Was Prime Mike Tyson Unbeatable?

What’s inaccurate? Much of this is documented by court testimony, including by Tyson himself (in the Rooney trial). In 1989, the year before the Douglas fight, Tyson testified in court that Don King was his best friend and that Cayton was cheating him and stealing from him.

Now do I think he made the right decisions as to his management? No, but there’s is not one iota of evidence that Tyson himself was troubled going into the Douglas fight by the team he himself chose. He was not a boxer in turmoil trying to free himself from King … he was King’s biggest supporter.

But he lost a fight so there has to be something wrong … right? Can’t be that Douglas beat him because Douglas was better because that doesn’t fit the narrative. So even though at this point there’s not so much as a peep from Tyson about being unhappy with his team and it’s 100% verified that Douglas’ mother died going into the fight … somehow Tyson’s management/promotional situation was so troubling to him on this particular day that it supersedes a man losing his own mother?

Please.

As for inactivity, what are you even talking about? It’s his third fight in 12 months and fourth in 18. Ali took off four freaking years. Heck even Tyson was out due to his prison stint and we don’t get excuses about inactivity … but of course he didn’t lose that fight.

 

Tyson was a very good fighter. Good power, great chin, excellent speed and defense. Was he beatable-yes! Was he not in his prime vs Douglas? Umm I believe he was. Could the fight have been different if he had his old management and trained- yes it could have but I still think Douglas was on that night and it would have been a rough go for any heavyweight period vs Douglas that night. I like Tyson more now than I did in my youth when he was knocking everyone out etc…… But to say he was not in his prime at the Douglas fight is complete baloney. Any fighter is beatable……. I will say with Tyson the thing people miss with him and don’t talk about that’s really the last time boxing was mainstream and a big deal!!!!! I will also include the 90’s in on that also but Tyson was part of that also. Boxing especially Heavyweights was a big deal in the 80’s into the 90’s. People have never gotten over Tyson loosing but the sport really hasn’t either in my opinion

 

If you think it's hating to not think Tyson unbeatable, then you're lost.

 

For me Lennox Lewis probably matches up the best H2H against all the best Heavyweights past/present, he has the size, skill, power, to deal with black/white era Heavyweights and the modern giants of today.

 

1. Common dude it was widely known that King was influencing all his decisions. It was HE who told Tyson that Cayton was screwing him and that he should fire his whole team. Yes Tyson made the call because it was HE who they worked for but in the end a 21 year old kid didn’t make that decision uninfluenced. Tyson also stated later in his life that king screwed him out of more money than anyone.
2. No one ever said that he was trying to be free of king. But his training staff using a condom with dissolved ice to treat swelling should have said something.

3. Tyson’s problems went way beyond just his management. His mother was gone a few years earlier. Cus died. Jim jacobs died. His sister died several months earlier. He had gone through an ugly divorce and wrecked a car in an alleged suicide attempt. Got into a street fight with Mitch green and injured his hand. Was floored in training by Greg page. This isn’t excuse making or creating a narrative. This is just stating facts
4. He fought Frank Bruno in February of 1989 and Douglas in February of 1990 ( one year ). Only fight he had in between during that time frame was a 93 second meeting with Williams. Pretty far cry from the amount of activity he saw between 1986-1988, especially when much of that down time was spent being up to no good.

Conclusion: Im not claiming that he was past his prime. Or trying to create a narrative. I go back to my first statement to you which was that claiming Douglas was simply “ better “ or that Tyson was overhyped isn’t that simple. That are obviously other details involved other than him just being 24 years old and losing a fight

 

I agree with the responsibility of Tyson to himself, fans, legacy, & as an example to others.
I said is much in my posts on this thread.
However the power woman have had sexually is only a small fraction of the power usurped by men where they had from limited to minimal freedom in life-in opportunities, vocation, romance, control over their bodies...
And men have been more abusive than what woman could accomplish with seduction.

Whoever has had power-as a group, statistically-have overwhelmingly been the bad guys.
This is heavily correlated with race, colonialism, being male-& straight.
None of which excuses Tyson from bad choices OR the people who exploited him.
Chief amongst them the psychopath Don King.
Who did far more damage to many fighters, great & small, than the ladieieies in question could have.

