Was Mike Tyson a cherry picker in the 1990's?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Mendoza, May 7, 2019.



  1. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,264
    Jun 29, 2007
    You are better off letting Bojak reply. News flash Valuev did not want the fight with Vitlai, night did Haye. They pulled out of the opportunity. You were not aware of that. Chambers was Ko'd out of the top ten by Wlad. Ustinov was never ranked high. And like I told you Vitali fought 5 ranked opponents during his run and was active. Wlad fought Chagaev and Povektin.

    Stiverene was a bogus rank, Peter actually beat top ranked fighter like Toney 2x and Maskeav, and a decent MCcline.

    If your eyes tell you Botha was a good as Peter, please get them checked. I suspect the problem may not be the eyes...

    Again Tyson's lone decent win in the 1990s' was vs Razor Ruddock. Bruno was good in the 1980's, Tyson beat him on his last fight.
     
  2. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    69,970
    23,858
    Feb 15, 2006
    Ruddock was probably the best opponent that Tyson could have arranged after the Douglas loss.

    Douglas decided to defend against Holyfield, and that left Ruddock as the best of what was left.

    After that Tyson goes to prison.

    After he comes out of prison, the belts have all gone their separate ways.

    He picks off the weakest belt holders first, and then he has no option but to fight Holyfield if he wants to be lineal again.

    After he looses to Holyfield, he never again fights the top men, except when he gets a shot at Lewis's belts.

    Post prison he never fought a top contender, except when there was a title on the line.

    Pre prison he seems to have made much bolder picks.
     
    Sangria, Golden_Feather99 and Bokaj like this.
  3. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,188
    9,760
    Jan 4, 2008
    What fighters that Tyson hadn't already beat were better than Stewart, though? If Tyson was cherry picking there must have been much more obvious threats out there, so who were they? Guys he hadn't already soundly defeated?

    The only ones I can see are Ruddock and Holy. He faced Ruddock twice the next year and was scheduled to fight Holy after him.

    Stewart and Ruddock x 2 is a about as good a comeback he could make to become the natural contender. And I just don't see the guys he supposedly avoided. Who were they? What would be a non-cherrypicking comeback, according to you?


    We are all here in agreement that they were weak opponents, but most of us feel that you're entitled to a couple of tune-ups after such a long lay-off. Vitaly and Ali went straight at top contenders and credit to them for that, but a couple of easy tune-up non-title fights isn't my definition of cherrypicking.

    If he had continued like that the next year as well, yes then fans would have started to become impatient, but he was soon back hunting titles.



    What?! Was it a setup that McCall KO'd Lewis and then lost to Bruno? This is just pulled out of thin air.

    I agree that Tucker-Seldon wasn't the strongest match-up for the vacant title, but you still have to provide some sort of evidence to back up a claim of a set up. Especially one that Tyson was complicit in. Because even if it was a setup, he can hardly be blamed if he wasn't involved. He just went after the title.

    I'm waiting to see some actual evidence that it was set up that Bruno and Seldon would win their titles. If you can't produce any, you should stop claiming it.

    And who would you have want to see him face in 96 if not the title holders?

    Better than McNeely and Mathis overall but not great opponents. But he was coming back after being away for two years and it wasn't like he held any titles hostage.


    We agree that they weren't good opponents, but he was coming back from inactivity in both cases and wasn't defending any titles. So I wouldn't call this cherry picking.

    It was also only for 1 year in total, so it would be an even much bigger stretch to say that he was cherry picking for the total of 5 years he was active in the 90's


    You keep saying Seldon's title win was a set-up without producing any sort of evidence. Put up or shut up.
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2019
  4. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,188
    9,760
    Jan 4, 2008
    I had a pretty long answer to this that I lost, hence the delay.

    My top 10 (Tyson excluded) would be Lewis, Holy, Bowe, Ike, maybe... and then there isn't much to separate Bruno, Ruddock, McCall, Mercer, Tua, Moorer, Morrison, Holmes and Foreman.

