Tyson- did he ever get close to his true potential?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by bill poster, Nov 15, 2007.


  1. TIGEREDGE

    TIGEREDGE Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,620
    31
    Mar 10, 2007
    Duran had a rather long prime that lasted until june 1980
     
  2. Bill1234

    Bill1234 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,314
    499
    Jan 28, 2007
    I agree 100%. He did reach his full potential as a fighter, but fell short career wise. In about 1988 or so, he was as good as he was ever gonna get.
     
  3. Bill1234

    Bill1234 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,314
    499
    Jan 28, 2007
    :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :good :good :good :good :good :good :good :good :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup Great post.
     
  4. Luigi1985

    Luigi1985 Cane Corso Full Member

    4,632
    30
    Feb 23, 2006

    Very good post!
     
  5. Woddy

    Woddy Guest

    This is probably about the best sumation of Tyson reaching his potential that I've yet heard.

    We also have to remember that he was only 20 years old, and in addition to losing D'Amato, lost his mother, and soon Jim Jacobs, all around the same time or very close. That is a lot of tradgedy for a young man of 20 to overcome. Especially one with so little education, maturity, and lack of people in the world who cared about him. Let's face it, once his family was out of the picture, Tyson's only surrounding cast, were the people who were there to gain monetarily from his career. In 1988, he went through an ugly divorce, aledgedly attempted suicide, had his best trainer fired, and not long after lost his sister in 1989. Tyson was all but maybe 22 when this all happened.

    Despite all the caos in his life, Tyson managed to become the youngest champion in the history of the sport, unify the title, had 10 defenses, and was undefeated in his first 37 fights. He also later became a repeat champion after serving his 4 year jail term.

    Yeah, I'd say he fulfilled his potential.
     
  6. Griip

    Griip President of TFE Full Member

    154
    0
    Jan 28, 2007
    But Foreman, Liston and Louis are the heavyweights that have lasted the longest?
     
  7. ChrisPontius

    ChrisPontius March 8th, 1971 Full Member

    19,404
    278
    Oct 4, 2005
    Foreman and Liston, how so?

    Foreman beat up mostly tomato cans and a few borderline contenders between 1970-1973. Then he destroys Frazier and Norton. One year later he gets embarrased by Ali, gets one more noteworthy win (Lyle) where he was one inch away from losing and then gets embarrassed again, by Young and retires.
    So basically he had 4 good years. It takes a full 10 years before he launches his comeback against tomato cans, takes a lot of questionable decisions against mediocrities (Schulz, Savarese, Stewart), loses one-sided to good fighters (Holyfield, Morrison) and gets one win (Moorer).
    That's not exactly long dominance.


    Liston was dominant between '58 and '62, although it is noteworthy that he only started beating ranked contenders from the late '59. If we include '63 then he has a grand total of 4 years of domination untill getting embarrassed by a light hitting 8 to 1 underdog. Not exactly long dominance.


    Now Joe Louis, he is indeed the exception to the rule, although it did take a hard beating from Schmeling to get him to get motivated.


    Duran as mentioned earlier is another exception. His longetivity, especially given his agressive style and wild life style is more than a miracle. Truely one of the greats.
     
  8. cpnasty

    cpnasty Fight Fan 83 Full Member

    4,663
    5
    May 1, 2005
    Absurd, he was a kid when he beat Spinks. He could have been much greater than that. What a waste of talent :-(
     
  9. fists of fury

    fists of fury Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,297
    7,047
    Oct 25, 2006
    Tyson is in many ways a walking dichotomy. Physically he had gifts that most heavyweights could only dream of, even some greats.
    On the other side of the coin, he was mentally such a disaster area one wonders how he achieved anything.
    I don't think that Tyson was mentally weak per se, because as noted he went through a hell of a lot of crap for someone so young. He did well to stay focussed and in shape, at least for fights, but a lot of the misery that befell him was of his own doing.

    As Chris also said, his style basically ensured a rather short prime. He was a short guy (for a heavyweight) fighting in an era of giants. Two other short fighters, Tua and Mathis jnr, didn't get close to Tyson's level. He did really well to destroy guys much taller and often heavier than himself. People give Evander a lot of credit for coming up and being a "small" heavyweight, but Tyson was barely any bigger. In fact, when they fought Evander was more or less the same size.

    Where I think Tyson fell short was that, despite all the negatives, he could have held onto the title longer. Maybe his absolute peak would have come and gone, but with the right people (and him having his head screwed on straight) he could have held the title for a few years longer, until Bowe or Lewis reached their respective peaks.
    He certainly had the abilty; the application of effort was no longer there though.
     
  10. ironchamp

    ironchamp Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,365
    1,034
    Sep 5, 2004
    The Key word being the application of effort was no longer there. That is probably why people are down on Tyson; he was too talented to let all slip away the way he let it slip away and to that effect he didnt reach his potential in the ring because he was good enough to do more.
     
  11. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    51,259
    25,616
    Jan 3, 2007