MIKE TYSON...What COULD HAVE BEEN

He said Tubbs "squeeled like a woman" when he hit him in the gut. And this was 1987. Sure Cus wasn't around, but it was way before his comeback.

I think all this, "what if Cus hadn't died" is 90% BS. Tyson just didn't have that innate mental strength that is required to become truly great. Maybe the downfall would have taken longer with Cus around, but in the end would have been pretty much the same story IMO.

 

Agreed...

A formidable fighter who falls short of the elite.

 

Out of interest where do you rate him at Heavyweight and who in that division would you consider elite Ezz?

 

I'll agree with that too. If you read the biographies that cover and go into Tyson's life in the Catskills with the D'Amatos, he was already raising a lot of hell back then. And like some others, including Teddy Atlas, I don't think that Cus was doing Tyson any favors by not confronting him on this, or choosing to ignore or work around trouble rather than deal with it. (For example when Tyson was about to be expelled from school and Cus responded by just taking him out of school entirely, giving him nominal home lessons while telling him that school wasn't really important and to concentrate on being a fighter, or lax gym discipline that meant that other guys would get punished for not working out and following a trainer's orders while Tyson would be granted exceptions, etc).

Also, everyone dies eventually, and Cus was going to die sooner rather than later, so speculating about what would have happened if Cus hadn't died isn't very realistic, because time was bound to run out for him very quickly. Now if Jacobs hadn't died, (because Tyson seems to have respected and liked Jacobs a pretty fair amount) and Rooney kept training him, that's fair to speculate about. But Tyson always had bad habits, he always was causing problems for himself and others, and he was always a loose cannon. How much he could keep on his game and out of trouble would always be an issue.

Regardless, I think Tyson loses focus after unifying the titles. It wouldn't be as bad as it was because King kept him inactive with nothing to do, (and keeping Mike working was a big key to him), and maybe his first loss would be to Holyfield or someone else rather than Buster, but I think there was always going to be some slacking off after he climbed the mountain of unifying the titles. Add on the issues with longevity that we've already gone over for a swarmer/puncher, and I don't think Tyson was going to continue to remain dominant in the early 90s as he had during the 80s. A major force, probably champ several times over, but not blowing everyone out and with him being what the sport was all about.

Just my $.02.

 

Ali and Louis are a lock.

Johnson was so far ahead of the field and so lauded at the time I have him as an elite HW. I think he was light years ahead of his time. And beat enough top names to deserve it. Detractors don't like his reign or his style, but in context he gets it.

Then the last one I'd consider would be Holmes. Lots of skill. Long unbeaten record... Hard man physically and mentally. I do waver on Larry though.

Those who just miss it

Dempsey (had he beat Wills he'd be in)
Tunney (an elite fighter but not quite an elite HW)
Marciano (exciting and fierce, great conditioning and heart but just lacking in ability at the very, very top level)
Liston (close but Ali fights cast a shadow)
Frazier (very close, being bounced like a basketball by Foreman a hard image to shake off)
Foreman (young version too wild, not mentally strong enough; old version too slow, physically limited: a hybrid would make it)
Lewis (very close too, the KO losses in his prime and his poor stamina)
Holyfield (just the odd inconsistency; had he fought Lewis earlier I think he would have won and that would put him in)

Tyson's career was a lot like Liston and Foreman... Seemed unbeatable until he lost a title fight and then never quite the same... Afterwards Sonny put a nice run together. Would have loved to see him get a crack at Frazier... Foreman eventually got his act back on the road and redeemed himself. Mike still beat some good fighters after Douglas but he lost all the big ones, the ones that could have taken him to the next level.

 

Ok, fair enough - you set an enormous standard as elite and only 3 1/2 heavyweights make it. I'd rank Tyson above 13 personally, but each to their own of course.

 

Tyson's career is all 'if' and 'but' for his army of admirers. "He only lost to Douglas because he never had Rooney in his corner" who's to say he would have remained unbeaten had Rooney remained with him into the early 90's. We'll never know. The fact of the matter is that he was beaten at the age of 23 years and near his prime. He never accomplished anything significant after that, apart from regaining the title against the limited Frank Bruno. He was simply a great 'on top' fighter who in reality wasn't great fighter when looking at his whole career.

People make excuses and say Holyfield only beat him because he was shot. Nonsense. He was still a very good fighter and was an overwhelming favourite to win the fight. Holyfield was sent 'get well soon' cards before the first bell rang. Ok, Holyfield proved he had much more left in the tank with the benefit of hindsight as he performed beyond expectations. Tyson's army of fans need to realise that saying "he wasn't anywhere near his prime" when he faced Holyfield is actually making matters worse for him IMO. Simply because thats part of being a great fighter, pulling out wins against quality opposition when past your prime. He had a second opportunity to turn the tables and blew it.

 

That comment was actually after th Tyrell Biggs fight. Another one of Tyson's early comments (1986) was when he said he wanted to drive Jesse Ferguson's nose into his brain. The build-up to the Razor Ruddock fights (1991) were filled with bizarre, homicial, homo-erotic comments from Mike.

Very much agreed. Cus and Jacobs probably could've helped prolong his success, but eventually, I think Tyson would self-destruct.

 

He beat Ruddock twice, Golota, Stewart, and Bruno while past his best.

 

Bruno was when he regained the title, that was the most meaningful win out all those you mentioned. Yes, I do give him some credit for beating Ruddock twice, especially the first fight.

 

I don't know if you could say he was past his best against Ruddock. He was still only 25.

 

He was probably still in his physical prime, but you could see his skills and technique were eroding.

 

That was probably because of lax preparation and training. He was hardly past his best in the way Louis was after WWII, Ali after the exile or probably not even the way Frazier was after FOTC.

 

If Tyson wanted to he could of went back to as good as he was.

But he didn't, thus he was past his best.

 

Not the sign of a great fighter.