Was prime Mike Tyson a "face first brawler"?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Jack, Oct 9, 2010.


Page 2 of 4
  1. Jack

    Jack Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,560
    67
    Mar 11, 2006
    Yeah, I agree. I think looking at those fights, even if it is right, is completely missing the point. When Talking about Ali, you don't think of the version who fought Holmes. When you think of Frazier, you don't think of the one who fought Cummings and so on.
     
    Jack, Oct 9, 2010
    Jack, Oct 9, 2010
    #16
  2. Colpolite

    Colpolite Guest

    Look at the threadstarter, it's a brit, that explains the stupidest question ever.

    Mike Tyson stalks and pressures you but with good balance/footwork/jab/head movement now compare that to Hatton is like night and day.
     
    Colpolite, Oct 9, 2010
    Colpolite, Oct 9, 2010
    #17
  3. gr33nfather

    gr33nfather Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,188
    4
    Sep 27, 2008
    nobody come close to tyson's head movement
     
    gr33nfather, Oct 9, 2010
    gr33nfather, Oct 9, 2010
    #18
    moneytheman12 likes this.
  4. Fighting Weight

    Fighting Weight Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,428
    3
    Jan 10, 2005
    Exactly. When I think of Tyson I think of the monster that tore through the division in double quick time back in the late 80's. No-one has done it since, they all hide behind bull**** politics and in the Klitschkos case the pathetic WBO strap until the real champion retired.

    We won't see the likes of prime Mike Tyson again for a while, that's for damn sure. He was a 'real' fighter, not like the bums that currently claim the meaningless straps in this pathetic HW division.
     
    Fighting Weight, Oct 9, 2010
    Fighting Weight, Oct 9, 2010
    #19
  5. Rumsfeld

    Rumsfeld Moderator Staff Member

    49,402
    15,464
    Jul 19, 2004
    I think you hit the nail on the head. Big punchers do tend to get lumped into the category of "limited brawlers". The reason for this is because, I think, the generalization tends to prove true.

    But Tyson at his best was far from limited. He was a complete fighter who made the best of his tools and maximized efficiency within his style.

    He was absolutely a good technician, and while I wouldn't classify him as a "brawler", either--he could brawl when he had to, and he could be mistaken as one when he unleashed furious combinations that appeared wild at times.

    Tyson had great head and upper body movement, and he knew how to set traps and mix up his punches accordingly.

    He was a tremendous talent at his best, although he was still beatable.
     
    Rumsfeld, Oct 9, 2010
    Rumsfeld, Oct 9, 2010
    #20
    moneytheman12 likes this.
  6. Jack

    Jack Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,560
    67
    Mar 11, 2006
    Me, "a Brit", is saying Tyson was an excellent boxer.

    MichiganWarrior, an American, is saying he was a brawler.
     
    Jack, Oct 9, 2010
    Jack, Oct 9, 2010
    #21
  7. Leon

    Leon The Artful Dodger Full Member

    40,234
    13
    Mar 14, 2010
    Why does the poll option say boxer/puncher instead of swarmer?:huh
     
    Leon, Oct 9, 2010
    Leon, Oct 9, 2010
    #22
  8. Jack

    Jack Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,560
    67
    Mar 11, 2006
    Yeah, I think this is spot on.

    I'd say that Tyson was a boxer through and through, but in certain situations, he did resort to brawling. Maybe to finish an opponent when he got a bit reckless, for example, but this wasn't what made him such a formidable opponent. The fact he had all the physical tools in the world and matched them with great technical ability, was what made him special.

    Given his physical attributes, I wonder how far he would have gone if he didn't have Cus to mould him into a technically proficient fighter?
     
    Jack, Oct 9, 2010
    Jack, Oct 9, 2010
    #23
    moneytheman12 likes this.
  9. Jack

    Jack Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,560
    67
    Mar 11, 2006
    Swarmer doesn't describe him accurately enough, I don't think. He was much closer to being an aggressive puncher.
     
    Jack, Oct 9, 2010
    Jack, Oct 9, 2010
    #24
    moneytheman12 likes this.
  10. Rumsfeld

    Rumsfeld Moderator Staff Member

    49,402
    15,464
    Jul 19, 2004
    That's the million dollar question.

    :smoke
     
    Rumsfeld, Oct 9, 2010
    Rumsfeld, Oct 9, 2010
    #25
  11. Leon

    Leon The Artful Dodger Full Member

    40,234
    13
    Mar 14, 2010
    Who do you consider to be swarmers?:think
     
    Leon, Oct 9, 2010
    Leon, Oct 9, 2010
    #26
  12. ripcity

    ripcity Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    20,449
    51
    Dec 5, 2006
    He was an aggressive mid range puncher.
     
    ripcity, Oct 9, 2010
    ripcity, Oct 9, 2010
    #27
    moneytheman12 likes this.
  13. Jack

    Jack Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,560
    67
    Mar 11, 2006
    I think Henry Armstrong is the best swarmer of all times, but there aren't a whole lot of them because of how demanding the style is. Footage isn't available but Harry Greb was a swarmer, but because of that lack of footage, I'd have Armstrong ahead of him.
     
    Jack, Oct 9, 2010
    Jack, Oct 9, 2010
    #28
  14. exumspate

    exumspate Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,471
    207
    May 6, 2010
    Isn't Armstrong Tyson's favorite fighter?
     
    exumspate, Oct 9, 2010
    exumspate, Oct 9, 2010
    #29
  15. hallelujahholla

    hallelujahholla Original Gangsta Full Member

    896
    0
    Jan 5, 2008
    Mike circa 1988 was the best heavyweight in history...not a chance in hell anyone could take him...because of his hungry mentality and bobbing and weaving...not to mention his DEVASTATING POWER.
     
    hallelujahholla, Oct 9, 2010
    hallelujahholla, Oct 9, 2010
    #30
Page 2 of 4