Prime tyson beats prime holyfield, convince me.

Mentality, I agree, Tyson was worse when he came back from prison.
But if he says the 2nd Ruddock fight knocked the mental edge/heart out of his game, why would you expect him to win in November against Holyfield ?

 

Not really, Moorer was probably more washed up than Holyfield. Moorer came off a life and deather with Botha where he was hurt badly in the 11th round. Moorer was not an elite fighter either, and probably would have fought very close and possibly lost to Bruno in 96.

 

So you are saying prime for prime Moorer is greater than Holyfield and Holyfield only got the better of Moorer after he had aged???

 

No he said going to prison did. He said he never had the same mindset about boxing when he got out.

 

Moorer was never as good as Holyfield as a heavyweight. Holyfield was injured in the Moorer fight and I and just about everyone in the arena besides Moorer thought Holyfield still won.

 

Moorer was a great light-Heavy but way below the likes of Holy & Tyson at heavyweight, IMO Holyfield beat him in there first meeting anyways (heart condition and all)

 

Yes and who had the better performances after 1996? and who was getting schooled by Botha in his very next fight?

Just because the public BELIEVED Tyson to be "back" and Holyfield to be shot doesnt necessarily mean that that was the case.

Peter Fkn Mcneeley pushed Tyson against the ropes and was swingign away until he got caught, that should tell you how rusty Tyson actually was.

Going 12 rounds with Riddick Bowe or Koing Peter Mcneeley in 1.....which was the better performance? Holyfield may have looked bad but the thats because of the opposition he was fighting, whereas with Tyson it was the opposite. Yes he knocked out a few people before the Holyfield fight, what people coudlnt seem to see was that he looked pretty bad in doing so. He was getting the **** kicked out of him by Mcneely, was getting schooled by Mathis and even Seldon was outjabbing him until he decided to fall down.
Yes he knocked Bruno out faster than the first time.....but thats because in the first fight, Bruno actually fought back whereas in the second fight he was merely a sacrficial lamb.

Tyson was percieved to be what he was pre prison but the Holyfield fights showed that he simply wasnt the same fighter. Holyfield on the other hand may have been shot, but he still had more than enough in the tank for Tyson.

 

How do you know Tyson was better pre prison when he never fought anyone as good as Holyfield
That was always the question over Tyson 'would he be so impressive against a top quality fighter?' - well the answer was a resounding NO, but because he was such a intriguing character and enjoyable to watch, he made many many fans who refuse to aknowledge that he never proved himself at elite level and elevate him to a pedestal way above what he achieved

 

Tyson himself paints a diferent picture.

He claims that he was focused and determined to win his titles back when he fought Neilsen and Bruno, but that he lost focus going into the Holyfield fight and took it for granted.

 

Against Nielson? Cmon coming in at 239 and fighting once a year wouldnt suggest he was focused and determined. If it was worth digging up I'd look for his interview, but even his interview with John Madden before he faced Mathis, he was saying he couldnt beat the old Tyson when they were showing him clips of himself. He just wasnt the same fighter.
Yes Ive heard Tom Patti claim Tyson didnt train hard at all for Holyfield in the first fight, but did in the second, but that didnt stop him from having a mental breakdown in the ring.

 

His take on it not mine.

 

Well, here he says the 2nd Razor Ruddock fight knocked the desire out of him, and if he'd never gone to prison he would never have been champion again :

0:45


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpYCHzs6BLM&feature=channel[/ame]

 

Tyson's first fight with Bruno is almost exactly how he looked in 1995-96. I remember the post fight interview with Bruno after the second fight. Frank was asked to compare the Tyson of both fights and he stated Tyson fought the same. Even though he lost interest I do believe the 1991 Tyson looked better in his fights with Ruddock, possibly because he knew Ruddock was a serious threat and there to murder him.

 

I truly don't believe that Tyson could have ever beaten Holyfield. I just think Holyfield has to many attributes that would always have enabled him to over come what ever Mike brought to the table. Here are a few: style, chin, grit, heart, fast enough hand speed (Prime Tyson had faster hands) , just enough movement (in case he needs to get himself together) But I just see many more scenarios that favor Evander.. Had they met in there Primes, its obviously a tighter fight and Holyfield would have to be on his game but Mike was the fighter he could never beat (atleast that's what everyone thought) And that would have him always primed to smash Mike. If the fight was fought in there primes Mike may make it to the cards but Holyfield wins it there..