    So you could say he beat none or you could say that he beat three without being really out of line with either answer imo. But answer me, what has this do with if he was a cherry picker or not? It doesn't really. It's just one of your sad attempts to put down the many fighters you don't like as much as possible. A pretty pathetic state of affairs for a so called boxing fan.

    More interesting in this discussion is who he faced, who he didn't and why. Rainer already gave you a very good break down of that, but you of course ignored it.

    Mercer had a short stint as top contender at about the time that Tyson went to jail. When he came out, Mercer was unranked.

    Morrison was ranked for a short while when Tyson was gone and lost to Lewis shortly after Tyson's return. He was unranked and had no title and was shortly after diagnosed with HIV. A fight with him didn't make much sense.

    Moorer had no title when Tyson came out of prison. It made more sense to go after the guys who had titles. He won the IBF title in June of '96, but Tyson would lose his titles to Holy just five months later, making the window for a unification small indeed.

    McCall had lost his title to Bruno, so Tyson fought him instead.

    Foreman almost never faced a ranked fighter if he couldn't win titles from him, so I don't think a fight between them ever really was up for discussion after Tyson lost his titles and not when he had regained two of them either.

    Bowe also had his glory days when Tyson was in prison and was beaten pillar to post by Golota and retired soon after he came out. Tyson-Bowe seemed to be the fight things hopefully were building up to, but Bowe had slipped much more than what most realised at the time.

    Lewis was probably only next to Bowe in most's estimation when Tyson got out of prison, but he held no major title and there wasn't much time for him to challenge Tyson's for his, since he lost them to Holy.

    Lewis was in the process of winning those titles when Tyson came back once more, and Tyson himself eased back into things after the second lay-off. But it's hard to accuse Tyson of avoiding Lewis, since they met up a couple of years later. At a time when Tyson's chances in all probability was smaller than they would have been in the mid 90's. But it was a bigger fight in 2002.

    Ike was unranked when Tyson came out of prison, entered the lower end of the rankings in '96, I think, and had his last fight in March of 1999, when Tyson was banned. So there wasn't any real window there.

    The window for facing Tua during the 90's was mainly in late 1999, but Tyson was easing back into things after his lay-off by then. A fight would probably have been possible in 2000-2001, but I don't know if it was ever talked about.
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2019
    Golden_Feather99 and dinovelvet like this.
  5. dinovelvet

    dinovelvet Antifanboi Full Member

    57,005
    17,354
    Jul 21, 2012
    Valuev complained the contracts given to him were not fair. Vitali had the power to make the fight yet it didn't happen.
    Vitali and Burnd Bounter issued a challenge to David Haye - beat Chisora for a crack at Viitali. He destroyed Chisora and Vitali cherry picked Manny Char.

    Hogswollop. He got ranked that high for beating Arroela who spent 6 years ranked in the top 10. Arroela who spent 6 years ranked in the top 10 i said!!!
    Sam Peter straight up sucked. He lost to Toney first time out and went life n death with short notice McCline. Arroela moped the floor with McCline.
    When an era is poor , average fighters like Peters and Stiverne get a high ranking. Peter in the 90's would have been Samson Pu'ha.
    The eye test cleary shows Peters was no better if not worse than Frank Botha.

    That win for Tyson is as good as Vitali's best comeback win.
     
  6. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,264
    Jun 29, 2007

    You did not directly answer the questions. Well you sort of answered question #1, but you listedmore than 10. Ruddock doesn't belong and I can prove it. Neither does Bruno as other fighters had better wins. I'd define better wins as more top ten wins and being higher ranked opponents.

    Once again:

    1 ) Please give me your top 10 heavyweight in the 1990’s please. 10, not 13 please.

    2 ) How many people on that list did Tyson beat in the 1990’s? 0, or 1? You tell me.

    3) How many people didn’t Tyson fight on your list? 0 or 1, you tell me.

    4 ) Do you think Tyson, if we wanted to could have fought better opposition, aside from Holyfield? Yes or no.

