The myth of Tysons post prison skills...

Hahahaha. Your so funny. Meantime back in the real world, just keep wanking over your Tyson pics.:rofl

 

Jon Saxon ducked Bruce Lee

Fact.

 

Says the person who calls himself 'Foxy'

 

Foolish post.

 

Tyson started to go down hill around his first fight with Frank Bruno. Once Tyson stopped training with Kevin Rooney he stopped focusing nearly as much on defense. You can see from his first fight with Bruno on to his downfall against Buster Douglas he moved his head a lot less, used the jab a lot less and didn't set things up nearly as much he just seemed to constantly go for the home run and when he got in there with a good boxer like Buster Douglas this got exposed.

After the Douglas fight Tyson came back and looked a lot better destroying both Tillman (which at any point in his career would've been the case) and Alex Stewart in the first round. Tyson had clearly started to train a lot harder after the poor performance against Douglas. Then when Tyson fought Ruddock, at times he looked great but also at times he was very lazy and tried to just slug it out with Ruddock while not worrying about defense and that made the fight much harder then it should've been. Rudduck at that time was a very tough opponent and I still give Tyson credit for picking up two clear wins against him in very hard fights and dealing with adversity(taking some very hard shot from a great puncher and coming back). I would've loved to see Tyson fight Holyfield even at this point though he was not looking nearly as sharp as he was in the early stages of his career he still was a force and I believe would've came in motivated and in great shape it would've been a classic forsure but the **** conviction ruined that....

When Tyson got out of jail he had glimpses of his old self but was a lot less precise, didn't defend nearly as well, didn't set things up nearly as much as he used to and from what I've heard didn't live the proper lifestyle for a fighter. He seemed hungry going into the Bruno fight and looked very good in that fight, though he didn't look nearly as much of a technician as he did early on in his career he did move his head well, was fairly precise and destroyed Frank Bruno who in his own right was a pretty good fighter. IMO that performances could've been argued as his best since the Michael Spinks fight. After that his next fight was a cake walk against Bruce Seldon which I believed might have made Tyson overly confident going into a fight with Holyfield who at the time was considered by many shot.

In the fight with Holyfield, Tyson looked alright early on though noticeably he was not throwing many combinations and at times was lazy. Holyfield fought a good fight not letting Tyson pick up much momentum. I had Tyson ahead until the round where the clash of heads occurred and then the knockdown. That round really seemed to throw off Tyson and from that point on Holyfield was in command. Their next fight is history but funny enough as it is in the round where Tyson bit Holyfield ear he was actually looking the best hes looked in years early on in that round. I feel that fight was far from over but Tyson clearly lost his composure after having a tough start in the opening round and then being cut from a clash of heads. I feel one of Tyson's biggest declines later on in his career was mentally he was not nearly as strong as we in the early stages of his career.

After the ear biting incident Tyson came back and the decline was even more evident. He stopped setting things up and head hunted even more, defended even less, looked like he trained less and apparently was into drugs and it showed. He looked like he may still be a viable contender in the Golota fight but its hard to tell how he would've looked as the fight went on if Golota didn't quit. After another long lay off he came back and fought and out of shape Brian Nielsen and did not look good, then took on Lennox who easily destroyed him and that was that there no point to even talk anymore about his career because after that point it was a joke.

In conclusion I think Tyson clearly gradually declined throughout his career, it was a bit of a roller coaster of a decline as at times he seemed to get a little bit of the old fire back but overall after the Michael Spinks fight he was never at that level again. I believe the main reason for his decline was mental Tyson clearly lost the drive and mentality that he had early in his career, he seemed to no longer be a student of the game, and once he got involved with the wrong people it all went south. Tyson was at his best from the Berbick fight through the Spinks fight, how good was he at this time? very hard to tell.. Though he beat some really tough opponents such as an Old but still crafty Larry Holmes, Pinklon Thomas at the time when he still had something left, a prime Tony Tucker and Michael Spinks none of these fighters at the time that Tyson faced them were great. Its hard to say whether even at the time when he was most focused if he'd be able to deal with adversity like he faced in the Holyfield fights. I'll always be a big fan of Tyson but I'll never rank him amongst the top five heavyweights of all time because skill wise he was as good as anyone but mentally he was very flawed.

