MIKE TYSON...What COULD HAVE BEEN

And if he wouldn´t have proper guidance, psychological support and boxing he probably would be dead right now. Grilled on a electric chair.

 

Tyson is one of the greatest heavyweight fighters of all time and arguably could have been ranked in the top five of all time. Everyone's list varies, but I think the only skeptic about Tyson's career if Cus had lived would have been the quality of opponents in the mid to late 90's. I think he would have beaten his toughest opponents Holyfield, Lewis, and Bowe if they fought before his exile. People forget that Holyfield is not a natural heavyweight even though he could take one hell of a punch. Lewis would have probably provided the sternest of tests for Tyson because Lennox is a naturally atheletic big man and had good feet. Bowe might have given Tyson some trouble on the inside because he was a very good in-fighter for a big man. Bowe's downfall is lack of significant foot movement and I feel Tyson would have probably caught him in the middle rounds and stopped him. Prime Razor Ruddock's smash might have sobered up Tyson if they fought well before the time he lost the title to Douglas. Razor likely loses to Tyson because he wouldn't pose the same problems Lewis might have at the time because Ruddock constantly neglected his jab.

IMO, Tyson's exile compares to Ali's from the standpoint that when Tyson came back, he used intimidation tactics more than ever to gain that mental edge on his opponents. Some of the hand and footspeed diminished and his reflexes weren't the same just like Ali when he came back meaning Tyson had to rely on other tactics namely intimidation. Young Mike Tyson was a humble, well spoken, respectable fighter that complimented his opponents after victory. I don't think Cus would have let Mike get away with the trash talking that dominated his career upon his return to the ring.

I recently revisited his fight against James "Quick" Tillis, and Mike's jab was still in the developmental process. He wasn't getting hit with serious shots early in his career because his hands were always high on the cheekbones. His guard position enabled him to avoid body shots better because he would use the double slip to either side and throw hooks to the body with either hand. Frazier did this early in his career, but started to weave a lot more in the late 60's moving in.

It's not unrealistic that Tyson would have surpassed Marciano's record and he would have beat Golota, Moorer, McCall, Briggs, Byrd, Ruiz and perhaps retired after beating both Klitschko brothers. All this only if Cus had lived.

 

You really have bought in the myth :roll:

 

But all the above fighters been in wars. There was a reason why Armstrong and co slow down and were loseing.
Tyson didnt take a beating yet. Most of his fights ended in a round or so.

 

No myth man.

I encourage you to watch Tyson's early career, how he boxed, moved, used his head, his natural body weight, his hand and footspeed. How is it for a guy his size, that many trainers and other fighters compare his power to that of the best, Foreman, Shavers, Liston and Lennox Lewis?

Respect to you Loewe for your opinion, but Mike Tyson was not a fluke as a heavyweight champion. He had some bad luck with people trying to take advantage of him and he didn't have the strongest educational background.

Still, there is no myth to what Tyson accomplished in his career and much more for what could have been.

 

If Tyson never fired Rooney, none of what happened later in his career would have happened.

 

I agree for the most part. Tyson always was very disturbed and wild, even with D'Amato. Some of his actions were covered up or looked over. Cus was known to let some of Tyson's actions outside the ring slide because of his talent.

What I wonder is, to what extent having D'Amato and Jacobs did help. Tyson was crazy no matter what, but it doesn't mean that their guidance didn't help somewhat.

With them there, maybe Tyson's actions outside the ring aren't as bad as what they were (of what he know)?