    That's it. Thank you.
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2019
  7. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,264
    Jun 29, 2007
    Problem #1 here is we are talking about a decade of boxing and Tyson aside from losing to Holyfield 2x beat only one decent guy ( Ruddock ) , as defined by amount of wins over top ten ranked opponents, or beating a highly ranked opponent. The Ruddock fight is not what I'm talking about, its the other 4 I mentioned.

    A tune up fight for a top ten opponent should be a top 20-30 type of guy, not McNeely, Mathis Jr, or Norris. That is cherry picking. None of these guys were in the top 40 at the time, I think. Botha was a safe fight too. I could name 15 better at that time.


    It was hardly a set up fight.

    McCall was big, durable and can punch. He floored Tyson by the way in sparring, perhaps a reason the two never met! He also beat Seldon for what that's worth.


    Let's start with Seldon

    Okay, the year was 1995. The top ten ring magazine annual ranked fighter in 1994 were

    1. [url]George Foreman[/url]
    2. [url]Oliver McCall[/url]
    3. [url]Riddick Bowe[/url]
    4. [url]Michael Moorer[/url]
    5. [url]Lennox Lewis[/url]
    6. [url]Herbie Hide[/url]
    7. [url]Larry Holmes[/url]
    8. [url]Henry Akinwande[/url]
    9. [url]Jorge Luis Gonzalez[/url]
    10. [url]Lionel Butler[/url]

    Seldon is not even rated! He became rated in 1995 after being old man Tucker. Going into the WBA vacant title match, set up by a certian wired haired promoter who at the time was at the peak of his power, we have two non top ten guys going at it. Is this a vacant title world title match to you? There's my proof.

    If you're going to have a vacant title fight, at least two guys should be ranked, and one highly ranked. This was not the case. I rest mine. Agreed or do you disagree viewing this as an acceptable vancat title match?


    Non cherry picking would be the top ten fighters from 1996

    1. [url]Evander Holyfield[/url]
    2. [url]Lennox Lewis[/url]
    3. [url]Mike Tyson[/url]
    4. [url]Michael Moorer[/url]
    5. [url]Andrew Golota[/url]
    6. [url]Ray Mercer[/url]
    7. [url]Henry Akinwande[/url]
    8. [url]David Tua[/url]
    9. [url]Riddick Bowe[/url]
    10. [url]Tim Witherspoo[/url]n
    The problem is everyone on that list could box and punch. Not the type of cherry pick Tyson matched up really well against. Well maybe Witherspoon who was old by then would have been easy for Tyson, but Tyson didn't meet him in the decade before by design.

    As I said before they aren't even good sparring partners. The goal was to let Tyson blow out easy marks, and fool the public that he was back. A smart management play.

    Bruno was unranked going into this WBC Title fight. Color him lucky to fight MCCall as many others were better at that point in time. The fight was a dull one, Bruno out boxed and almost gassed himself vs. a listless McCall who just did not seem to want it on that night. So I would say McCall was worthy of a vacant title shot, but Bruno who ended up winning was not. Not a bad vacant title match. Not a good one either.
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2019
  8. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,188
    9,760
    Jan 4, 2008
    No, you're being silly. I did answer the first 3, that you'd didn't like the answer is another thing. If it was 11, then shave Morrison off.

    But I see now that I might have missed nr 4, which is the only relevant one for this thread really. I have answered it numerous times, of course, but perhaps not in a single answer.

    I think Ruddock was the best one to fight to get his shot in Holyfield. Aside from Ruddock and Holy, I don't know if there was anyone really better out there that he hadn't already beaten than Stewart. Foreman, yes, but I don't see him facing Tyson without the possibility of becoming the champion. Maybe Witherspoon, as well, but not much in it any way.

    Certainly there were better guys than McNeely and Mathis jr, which I have said several times, but I have no problems with a couple of easy tune-ups.

    And I have also said several times that I think it's only logical for him going after the major titles next, even though Bowe and Lewis looked like the most dangerous opponents at the time. But you think it's cherry picking to go after the big titles? A yes or no on that. And no talk of "set-up" without proof.