 

Very succinct. Nice post welcome to the forum!

 

Tyson definitely lost some speed post prison. He wasn`t slow but he didnt have the same kind of quckness. He also lost some fluidity. He seemed to be a little too muscle bound.

I dont think he had the same commitment to the game. The interest in training wasnt the same. Tyson knew he could still KO most heavyweights with his early onslaught.

 

I think it was evident that Tyson showed a less fluent and less spontaneous version of himself as early as the Tony Tucker fight. He was made to think in that fight but was not giving away weight, nor was he being punished too severely. A more experienced challenger than Tucker may have exposed Tyson right there. Tucker hurt his hand in that fight also.

Tillman and Stewart were both sitting ducks, a league bellow Ruddock so Tyson was always going to look better against them. Had he fought Ruddock ahead of those two Tyson would not have shown decline. Tyson was always going to look less sharp against Bruno,Tucker, Douglas and Ruddock because they were the best Tyson had fought up until this point.

Agreed. Tyson was still the best heavyweight in the World out side of Lennox Lewis at that time.

I agree with this. However, was Tyson ever that strong mentally? During the unbeaten part of his career he had the aura and intimidation thing going for him, nobody had yet worked out his style either so it was harder to test that mental strength department. I think Tyson looked pretty frustrated in the Smith fight. That showed weakness in my eyes but then he was young. Perhaps his talent brought him too far too early?

Fighters had more confidence going in against him at this point. Tyson could still smell fear and expose an intimidated opponent early in a fight but less fighters were scared of him. Nielson had home advantage, was a big man and any fighter knocking him out would have got a good write up and ranking from beating him in Denmark. [/QUOTE]

I think Tyson was a great fighter but between the Berbick and Spinks fights Tyson fought a lot of inactive and under prepared fighters. Sure they were the best around on paper but Tyson was better prepared, younger and faster than they all were. Tubbs, Holmes and Thomas were not strong contenders or that current. They had been around a long time and had not beat rated fighters for some time. They had value as names. Smith was not a good result. Tucker was intresting but not sensational. The Biggs Fight was good and Bruno was also a good win but neither men beat top fighters going into their title fights where as Ruddock, Douglas and Holyfeild had.

 

So, where do those of us who always said that Tyson was a " spent force " at least a year before the Douglas fight, and have no interest in the prison excuses collect our Blue Peter badges?

 

But was Tyson ever really quite the force we thought he was? His career shows Tyson looked his most sensational against intimidated or inactive opponents and more cautious, less fluent, often frustrated against better resistance. In other words the more resistance Tyson got the less sensational Tyson looked. Maybe that is true of all fighters to some extent but not many looked so free of ideas or having to think what to do once a fight got tough. You cant blame his corner, you cant blame his lifestyle because this was true throughout his career.

For every Michael Spinks win there was a Bonecrusher, Bruno, Tucker or Tillis performance once Tyson hit top level. I don't think there was a period even with Rooney where he was consistently the phenom at world level. Between his defeat or after the prison stint during the so called decline without Rooney Tyson was always capable of sharp devastating wins like the Tillman, Bruno, Golota, Saveresse and Orlin Norris outings. Proving he had a knack of being sharp if things went his way early in a fight.

 

Lmfao. Thats not a very good way to evalute. Of course the people that knew you were trolling werent going to give you a long drawn out response because you werent being receptive to anyones opinion but your own. And of course people ae going to call you names with such a stupid opinion as you had to start the thread...

 

Yep.

But that's always the same story with those "on top" fighters. it's either A+ or like C-, isn't it? And that C- sure looks like a long way from even a B.

Optimal matchmaking is an absolute priority with those "on top" guys because they lose so badly. But when things go their way, they look great.

McClellan was another on top guy. A real force when things go his way. Very vulnerable when he wasn't and those spectacular results just aren't there.

 

I'm not sure I agree. I thought he looked devastating taking out Biggs, Holmes, Tubbs and Spinks, consecutively. Truthfully, to me each performance during this period exceeded the last.
They weren't just mere wins, but utterly dominant and devastating wins over credible opposition.
These fights were sandwiched between Tucker and Bruno.

