Mike Tysons resume was rubbish in a weak era.

Your point is what?

James could never again replicate that performance against anybody else. That was the sharpest, best version of James we ever saw. He then retired after being crushed by Evander.

The difference is, James' sad loss of his mother, motivated him like nothing else could, whereas Mike's out of ring activities and his mindset had an adverse effect on his performances.

 

First off, I'm not a fanboy.

Second, I've never claimed that Mike was unbeatable. You can read my previous posts.

No, he didn't become shot overnight. But he'd clearly lost his focus by the time he fought James. He wasn't the same guy who'd demolished Berbick and Spinks. Rooney, Atlas, Jacobs and Cayton had gone, and he was still affected by the break up with Givens, wanting to party with women. He went to Tokyo, and he wasn't fully prepared and he underestimated James. He got dropped on at least one occasion by Greg Page in sparring, and again, he'd looked poor against Bruno in the previous year.

If you think that James would always have beaten any version of Mike, then that's up to you. But I don't share that opinion. I think the focused versions of Mike who fought from 85-88 would have beaten James.

Here's an interesting excerpt from his autobiography looking at his fight against James in Tokyo:

http://www.newsweek.com/inside-greatest-upset-sports-history-225113

I've no reason not to believe what was written there.

I don't think he lost to James, because he was the best opponent he'd faced. Even though that specific version of James was a tough proposition, he wasn't on another level to the guys who Mike had beaten previously. You can't say that Mike knocked out bums, but lost when he stepped up his competition. It's not as simple as that. Again, Mike wasn't as sharp as he'd been previously, and James could never again replicate that performance.

 

Who said Tyson was past prime against Douglas?

Tyson wan't past prime at 23, but he was past prime at 29 when he made his comeback in 1995.

Also, people seem to forget that Buster Douglas was a very talented fighter that had an 83" reach and knew how to use it. Douglas was also ranked #7 in the world. The only reason Douglas was such a huge underdog was due to him being very lazy and inconsistent. Just three years before the Tyson fight he had a very competitive fight with Tucker.

1987 IBF title fight
#7 Buster Douglas vs. #8 Tony Tucker

This content is protected

Buster was 227 lbs and put on a good performance, but didn't pace himself and gassed out and was stopped by a right hand by Tucker.

1989 2 fights before the Tyson fight

Buster Douglas vs. # 7 Trevor Berbick

This content is protected

Buster was a trim 226 lbs and thoroughly outboxed Berbick.


1989 1 fight before the Tyson Fight

#9 Buster Douglas vs. Oliver McCall

This content is protected

In this fight Buster was 242 lbs and did win by a lopsided decision, but he underperformed due to being too heavy. This is also the same Oliver McCall that would go on to knock out a prime Lennox Lewis 5 years later.

1990

# 7 Buster Douglas vs. Mike Tyson

Buster was 231 lbs and completely neutralized Tyson's body punching and was lighting Tyson up from every angle when Tyson tried to force his way in to score. Buster also utilized excellent footwork, which kept him off the ropes and Tyson in the center of the ring, which left Tyson sitting duck for Buster's jab's and counter hooks.

Tyson adapted later on in the fight by blocking Buster's right hands and coming under to start going to work on Buster's body, but it was a little too late. However, late in the fight Buster started easing up with his footwork and jab and backing Tyson and got floored with a beautiful uppercut by Tyson. To Buster's credit he got up and went back to work on Tyson and rocked Tyson with his own uppercut and finished the champ.

Buster deserves full credit for the win against Tyson.

After the Tyson fight Buster was guaranteed a $24 million payday against Holyfield and showed up at 246 lbs and was easily beaten by Holyfield.

 

H2H, he is

 

Tyson wasn't at his best vs Douglas and everyone knows that.
but he lost fair and square .
Tyson vs Douglas at their very best who would you pick?

 

If you think Tyson was 'prime' vs Buster, you're very much mistaken. Forget his age, that's not relevant in his case. He was under-trained during camp and overwhelmed by the spotlight of publicity and not helped in the slightest by his unscrupulous promoter; and basically suffering a mental breakdown in the public eye, fuelled by drink and drugs. He famously got dropped by Greg Page in sparring for this fight and was already a fighter in decline. Douglas did all he could do - he beat the man in front of him. But to claim that man was the best form of Tyson simply ignores all the facts to hand.

There's no doubt Buster's jab was a real weapon that night and would have been against a prime Tyson too, but a prime Tyson would have stopped him in my view...

 

no matter what you think of the people he fought the man didnt **** about like todays pussys from winning the wbc title it took him 3 fights after to become undisputed champ from age 20 to 21.

 

Great post.

Most people can't seem to comprehend that he was past his best, because they're so fixated with his young age at the time. But he was past his best. He burnt out so fast. He was already in decline in 1989 against Bruno.

 

Lennox Lewis

Corregated Iron Mike didn't want that work

 

It's shocking how short Tyson's prime was. You're right, he had diminished by the time he stepped into the ring with Bruno...

 

First youre a complete moron. Second try telling Mike this to his face.

 

Back in the day there was a gang of a dozen or so guys on this forum with black + white Tyson avatars on this site who'd gang up on posters who dared to utter any criticism of Mike. Hands up guys, who here was a member of the BW Iron Mike Avatar gang?

 

This.