Mike Tyson vs Dokes instead of Douglas, 1990

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by ChrisPontius, Jun 17, 2007.



  1. ChrisPontius

    ChrisPontius March 8th, 1971 Full Member

    19,406
    249
    Oct 4, 2005
    I think there was some talk of a Dokes bout. Dokes lost by TKO to Holyfield in 1989 (tenth round), but won his next three fights.

    Could Dokes at that point have beaten Tyson or would he have lost to that terrible version of Tyson?
     
  2. Rattler

    Rattler Middle Aged Man Full Member

    3,925
    18
    Feb 9, 2005
    Tyson wins.

    Dokes was too easy to hit, and Tyson's reach is more pronounced in this fight. Plus, Dokes was not emotionally stable at this point. Still talented, but he was a little ****ed up in the head. He wouldn't be as focused as Douglas was.
     
  3. ChampionsForever

    ChampionsForever ESB VIP

    4,053
    1
    Dec 3, 2004
  4. Sonny's jab

    Sonny's jab Guest

    I dont believe that was a "terrible version of Tyson".
    Buster Douglas had the right style and refused to be intimidated. He came to fight.

    Believe it or not, people, TYSON WAS NEVER INVINCIBLE, no man is invincible. That was all hype.

    As for Michael Dokes, it's hard to say how he would have done versus a prime Tyson. Tyson didn't beat many guys as tough as Dokes, but he beat a few, and he was a heck of a puncher, so I'd favour Tyson.
    But then I'd have picked Tyson over Douglas in a fantasy match if they had never fought.
     
  5. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    48,208
    18,554
    Jan 3, 2007
    How in the hell do people come up with these threads?
     
  6. boxbible

    boxbible Active Member Full Member

    982
    0
    Aug 6, 2004
    Douglas put in one of the all-time great performances.

    He woulda beaten many a great heavyweight that single night.
     
  7. fists of fury

    fists of fury Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,293
    6,967
    Oct 25, 2006
    Dokes would have probably lost.

    Douglas was just destined to be the man who beat Tyson. He had an unforgettable performance against an unprepared (but not totally rubbish) Tyson, and Douglas never ever looked as good before or since. I honestly believe it was just "meant to be."
     
  8. hobgoblin

    hobgoblin Active Member Full Member

    810
    23
    Jul 31, 2004
    Joe Frazier would have KO'd him by round 11. Marciano would have KO'd him. Muhammad Ali would have decisioned him. Joe Louis would have gotten the KO within 8 rounds (unless he had a really off day like against Billy Conn). Floyd Patterson would have probably won by KO too. Larry Holmes would have edged out a decision.

    I wonder though, how Foreman, Liston, Lennox Lewis, and Riddick Bowe would have done. It is a styles thing. They would have struggled against Tokyo Douglas.
     
  9. Jear

    Jear Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,719
    10
    Jul 27, 2004

    I feel the latter stated champs fare better than Frazier, Marciano or Patterson against Douglas that night. Douglas fought superbly with a great jab and combination punching. His uppercut in Tokyo on the back of the jab would have caused major style issues for the shorter inside fighters. The taller guys may have been able to fight on more even terms
     
  10. MrSmall

    MrSmall Member Full Member

    142
    6
    Jan 2, 2006
    Christ, get a life, Douglas>Tyson people.
     
  11. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    70,042
    24,049
    Feb 15, 2006
    Part of me thinks that Tyson might have lost to Coco the clown that night. He simply didn't turn up.
     
  12. Sonny's jab

    Sonny's jab Guest

    I strongly disagree.

    People like to square everything neatly in categories, make things "make sense", and since they already have Tyson as far greater than Douglas, they cannot accept the fact that he could have been anywhere near his best when Douglas punched the **** out of him.

    People find it hard to accept the reality because the reality is :
    1. Tyson was never as good as people thought, he was never invincible.
    2. Douglas was often a lazy and unspectacular fighter but he was capable enough and had the style to beat a prime Tyson.

    Simply put, you put two heavyweights in there who can fight, and who aren't afraid of the other one, and regardless of their reputation and of the opinions of others we simply dont know who beats who until the fight takes place.
    That's the beauty of boxing.
     
  13. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    70,042
    24,049
    Feb 15, 2006
    I have to say that looking at Tyson in the early rounds against Douglas he was not displaying his usual agression. You could argue that he had twelve rounds to turn the situation around.

    You are right about one thing though. Every all time great has had nights like Tyson had in Tokyo against guys of a similar calibre to Douglas.

    What set's the Louis's and Ali's of this world apart from the pack is that they always found away to snatch the title back from Douglas within the length of the fight.
     
  14. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member Full Member

    48,268
    35,071
    Apr 27, 2005
    Good one hahaha
     
  15. Sonny's jab

    Sonny's jab Guest

    It's hard to display your usual aggression when you are getting the **** punched out of you, and getting your socks boxed off. That's a fact.

    Guys like Pinklon Thomas, Tyrell Biggs, Tony Tubbs, Trevor Berbick never got to show their full repetoires against Tyson, because Tyson did his thing. I could argue that those guys didn't turn up, but that's robbing Tyson of his due credit.

    But I'm even-handed in acknowledging that Douglas did to Tyson what Tyson was expected to do to him. That's boxing. You aint gonna look at your best when the other guy is beating the crap out of you. That's life.


    To be fair to Tyson, Joe Louis got beat up and KO'd by Max Schmeling, who was also a massive underdog.