot that nearly tipped him out of the ring, and came back to score a KD of his own. It takes some stones to do that.

[attaboi] "Sanders would have frozen from Tysons intimidation and would have gotten straight up slaughtered for it."

LOLOL Tyson isn't half as scary as a prime Vitali, and Corrie had no problems in facing him at the age of 38. Get real.

[RCS] "Fact is, Mike could have fought him, instead he fought a lot of worst opponents than Sanders."

This.

[azzer85] "Sanders had more in common stylewise to Tyson"

Sanders had nothing in common stylewise to Tyson. Southpaw vs conventional. Peek-a-boo vs upright. Hooks vs straight punches. Tall vs short.

Here's the problem.

What people remember about Corrie is his static, 37-38 year old gassy version, which was not prime. What people remember about Tyson is the rampage that he tore through the ranks of lesser fighters.

What I remember about Tyson is Francois Botha giving him a virtual boxing lesson, practically scornful of "Iron Mike", until Tyson managed to finally land a bomb in the 5th to save his skin. Now, if Francois Botha can outbox Tyson for 5 rounds, then Corrie Sanders, who was without a doubt in my mind the far superior fighter of the two (having beaten Botha 4 times in the amateurs already, KO'ing him 3 times) would certainly take care of business against Mike.

 

Botha gets flattened by a beyond shot Tyson and that somehow equates to Sanders beating the prime , destroyer Mike Tyson of the 80's?
Unbelievable. And people call me a troll:roll:

 

While there is a logic to you're argument it is flawed. We have never seen Tyson in a ring with a woman. By your logic because we have never seen Tyson in the ring with a woman we have no frigging idea how Tyson would handle a good woman, maybe he tears the woman a new one, maybe the adjustment to facing an opponent with b.oobs isn't so smooth, we simply don't know.

 

I agree, the Botha fight was Tyson way past his best and he had not fought for 18 months so was ring rusty. He was also at a then career high weight, he clearly wasn't there mentally, Botha was meant to be an easy win and he probably under prepared. Once he had a few rounds under his belt to clear away the rust all it took was one punch, fight over.

Mythical match ups are always prime for prime so bringing up a 33 year old, probably shot and ring rusty Tyson is pointless.