I think he lost a bit of focus and desire, but it gets very overplayed to paper over the fact that Douglas outclassed him. Tyson wouldn't done better against guys like Williams, Stewart and Ruddock before Spinks. Stewart was decent and Williams and Ruddock were legit top contenders. Tyson manhandled them. And even against Bruno, he looked more or less like he did against Thomas. Lost focus for some rounds when the guy hung on despite a quick start from Tyson, but ended it in impressive fashion.
Had he beat Douglas as easily as expected but otherwise have the wins he does have, no one would be saying he was past his prime by then. So that argument only hinges on the loss to Douglas.
The Douglas fight just proved that Tyson was done as a serious boxer. Too much partying. He didn't train as hard. Few people in sports history have that dedication to want to stay great once they reach superstar status. And boxing is a bit harder on the body and mind than other sports. So it is understandable that boxers like Tyson and JCC went downhill after they reached that level.
Superb. Barely anyone picks up on his insane schedule not only pre title but post title as well. In basically 1 1/2 years he put paid to Berbick, Smith, Thomas, Tucker, Biggs, Holmes, Tubbs and Spinks in his title and post title run. That is 8 front line fighters in 19 months. There is zero filler in there. Holmes himself actually had 8 in a similar time but no-where near the same level of opponent with plenty of filler. Ali had about 4, Holyfield 4 including a loss. Tyson's schedule and quality of opposition (per ranking) was freakish. He had two fights in the 1 1/2 year period pre Douglas if we go just forward of Spinks. It's common knowledge he was in quite poor shape comparative to what he had been up until Spinks and his "comparative" inactivity versus his previous period imo would have had a lot to do with it as well as other factors. He could hardly get out of shape when he was fighting every 3 months or so. He was at his best fighting often which would also cancel out a lot of the distraction angle and quite likely personal problems caused by having too much time on his hands. Your post actually captures something that ties a whole lot of other things together. The personal problems affected the inactivity and the inactivity affected his training and dedication as well as his sharpness in the ring.
You guys got it all wrong. It wasn't Rooney, it wasn't the Spinks fight, it wasn't even Buster Douglas. It was Robin Givens. She hit Tyson harder than Buster Douglas ever could.
There was a method to their madness. Keep Tyson busy, out of trouble and strike while the iron was hot.
It was because Kevin Rooney left after the Spinks fight, after Rooney left you can see in the Ruddock and Bruno fights that Mike was no longer using his head movement and had just turned into a brawler.
Mike Tyson looked a lot better against Frank Bruno and Carl Williams and Alex Stewart and Razor Ruddock and Savarese, and Golota and Bruno 2 and Seldon than he did against Tony Tucker or Bonecrusher Smith. Aside from his losses to Douglas and Holyfield, Tyson probably looked worse against Tucker and Smith in 1987 than he did against anyone until Brian Nielsen 14 years later. People are always looking for the moment when Tyson was no longer "prime." There was no defined period where he WAS prime and when he was NO LONGER prime. Tyson was totally focused on boxing from like 1984 to 1986 - when he was basically a kid being guided by adults as he went from amateur to pro. And even then, he'd lose focus. There's really little difference between his performance against Ribalta and against Ruddock. By 1987, when he was 20 and 21, he wanted to be treated like an adult himself (like every 20 and 21 year-old does). And he wasn't as focused every time he fought (see Smith and Tucker and Douglas). When he was focused, however, he continued to turn in great performances (regardless of who was training him) throughout the 90s. Tyson looked so bad against Bonecrusher Smith, Cayton and Jacobs almost pulled Rooney then. Kevin Rooney was an alcoholic who also had a bad gambling problem. In fact, in the ring after the Spinks fight, Tyson said Rooney told him he'd gambled away BOTH of their purses on a first round knockout. And Tyson said he "believed" Rooney, because everyone knew what a degenerate gambler Rooney had become at that point. Lying to his 21-year-old fighter that he wouldn't be paid if he didn't score a first-round knockout moments before the biggest fight of his career to that point isn't the mark of a good trainer. Kevin Rooney was just another Teddy Atlas. Tyson had heard the same stories and learned all the same moves and feints and punches from D'Amato that Rooney and Atlas had picked up. Rooney and Atlas never told or taught Tyson anything he hadn't already heard from D'Amato. That's why Tyson still credits D'Amato, and not Rooney or Atlas. And that's why Tyson was still able to turn in great performances whether they were around or not.
I agree on some of your points but Tyson's one round destructions over guys like Williams, Stewart and Tillman are obviously going to look good. Tyson looked very sloppy against Bruno and against Ruddock Mike had turned into a brawler, throwing wild hayemakers, having no head movement, barely throwing punch combinations and just throwing one shot at a time. After Rooney had left Tyson became a mainly a headhunter. I think that Tucker was a good fighter as well and thought Tyson delivered a good performance in that fight, also it's worth mentioning that while Mike had a pretty lacklustre performance against Smith, Smith mostly clinched Tyson.
I don't think Tyson looked any sloppier against Bruno or Ruddock than he did against Ribalta, honestly. Bruno was much better than Ribalta. And Tyson finished Bruno much more effectively (both times) than he did Ribalta. Also, Bonecrusher didn't invent holding against Mike Tyson. Tyson just let him hold. On the other hand, Tyson brutalized Ruddock in their return fight. And Ruddock was better than Smith. If the Bonecrusher or Tucker fights had come in 1995, and the 1995 Bruno and Seldon fights had happened in 1987, people would include the Bruno and Seldon fights as bout were Tyson was "super sharp, unbeatable and prime" and the Tucker and Smith fights as example of "how far Tyson had fallen." Tyson could be hot and cold. He's human. Tyson learned everything he was going to learn from D'Amato. He had some decent trainers over his career. If he was in the mood to fight, he tended to fight great. When he wasn't, he didn't look so good, regardless of who was training him or what they told him to do. That's all I'm saying.
Letting go of Rooney and the deterioration of his technique was just a symptom of his mental deterioration. If boxing is really 80% mental then it's no wonder his performances declined as his private life went to hell and he lost control of himself. D'amato Jacobs Rooney etc had kept him and his fury carefully contained and channelled into boxing which resulted in a great run which was destined to fall apart and spin out asof control he got famous and rich at a very young age