Now people see that Tucker fight as some kind of negative or knock on Tyson (probably because Tyson didn't get the KO) but I don't see it that way at all.
In that fight, Tyson went boring in looking for the quick ko as he always did, and to be fair to Tucker he gave Tyson something to think about early on.

However, around the 5th round or so, Tyson obviously realised that he wasn't getting Tucker out of there anytime soon, and he adjusted his mentality accordingly, eventually settling for outboxing and outjabbing the much taller and rangier Tucker.
Certainly not one of Tyson't best fights if you're looking for highlight reel material, but from a technical perspective, one of his most underrated wins, imo.
Then, there is the Bruno fight where, aside from a bit of a moment in the first when Frank caught him with a peach of a left hook counter, there was little cause for concern as Tyson basically took Bruno apart piece by piece for the next four rounds.
The only title fights where he fought genuinely below par where the Bonecrusher and Douglas fights. (At least in my view.)

So for me, I think it's hard to be critical of his reign as champion in the 80's.

As an aside, I think that sometimes Tyson's quick, 'easy' wins are seen in something of a negative light in a way. It's almost as if some folk have the attitude that if he couldn't get you early, he couldn't get you at all or he lost.

Firstly, I think it takes a hell of a fighter to be able to destroy capable opposition early. In the early rounds, an opponent is at his freshest mentally and physically, and all his opponents knew that Tyson would come storming out looking for a fast finish. There was no secret as to what he was going to do and yet, how many lasted beyond six rounds or even three?

While I do agree that Tyson was a front-runner and tended to do his best work relatively early on, he does at least have a 10th round tko on his ledger, which to be honest, is two rounds later than say, Lewis has on his. (Lewis never scored a tko/ko past the 8th round.)
He also dropped Douglas with a corker of an uppercut in the 8th despite being battered continually, and scored with a huge left hook on Tucker in the 12th round of their fight, forcing Tucker to hold on.
So for me, while not as dangerous as in the early rounds, I think basically that as long as he remained upright he was a threat and not to be taken lightly.

The intimidation thing I think gets overplayed a bit as well. Yes, in both fights Bruno was deeply intimidated and Spinks was virtually a dead man walking in their fight, but inasmuch as Tyson did bring the intimidation factor into a lot of his fights, I think that at other times, he brought the best out of his opponents.
Certainly, there was a huge incentive to beat Tyson and not everyone he faced (that he beat) was particularly fearful of him.
I think it can be said that Berbick had a point to prove when he fought Tyson, and came straight at him. I didn't see any intimidation there, nor in the faces of Holmes, Thomas, Ruddock or Tubbs. Ruddock was convinced that Tyson was afraid of him.
Tillis put up arguably a career-best performance versus Tyson, as did Tucker.

So yeah, for me it's become a little too overplayed, a little too black & white an issue.

Excuse the long-winded and no doubt rambling post...it's a Saturday afternoon and I've got nothing better to do today.

 

I think Tyson was a great fighter but between the Berbick and Spinks fights Tyson fought a lot of inactive and under prepared fighters. Sure they were the best around on paper but Tyson was better prepared, younger and faster than they all were. Tubbs, Holmes and Thomas were not strong contenders or that current. They had been around a long time and had not beat rated fighters for some time. They had value as names. Smith was not a good result. Tucker was intresting but not sensational. The Biggs Fight was good and Bruno was also a good win but neither men beat top fighters going into their title fights where as Ruddock, Douglas and Holyfeild had.[/quote]

Very good points and for the most part I do agree with what you are saying. Tony Tucker did give Tyson some trouble but overall I consider that fight a pretty good performance by Tyson. Tucker at that point in his career was a very good fighter. He was tall with good boxing skills and power, he(Tucker) began his decline as a fighter after that fight when drugs took over his life. I feel Tucker was probably the best opponent Tyson ever defeated. In that fight Tucker started off well but Tyson took over the fight after a couple rounds and clearly won. Now I know Tucker hurt his hand and that does a play a big factor but at the same time thats part of boxing and its the boxers responsibility to deal with situation like that when they are fighting.

