Reverse a loss: Tyson

Tyson WAS past his prime in 1996.

But Holyfield wasn't exactly prime either, and was viewed as shot before he beat Tyson.

 

Interesting question. I guess a win over Lewis would have been the the biggest upset and the most spectacular, certainly in terms of redemption.

As I had considered him on the slide since 1990 it would have been in effect a 11 or 12 year comeback. Not quite Foremanesque or Duran-like, but not far off.

If he had KOd Douglas, hmmm that would have been fascinating and a good topic for a new thread. How would we all re-write HW history?

Who would have dethroned him? Would Holy have avoided getting mashed by a quicker, more elusive and more confident Tyson than the broken post-prison '96 version he actually faced?

 

Because after that fight Tyson realised that he was mortal and stopped believing the hype about his own invincibility.

A man who truely believes that he can't lose is a tough man to beat.

 

Winning or loseing to Douglas would have matter little. Tyson would have still gone to prison for 3 years, came back and lose to Holyfiled. Even if he did beat Douglas, I still think that happens.

 

Douglas, no doubt in my mind.

That loss at just 23 hurts his career a lot more than the post-jail losses to Holyfield and Lewis.

 

i actually think tyson NEEDED the douglas loss he had been on the slide since the spinks fight and it kinda made him pull his finger out as you can see from his two good performances against ruddock. the douglas loss kinda humanised him in a way

 

Lewis then Douglas

 

I say Douglas, as that fight is the central moment that ensures Tyson's non-appearance in my top 10. It's a crushing loss to a relatively undistinguished opponent while he was in his prime and healthy. If he had beaten Douglas, then losing to Holyfield later that year would have been no shame and Tyson's legacy wouldn't have suffered nearly so badly as it did against Douglas, and a win over Holyfield at that stage would have locked him into the top 10.

 

If he had beaten Douglas then he would only have lost to other all time greats except when he was in his late 30s.

 

Perhaps, but loosing the title to Holyfield would be a lot less damaging than loosing it to Douglas. Holyfield would have gone on to build up a body of work outside of the win over Tyson. Even if he hadnt his body of work at cruiserweight would have gone some way towards justifying the loss.

 

Holy 2.
Why?
Why, there would be a Holy 3 of course!

 

It would have helped his career most if Tyson would have beaten Douglas. Je would have fought Holyfield next. I think he had a good chance of wining that fight back than.

 

Exactly. Let's assume that Tyson fights Holyfield in Douglas' place- if Holyfield wins and does everything else exactly the same as he did in real life, except that the late '90s Tyson fights don't happen, since they already fought in '91, then I imagine Holyfield's standing in the eyes of the fans would be noticeably enhanced by his having beaten a prime, undefeated Tyson, and Tyson's standing would also be enhanced, since he would have only lost the title to an all-time great and would have no losses other than to all-time greats, as you say, until his late 30s- and each man's risen stock would reciprocally raise the other man's more by association. Really, I think both men would have gained a lot historically if Tyson could've only kept his end of the bargain and beaten Douglas.

 

Come to think of it the stock of the cruiserweight division as a whole would go up in this scenario. Sudenly anybody who gave Holyfield a good fight would have serious heavyweight credentials.

 

Holyfield in 1996.