Tyson already on the slide in Bruno I?

I think Tyson was a bit rusty/sloppy against Bruno too.
The thing is, I reckon Bruno was at least as rusty as Tyson, since he'd been out the ring twice as long as Mike had.

 

I think this is the case with Tyson more than any other fighter, actually. You have it somewhat with Ali, especially in fantasy match-ups, but not quite in this way.

Do I believe we saw the very best version of Tyson against Bruno? No, no fighter can be at peak form in every fight. Was he a bit overconfident and too comfortable? Yes, for a period after flooring Bruno, but that is almost to be expected from someone who has run through his opponents like he did for the most part and is up against someone he probably doesn't rate very highly. Doesn't mean he's in terminal decline.

Ali lost a round or two by not taking Chuvalo seriously enough in 1966, doesn't mean he was on the slide. Some of the KDs Louis suffered to less than great opposition was probably due to him not being 100% concentrated. Even the best fighters are human. No one is at the very top of his game for every second. But in Tyson case, every second of lapses in the fights post Spinks are scrutinized to find excuses for his loss to Douglas.

 

This is why I think Bruno get underrated a bit. Same thing with the Lewis fight, if Bruno does well then something is lacking with his opponent, Lewis was cold, lethargic etc. I think too much is made of the Tyson slipping theory when it comes to the Bruno fight. To me Tyson still looked lethal at times even though he didn't get his man out in two rounds, its just the fact he wasnt quite as sharp, probably 85 to 90 percent his best form in my opinion. Put it this way, I dont think the Spinks version of Tyson would have got Bruno out much quicker, maybe a bit tidier and getting hit less but Bruno was a tree that had to be chopped down.

 

I'm not sure on that evening Spinks turned up in the right frame of mind to fight against Tyson. Maybe a lot of fighters beat Spinks in a that frame of mind?

Tyson took care of business but I am not sure he was up against much there. It was a one way bag work out.

It is difficult to assess what the blow out victim had going for him if he never got going. I am also thinking of Patterson and Walcott and Liston and Witherspoon when they each folded up in one round.

 

The Frank Bruno fight, March 16 1996, which Tyson won, took place after his three-year imprisonment and six years after his defeat at the hands of Buster Douglas on Feb 11 1990, a defeat that had already denuded Tyson of his aura of invincibility. So why is the Bruno fight being used as an indicator of something that had already been detected-Tyson's reduced boxing prowess?

BTW

The causes of such a downward slide could have been both physical and psychological. Or purely physical and purely psychological. On the psychological side we have his squabbles with Givens which led to his crashing his car into a tree and rendering himself unconscious. Such squabbles don't make for efficient training and drain the body of energy.

Compounding this came the death of his beloved trainer and mentor Cus Damato and Tyson's subsequent lack of discipline in training prior to the Douglas fight.

 

I think you are just mentally challenged, and in no small way. What adult numbskull would not know how to average out a boxers weight across a number of fights. Unfathomable.

 

Tyson/Bruno I took place in early '89 and was Tyson's first fight w/out Kevin Rooney.

We are not talking about Tyson/Bruno II.

 

I recently re-watched most of Tyson's fights. It's interesting that whenever he doesn't find the KO in the 80's - i.e. Tillis, Thomas rd 2-5, and Tucker - the commentators wonder what's wrong, why he's going for one punch, why so little head movement, what's up with the head hunting, etc.

When the same thing happens post-Douglas, the commentators keep saying "Where is the Tyson of old?! He needs to go back to that!" all the time. In many people's mind, legendary Tyson with Rooney would fight 12 rounds like he did for 30 seconds against Frazier. I've watched the Tucker bout a million times because it's the only interesting 80's Tyson fight that lasted long. Let me tell you, he made all the mistakes that he supposedly started making without Rooney. He threw no more than 40 punches a round, most of them single shots followed by a clinch initiated by either side. He did make more mistakes in the 90's than in the 80's, but certainly not to the extent that many like to believe.

To be sure, he's an extremely fast and powerful puncher - very dangerous. The combination with which he finished Bruno is one of the most brutal combo's in heavyweight boxing. Pretty hilarious to point to that fight and say he stopped throwing combinations. The Mathis one in 1995 was fantastic as well: slip, quick step back, pivot, vicious right uppercut followed immediately by a left hook, another right uppercut and a right hook to finish him off. He must've thought it was the 80's.

 

Yes, and in fairness - the Tucker fight was a solid, workman-like performance against a tough opponent whose physical talents are exceeded by his accomplishments. Tyson also showed he wasn't fazed by some degree of adversity - being rocked right after the opening bell and taking heavy fire for four rounds. But he kept going at it, banking rounds enroute to a solid decision victory.

 

Did you find that 50 greatest punchers list with Leotis Martin on it?

 

He is 68 on the Rings top 100 list which puts him in front of such recognized bangers as:
Firpo[79],Gomez[72],Buddy Baer[69],Ruddock[ 70] Johannson[99]. ,
Got any more quips?

 

Of course Tyson threw less combos against Tucker. He was fighting a guy who was running and clinching. You dont just throw combos to throw them. He actually outjabbed Tucker which is exactly the type of punch you would expect to predominate in a fight such as this but would never expect it to land more frequently for the shorter, shorter armed fighter.

 

Why was he failing to slip so many punches from a guy who ( as you say) was really just "running and clinching" ?
Just boring in with his head down. Not exactly the mythical prime Tyson people like to contrast with the "post-Rooney" Tyson. He looked the same as he did in 1989 when Rooney left. That's the point.

 

NO, he slipped the Tucker jab all night long despite a huge height and reach disadvantage.

He wasn't defensively perfect, but was better than in the Bruno fight.

Experts noted it at the time.

Revisionist history is a *****.