Tyson versus Dempsey

What's flawed about it? There were tough fights that he stayed away from and he did cherry pick a lot of his opponents post Douglas, i don't think i need to do a run down.

Mike is overrated because of the manner of his losses and the esteem he is held in by casual fans. He never came back to win a fight after being down and he got controlled and physically overpowered and broken down in all of his losses. Could anyone do it to him? No. He was an exceptional puncher with lightening movement but ultimately he was flawed, and a certain style would always give him huge problems.

Mike's time as true world champion ended in 1990, which says a lot really.

 

True.
Tyson even complained recently that King was wrong to throw him in with Ruddock the second time.

The cherry-picking happened after Tyson had been in prison.

Well, Holyfield was taken very seriously, no doubt.
(and the Cooper scare happened AFTER Tyson had pulled out of fighting Holyfield)

And, yes, King's issue with a Holyfield match was about control, pure business. But he had no choice really, the titles were staying with Holyfield.

 

Tyson forced King to make the fight. He was bailing to Steve Wynn if King didnt make it happen.

 

Henry Tillman was a post-Douglas cherry pick, let's be honest.

 

Which fight ?

 

And what certain style was that? Was Douglas really any better than Tucker or half the fighters that beat Douglas and Tyson beat one sidedly?

 

Holyfield He was trying to get away from King around the time of the Ruddock fights.

Last week, some TV executives who insist on anonymity paid a visit to Tyson Central. There they were told, by close friends of Tyson, that while the former heavyweight champion sincerely dislikes Ruddock and relishes the prospect of beating him again, he wants nothing to do with King, for several reasons.
The most important, of course, is that Tyson has not seen one penny from the first fight with Ruddock above the $2 million he was guaranteed, even though King told him the pay-per-view receipts would drive his paycheck up to $12 million.
Now, King is saying it could take months for all the pay-per-view money to come in, but that doesn't wash when you consider that Evander Holyfield and George Foreman already have been paid for their fight, which took place a full month after Tyson-Ruddock. And it doesn't help that King still owes Tyson more than $2 million from the Buster Douglas fight, which was 15 months ago.
All of this has resulted in heightened tensions between Tyson and King and between King and Wynn, who is threatening a lawsuit if King doesn't produce a Tyson fight in the ring of Wynn's Mirage Hotel June 28.

This content is protected

 

Of course, but Tyson was coming off a terrible one sided knockout loss. Who should they have put him in with? Tyson came into that fight still showing the effects on his eye from the Douglas fight. Tillman still had two amatuer wins over Tyson which made the card interesting. I dont think Stewart was a cherry picked fight nor was Ruddock, two dangerous punchers with big knockout percentages.

 

Oh, yeah, I don't doubt that.

That was before Tyson for Ruddock again, and King still blurted out some **** about "we don't need Holyfield" in the post-fight interview.

King wanted to match Tyson with Renaldo Snipes or something.

Tyson wanted the titles back.

 

That night he put it all togeather. Before Buster Tyson was seen as close to unbeatable, there is a mentality that has to be taken in to a fight not just attributes.

Physically strong, good movement, Jab. Those are attributes that Mike has problems with.

It's clear from watching Mike v Douglas that Buster was doing a lot of things right, not that Mike was doing everything wrong.

 

Tillman was a mismatch.
Tyson-Foreman would have been better.

I agree, Stewart was credible going in, and Ruddock was a tough opponent.

 

Douglas was able to do a lot of those things because of what Tyson wasnt doing. A short pressure fighter has to move his head and be elusive to get inside against a good tall technician. Tucker was a very similar fighter to Douglas yet Tyson proved to be a more formidable challenge for him to hit consistently. Tyson stopped doing things right as early as the Bruno fight.

If Tyson would have rematched Douglas and kicked his ass the loss would have been written off like Lewis/ Rahman. Even Lewis called Rahman the Buster Douglas of the 90's. The win is overated to the max by the anti Tyson contingent. Douglas wasnt that good.

 

I would've loved to have seen Tyson-Foreman but George turned down a $4million offer to fight World Champ Tyson in early '90 & a $20million offer to fight him in '91. He rightfully didn't want to get tied-up by King's greedy contract options. To paraphrase, he said something like:

"I was more afraid of Don King & the dotted line, than i was of Tyson."

 

Well there it is, Tyson had the shortest peak of any fighter in history.

The funny thing is agree with you to a certain extent, but there is something more than that there.

Do you know how easy it would be to apply the same logic to anybody anytime they had a less than perfect performance? Too easy...

Mike looked better against Bruno in the second match than he did in the first. He was on a high, the majority favorite, but then Holyfield derailed him.

More than anything else he seemed like a fighter that was fine when things were going well for him but started to capitulate when it went past a certain point going the other way.

But yes he could have performed better against Douglas and overall he is a far better fighter, boxing math doesn't always work though, so i don't think that the Tucker/Douglas comparison says a great deal, two different fighters in any event. He was also moving his head and looking for angles quite a lot early against Douglas, Douglas' timing and movement were offstting Mikes movement.

 

Shortest Peak? :huh

I make it '86 Ribalta to '88 Spinks (10 Fights). That's longer than most by number of fights, the most important measure.

What if we compare it to George Foreman's 4 fight Peak or Jack Dempsey's ONE fight Peak?