I can see the argument made for Tyson or Holyfield winning. In Holyfield's favor, there's the success when they did fight in 1996-97, when Holyfield was supposed to be a shot fighter, Holyfield's superior mindset, etc...Holyfield might've always had Tyson's number. In the argument of Tyson, Holyfield got more experienced against bigger guys from 1991 to 1995, got bigger and stronger himself, and learned to control his passion for warfare. Holyfield said the losses to Bowe, especially the 3rd fight, made him learn to control his aggression more. Holyfield clinched Tyson a lot and was a lot more controlled in his aggression than the younger Holyfield. Also, the body has been a somewhat vulnerable spot for Holyfield. Bowe hurt him repeatedly to the body, Foreman doubled him over to the body, Moorer hurt him to the body in round 4 of their 1st fight, Lewis hurt him to the body in round 5 of their 1st fight, when Tyson did hurt him in their first fight in round 5, it was his patented right hook to the body, right uppercut combo. A younger Tyson went to the body with more frequency. The body attack Ruddock took was vicious.

Against Bowe: Bowe's defense is just too poor, and his mindset is too much to trade, for me to pick Bowe to win. I think Tyson wins.

Against Lewis: Depends on when they fight, really. The earlier they fight, the better for Mike. Lewis improved after he lost to McCall in 1994, since he picked up Manny Steward who was the one who helped McCall to exploit Lewis's balance problems and being so open when he threw right hands.

 

I dont think Tyson is going to run though the 90's unbeating knocking out the likes of Holyfiled, Lewis or Bowe with out loseing at least one time.
The 1990's heavyweights for the most part were better than the late 80's that Tyson destory. As said before, most of Tyson's acts outside the ring were cover up. Sooner or later Tyson was going to crack.
Perhaps around 92 or so.

 

I don't think that it's all about beatings. That's part of it, but not the whole story. And anyway, the first beating that Tyson took was the beginning of his rapid decline. You could also argue that the first beating Frazier (in 1971) took began his rapid decline as well.

I think that swarmer-types are less able to bounce back as the more innovative and versatile boxer-puncher are able to. Swarmers rely on confidence and chin more than any other style and once they get a little insecure, it's the beginning of the end. Their extreme style is also necessarily time-limited. A man cannot continue to fight like that without either adapting or fading.

Dempsey is another example of a swarmer with a short shelf-life. Granted his dissipation accelerated his decline, but it's tough to fight like he did against Willard fight after fight. And you aren't doing it when you're 30. Greb is an exception. It's not iron clad but I see consistency.

 

I never said he was fluke. So, I´m not a fan of his due to his personality but he was the most spectacular hw I´ve ever seen. He was so much fun to watch and the most impressive hw on film imo. BUT he had mental problems his whole life. It wasn´t due to Jacobs and D'Amato dying and Rooney getting fired it was all due to Mike´s mental instability. It would have always happened. I made a post earlier in this thread where I described how I think his career would have unfolded if he didn´t have the mental problems but he just had them and would have ****ed up his life and career even if D'Amato would be alive today.

 

Fair points, but i really think IF for debates sake Tyson stayed in his Larry Holmes form mentally he wouldn't have burned down quite as early as the usual swarmer model. Frazier, Armstrong and many others fought many grualling battles and excepting big fights with Holyfield, Lewis and Bowe say Tyson would have cruised along relatively unscathed. The above three battles and opponents, all in his future, would have dictated IMO his physical longevity or lack of it.

 

Just let me also mention that Duran wasn't THAT far off a swarmer hybrid himself at times, but his uncanny anticipation and ability to time and roll with punches carried him mostly unscathed thru a very long successful career. Tyson at his utter best was tearing thru the division with barely a sweat and his own brand of defense was eye openingly effective during this time. I agree with Chris that he was going to crash and burn no matter what mentally.

 

Anyone with any supervisory experience knows how tough things become once somebody falls into some money. Just try motivating them & do what they used to do when there isn't any "or else" at your disposal. Same with Tyson & lots of other guys, but especially the punchers---when they get big money who is going to make them get up at 5 in the morning to jog 5 miles? Especially if they've been having easy fights with early ko's. Good luck. Those guys are almost impossible to get in great shape fight after fight & they've long since stopped listening to their corner anyway. That early dedication is gone & these guys lose fights they shouldn't have.

 

Holmes was still a really good fighter. he give evander holyfield hell and beat the good ray mercer a few years later