    When he came back in 1999, there were of course better opponents than Botha and Norris, but he had been away for two years and had no titles to defend. So no problems with two such fights in six months really.

    Now you answer me, which guys should he had faced and when to not be a cherry picker?
     
  9. Rainer

    Rainer Active Member Full Member

    883
    618
    May 2, 2019
    You keep avoiding the fact that Tyson was out of the ring for 5 and half years of that decade!
    Plus the fact that several of those you have listed in posts were only ranked whenTyson was in prison.
    I have a very strong feeling that had he fought them when they were unranked you would be jumping all over it!
    You penalise Tyson for going after the WBA and WBC title belts and that's just ridiculous.
    I don't see any balance or objectivity in your arguments at all,you seem determined to pursue your line of thought in the face of cold facts.
     
    Sangria and Golden_Feather99 like this.
  10. Rainer

    Rainer Active Member Full Member

    883
    618
    May 2, 2019
    Why do you continually ignore the fact that Tyson was only active for4 and a half years of the90's?
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2019
    Sangria and Golden_Feather99 like this.
  11. Rainer

    Rainer Active Member Full Member

    883
    618
    May 2, 2019
    Tyson could only have fought a ranked Tua in 96 and up to Jun 97,after that he was incarcerated.
    Morrison was not ranked while Tyson was active in the 90's.
    Foreman was no8 at the end of 95 below both Seldon no 6, and Bruno no7 .
    Foreman was unranked the following year,Foreman made the ranking again at the end of 97 Tyson did not have a licence to box then.
    Tyson could only have fought a ranked Ike in 99,when he was coming off of his suspension.
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2019
    Sangria, Golden_Feather99 and Bokaj like this.
  12. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,264
    Jun 29, 2007
    Answer in the format I provided.

    If you think Ruddock belongs on the 1990’s top ten I think not.

    I listed 4 weak opponent picks. Are you asking me to find better opponents? That would be too easy. I have a busy week and won’t have time to reply with detail.

    Once again answer the questions quickly in the format I provided
     
  13. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,264
    Jun 29, 2007
    Should I extend the cherry picking into the 00’s to make up for the jail time?
     
  14. Rainer

    Rainer Active Member Full Member

    883
    618
    May 2, 2019
    You made the criteria and loaded the format to your own slant.
    My point is Tyson, whom I actively dislike, fought 7 ranked contenders in the 4 and half years he was active in that decade.
    Objective posters would surely cut him slack for taking on McNeeley and Mathis after coming out of 4 years of prison.I think you have lost this one Pal.
     
  15. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,188
    9,760
    Jan 4, 2008
    Ok, let's say Ruddock doesn't belong in the 90's top 10, since he didn't do much after getting mauled by Tyson twice. What does it matter? You have already agreed he was the best contender out there together with Tyson, so obviously nothing remotely close to a cherry pick. That he didn't achieve much later doesn't even come in to this since Tyson hardly can be blamed for not reading the future, can he? He could only go after what Ruddock actually had done at the time, not what he would or wouldn't do.

    But of course you understand this fully well and only try to change the subject with "the format you provided", that has little to do with the subject of this thread, for the simple reason that you've been completely owned on the threads actual subject.

    I have indulged you and answered your questions in a manner that didn't deviate as much from the actual topic as you would have wished. That's what you're going to get. If you want people to answer your questions "in your format", start a thread with them and see if anyone can be bothered. But don't start a thread on another subject and then try to change it into something else just to try to get away from the fact that you're losing the argument badly.

    If you won't answer my question, I'm done discussing with you.

    Because this is the question that matters. If you think he cherry picked you can't refer to guys that might look better than his actual opponents now 20-30 years later, even though they might have peaked when he was away from boxing and on the way out when he came back. You have to actually look at the options at the time and which options you'd say was clearly preferable to the ones he chose.

    So once again:

    Which guys should he had faced and when to not be a cherry picker?
     
    Sangria and Golden_Feather99 like this.