Tyson and the myth of the late round comeback

This is why. Note the best fighters there are Lewis and Holyfield, both in the "loss" column for Mike*. The fighters in the "win" column are decent, a couple are pretty good fighters, but they are no Ali, Louis, Holmes etc. The reason guys like this are favoured if they survive the early onslaught, is because they are brilliant fighters, who have what it takes to beat Tyson. His workrate greatly diminished as the fight progressed, both offensively and defensively (I think he became easier to hit as the fight progressed, he seemed to move less).

*Note: I know Tyson was past his prime against Holyfield and Lewis, but you used them as an example.

 

This kind of looks like a recycling of that "Tyson-Marciano, the myth of 'intangibles'" thread from a few weeks back, but expanded to include the general field...

I think some numbers might be in order to illustrate the point here:

Against currently top-five-ranked opponents, Tyson had six stoppage wins: Berbick (second round), Thomas (sixth round), Tubbs (second round), Spinks(first round), Williams(first round) and Ruddock(seventh round). His other wins against top five opponents were decisions over Smith, Tucker and Ruddock.

Marciano, by comparison, had nine stoppage wins against top-five-ranked opponents: one in the first(Walcott), one in the second(Matthews), one in the sixth(Layne), two in the eighth(Louis and Charles), two in the ninth(Moore and Cockell), one in the eleventh(LaStarza), and one in the thirteenth(Walcott). He had one other win over a currently-top-five opponent, that being the decision over Charles in their first fight.

Starting to see the point, here? In his nine wins over top five opponents, Tyson had four knockouts in the first two rounds, and then after that, only two knockouts in his other five fights. If you were a top five heavyweight, the odds were that if you made it out of the first two rounds with Tyson, you were going to last the distance. On the other hand, Marciano's knockouts are fairly evenly distributed across the board, with a slight cluster in the middle. Even as an elite opponent, no matter how long you lasted in the fight, the odds were still overwhelming that he was going to knock you out. Tyson, in his 58-fight career, had one stoppage past the seventh round(Ribalta)- this, compared with Marciano's nine out of 49 total fights.

Certainly you can see the trends here. Tyson was at his most dangerous in the first two rounds, fizzled off a bit but was still a threat in rounds 3-7, and then you were pretty much home free by the eighth. Tyson clearly lost some of his offensive intensity and a bit of the "oomph" on his punches in the second half of the fight. Marciano, on the other hand, was more or less the same throughout an entire fight, and caused his opponents to wear down and deteriorate at unusually fast rates. It is true that Tyson was still able to win decisions against opponents who made it into the late rounds with him in his prime, but none of those men had vastly superior stamina and remained consistent round after round all night the way a Marciano did. I think the writing on the wall is clear enough; against a top-flight endurance opponent, Tyson's best chance is to put the other man away early, and his odds of victory drop off rapidly the further the fight progresses.

 

Then again, he has a 5-3 (just ONE ko) record in fights that went 8 rounds or more. I'd say round 8 is a classic, what many call, 'a mid to late round' too. :good

 

Simply because he was more efective and busier in the first few rounds.

That is not to say that he is not dangerous in the later rounds but any sensible plan for beating him would pay close atention to the early part of the fight.

 

Two reasons:

-The guys that DID beat him (let's say, Douglas, Holyfield and Lewis) all needed to break him down over more than 6 rounds, not including the ear-biting win of course.

-Most of Tyson's knockouts were scored during the first 6 rounds.


Combine these two and it is obvious that your best chances against him are during the late rounds.
Of course, as you pointed out, if you fight "to make it out of the first 6", you'll probably end up like Biggs or Smith. You have to control him, foul him, push him around from the opening round.


Now, i will add that his few late round stoppages also had something to do with the durability of his opponents: if they weren't going to fall inside 6, usually they weren't going to go down at all. If Tyson was a bit less effective then he might have stopped Thomas in the 9th, or Biggs in the 10th, Botha in the 8th, etc. It's a stylistic thing: Tyson is over-agressive which leads to many early knockouts of those who couldn't take it, but few late stoppages. Same more or less applies to Dempsey.


In this sense, he pales in comparison to Marciano, but then again, which puncher doesn't? Marciano has a ridiculously high stoppage record against ranked contenders that basically no one has ever topped.

 

Great work.

 

Iron,

Tyson's attacking style and power tailed off around round 5. While Tyson did defeat Ferguson, Tillis ( could have been a draw ) , Green, Ribalta, Smith, Thomas, Tucker, Biggs, Ruddock 2x and Nielson, how many of these guys were in there to just survive the rounds? Most of them.

However when Tyson was in a fight vs a guy who wanted to win instead of survive, his will slowly but surely evaporated as the rounds went on. This can be seen in the Douglas, Holyfield, Lewis, and Williams fights. Bruno nearly tested Tyson’s intangibles in their first fight, but Bruno himself had major league confidence issues. Tyson never got off the deck to win a fight, and in truth really wasn't a tough guy when his seconds had to work on a cut or swelling. In addition, Tyson was foul prone.


I beleive Tyson was a top 13 all time heavy, and would have many old timers looking up at the lights early, but grit, heart, and will were his weaknesses. The thing is Tyson's physical skills / intimidation were enough to get his opponent out of there before he had a heart check.


Boxing can be a strange sport. Those with the greatest intimidation ability can suddenly fold when things aren’t going their way.

 

What was the point of including this fight?

 

I am well aware that Tyson was past his best in the Williams fight, tough I would argue he looked very " on " early. That is not my point.

My point is Tyson, who was broke and needed money folded as soon as something did not go his way. A huge PPV fight vs Vitali Klitschko would have been next for Tyson.

Tyson claims to hurt his knee vs Danny Williams, and the film shows it did buckle a bit. Maybe he did, but then again Tyson walked out of the ring just fine.

If Williams was gun shy or reeling around the ring, I believe Tyson might have gone on a few rounds more. But Williams was game. Tyson’s intangibles were quickly tested vs Williams, after Williams stood up to Tyson's inital assult. The Williams fight fits the pattern of guys who stood up to Tyson defeating him.

 

He didn't just claim he hurt his knee, but the film, the replays of that moment clearly show that, as well as his actions after it. You can't put the weight of your body into your punches anymore when your front leg is injured, and that's exactly was was happening the rest of the fight, Tyson not throwing any heavy power punches anymore. And a plaster cast on his left leg for a while. Perhaps somebody will still claim it was fake, but a simple question - what for? Throwing the fight the moment when you are not only handily winning it, but are just a minute away from stopping your opponent, who's not fighting back anymore, not standing up against your assault, but is breaking apart quickly?

 

You are right about not being able to afford to lose the early rounds, but i think what most people mean is that if he didn't knock you out inside 6, he wasn't likely to knock you out at all. That doesn't equal winning, obviously.