Tyson vs. Douglas II.

Who says he'd have to be his best to beat Douglas? Douglas wasn't his best against Holyfield, either.

Tyson fought great against Tillman, Stewart and Ruddock.

The Tyson who fought those guys beats the Douglas who fought Holyfield.

Hell, a lot of guys would've beat the Douglas who fought Holyfield.

Ruddock and Stewart might have beaten the Douglas who fought Holyfield.

Douglas was terrible in his first defense. If it had been Tyson in there instead of Evander, Douglas loses against Tyson, too.

Douglas went through the motions and quit when he was on his back.

 

A fit Douglas would win again. An unfit Doughlas ....

 

No he wasn't, his skills had peaked. What Rooney gave him was better corner advice and in fight adjustments. Rooney was never going to stop him going off the rails and Holyfield was looming large as well with the likes of Bowe and Lewis just around the corner.

 

Absolutely.

Whole new level of pedigreed up and comers. Whole different ballgame than fighting guys with tons of mileage on the odometer.

As for the so called great trainer Kevin Rooney, if he was even close to that stratosphere, a million fighters would have used his services since. If he was even considered good, a ton of fighters through the years would have had him in their corner. Let alone promoters like Don King or Cedric Kushner or Main Events---he would have been part of the house staff.

 

There would be no point in facing the now fat douglass years after prison, it would be like wlad Klitschko waiting for purity to go blind and then beating him up. Nobody wants to see a meaningless fight.

Now if douglas had got in shape and tyson got his head together then yes it would be great.

 

Does anyone have any information on who Buster used as sparring partners? I remember that Oliver McCall gave a warning to Tyson that Douglas was a real good fighter and that Tyson ignored the talk... love to find out what Buster was doing in camp prior to the fight...

 

Douglas got Ko'd in 1 round to Lou Savarese. That's why the rematch never happened in the late 90's and Mike fought Savarese in Scotland instead.

 

Tyson KO'd Savarese in 38 seconds. From one punch, basically. Post fight interview was legendary though. Supposedly Tyson only trained 2 weeks so he could bury his buddy Darryl Baum.

 

Tyson's legs were shaking form the 5th round on because of poor preparation. it's ok Unforgiven, to admit Mike Tyson was less than motivated to fight Douglas in Tokyo of all places. It's ok to admit that Mike Tyson was nowhere near his best fighting shape on February 10, 1990. He took a 10 round drubbing and was able to last 10 rounds because he was the undefeated and undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, and until the very end tried his best to turn the tides and keep his belts.

Ultimately it was his own fault. No excuses there. However, at his best Douglas wouldn't have won because he was doing things to Tyson because Tyson wasn't doing what he does best. Douglas prepared for their fight, Tyson did not. It's ok to admit this!

Still the hater, I see.

 

What's funny is that a lot of the newspaper reporters at the time who couldn't stand being snubbed by Mike (some were saying Tyson was afraid to fight Foreman, even) were stating that Mike wasn't taking this fight seriously. This was reported in the newspapers merely days before the fight. These same writers and journalists claimed Tyson wasn't at his best or prepared well against Douglas. Now why would these writers, the same who badmouthed Tyson for being a *****, claim he didn't take Douglas seriously? Wouldn't they be celebrating the fact that he lost to a guy named Buster? Wouldn't they be celebrating that Tyson lost and got beat up badly in the process?

 

Did a little research...
Savarese KO 1 Douglas 6/25/98
Tyson - Douglas proposed in early August of 1999 for 10/2/99
Tyson - Douglas nixed later in August of 1999 because Douglas is reported to be 300 lbs, making him an unsuitable opponent in the eyes of team Tyson (rightly so).
Tyson KO 1 Savarese 6/24/2000

Between Savarese - Douglas and Tyson - Savarese, Savarese went 1-1 against high level competition, while Douglas went 2-0 against very low level competition. While Savarese - Douglas probably indirectly led to a Tyson rematch not happening, it didn't directly lead to Savarese replacing Douglas against Tyson in June of 2000.

 

Well I mean, it kind of did. Nobody wanted to see Tyson-Douglas after Buster got flattened by Savarese. Tyson was shopping for names. Foreman was also mentioned as a Tyson comeback opponent in 1998 but George was making a fortune with his grill. Also, Finkel figured Savarese was a big guy and started preparing Mike for Lennox Lewis. And of course Golota was next in line.

 

I guess my original point was that some fighters and promoters would've jumped on that situation. Team Tyson could've seen Douglas as an easy mark and avenged the loss. Promoters could've totally sold it to the unwitting public, a la Tyson-McNeeley, billing it as a chance for Tyson to avenge the loss (or can Buster do it again!?!?), and making excuses for the loss to Savarese.

The fact that Team Tyson rejected a bout that was pencilled in for October 1999 because they knew Douglas wouldn't be competitive... that doesn't happen much in boxing.

Or did Team Tyson fear that, despite Douglas' reported weight of 300 pounds at that time, Douglas had Tyson's number and would train like mad for those two months and pull off another upset? Far fetched?