I feel Tyson was much more composed early in his career. In both the Bonecrusher Smith and Mitch Green fights he did get frustrated because of them holding him throughout but at the same time won pretty much every minute of those fights. The Bonecrusher fight wasn't a great performance by him by any means he was lazy in that bout but its not uncommon for any fighter to be that way when they feel they have a fight well at hand.

The fights with Pinklon Thomas and Larry Holmes both lead me to believe Tyson was a much more composed fighter at this point in his career. When he fought Larry Holmes, he(Holmes) was very faded, I consider Larry Holmes the third best heavyweight of all time in his prime, but still at the point Tyson fought him Holmes still had enough left to give almost any fighter in history a lot of trouble with his craftiness. Remember Holmes returned a few years later after being destroyed by Tyson and embarked on a good comeback, winning many fights, beating a very tough but raw fighter in Ray Mercer, and giving both Evander Holyfield and Oliver McCall lots of trouble in title fights. Tyson destroyed Holmes in their fight which was very impressive. Holmes was clearly trying to use his craft and frustrate Tyson but it didn't work at all. Tyson used his jab well in the fight, set up most of his power punches with good head movement and the jab, threw punches in combination and didn't get wild until the end where he had Holmes in bad trouble. If you ask me if the Tyson from a few years later would've fought Holmes at this point I think it would've been a much different fight. Pinklon Thomas at the time he fought Tyson I feel was still a pretty good fighter. Thomas was a tall guy with very good jab and good boxing skills, the kinda of guy who you'd expect to give Tyson a lot of trouble.In rounds 2-5 he did. Tyson though stayed composed with help from his trainer Kevin Rooney who provided him good instruction throughout and came out and destroyed Thomas in the 6th with an outstanding flurry of punches. Both the Holmes and Thomas fight were to me two of Tyson's most outstanding performances. Tyson also looked very good in his fights with Biggs, Spinks, Berbick, and Tubbs.

It was evident once Kevin Rooney was no longer in Tyson's corner he began to get much more wild. The fight with Bruno he looked a lot like he did in the Razor Ruddock fight which was still a very devastating fighter but not nearly as disciplined or composed fighter in the ring. Unlike in the fights against Holmes and Thomas,etc. Pretty much every thing was power punches and a lot less of his peekaboo defense was displayed and he took some heavy shots because of it.

My take on the Buster Douglas fight is that Tyson came in very flat and over confident expecting to walk over Douglas. Which was dumb because Buster though at times throughout his career being very suspect when he showed up for a fight he was a very good fighter. Douglas had one of the best jabs in heavyweight history of you ask me, not only that he was a well schooled big man much like Riddick Bowe and on the night vs Tyson boy was he on. If you ask me no matter what Tyson showed up he would've been in for a tough fight against Buster on that given night and was no match showing up unfocused the way he did.

Now it is still hard to say that if Tyson would've been in a real war with a guy like Holyfield in his prime years if his composure would've still been there. I feel Tyson's composure began to lack once Kevin Rooney was no longer his trainer. After that he did have more trainers with creditials but they weren't the right fit for Tyson. Rooney employed a very disciplined and technically based training regement for Tyson and provided very good advice in the corner during fights and seemed to know what to say to motivate Tyson while he was fighting. Rooney helped Tyson out early in his career in a tough fight against an experienced fighter in James Tillis and also as I said provided good encouragement in the Thomas fight. The team Tyson had at the beginning of his career seemed to be the perfect fit for Tyson the problem is once Cus and Jimmie Jacobs were gone there were no one there too help Tyson keep his life in check. Now who knows, perhaps even if Cus and Jacobs would've lived another 10 years Tyson perhaps may still have been lured in by Don King and effected by other factors but I feel it would be a lot less likely and not to the same extent. Tyson not only seemed less composed in the ring as gradually all the people who he started out with began to pass on or be removed, he was a lot less composed outside the ring in his behavior and the way he presented himself towards the general public.

It'll always be a mystery how great Tyson really was in those few years where he really seemed to be on. Could he have beat guys like Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield? Maybe, I feel he had the ability to win against almost anyone but was he ever strong enough mentally to deal with great fighters when facing adversity, its hard to say.