 

And for all the adversity Tyson had sex, drugs etc…. Once he lost he should have straightened out and came back even more determined. I will say maybe we never even saw the best of Tyson- truly dedicated come off a couple of losses. Sure he did good in the Ruddock fights and then it was basically prison. But the guy didn’t even hit his prime yet. It all goes back to him not being able to deal with adversity etc……. That would have been the Prime Tyson dealing with that!

 

1) Someone was always influencing Mike’s decisions. Fellow street kids when he got himself thrown in juvie for beating up grandmas to take their grocery money as a young thug; Cus when he was in Catskills; Jacobs and Cayton on the boxing business. So King became an influencer. But he was NOT unhappy with his team at the point of the Douglas fight so it’s moot. He literally said under oath a year before that King was his best friend. Whether he should have trusted Cayton or not doesn’t matter — he didn’t. Which means until he dropped him, THAT is when he was unhappy with his team, which should of been when such a thing would have influenced his in-ring performance.

Tell you what: list me three good decisions Mike Tyson ever made during his career that he made all on his own without any input or influence by anyone else.

2) The lack of an Enswell was embarrassing. But then again they’re training a fighter who you say didn’t want to train. So it’s not like he did what he was supposed to and they didn’t … but by all means, must have been the cornermen who went out there and walked into every jab and right hand, lol.

Tyson chose the people to train them. Snowell had credentials — proved himself before and after the Tyson fight. Bright was hand-picked by Tyson because he was a D’Amato disciple.

3) Life happens. Does every single thing in Mike Tyson’s life have to be perfect for him to beat up people in the ring? Yes, people due. Douglas’ own MOTHER died right before the fight and it made him stronger — because he had character. Sorry Mike was young but that’s no excuse — Floyd Patterson had issues and he was a young champion and he won fights; Wilfred Benitez was a mess (probably better off if his father wasn’t around) and he won fights. You want a laundry list of athletes who didn’t fall apart because things in their life weren’t perfect? How about Michael Jordan winning, what, four rings after his father was murdered? Matthew Saad Muhammad didn’t even know who he was because he was left on the street as a child.

So Tyson had some adversity? Boo freaking hoo. Those things didn’t all happen in the weeks and month leading up to the Douglas fight. Funny those things didn’t matter until he lost a fight. Never heard a word about his barely being able to pull himself together for Carl Williams.

4) Michael Spinks on 6/27/88. Bruno 2/25/89. Williams 7/21/89. Buster 2/11/90.

Four fights. Eighteen months. Three in the last year (from late February ‘89 to early February ‘90). That’s as black and white as it gets.

You might also note that he had a training camp for each of those fights. So he’s in the gym and in the ring far more in that time period than out of it. He’s not fat for Douglas (lighter than vs. Berbick or Tucker). He’s not rusty. He’s just not as good as Douglas.

Conclusion: Mike Tyson was in trouble from the time he was about 12 years old. He did things he shouldn’t have done before he met Cus D’Amato, after he met Cus and after Cus was gone. He wasn’t a perfect fighting machine vs. Rooney — you can see him have trouble at various times before that … vs. Bonecrusher, vs. Tucker, heck vs. Mitch “Blood” Green. The book on Tyson always was that if you survive the first few rounds he’s a different fighter, starts looking for one punch. Find me a fight that went 10 or more rounds where his head movement and use of his jab lasted from first bell to last … it doesn’t exist.

Tyson was never invincible. You can make all the excuses in the world for him but Buster wasn’t hearing any excuses — he came in with his toolset and absolutely took Tyson apart. Everything else is just trying to pretend the 42-1 favorite was really Godzilla but he slipped on a banana peel, and it just ain’t so.

 

no one’s making excuses. You’re just over simplifying and over generalizing. Tyson vs Douglas was a case where one man came to give the best performance of his career in a once in a career showing while the other came to give his worst. It was hardly a blanket representation of what types of fighters either man typically were when contrasting the rest of their careers to that evening

 

1) This thread isn’t a debate over who had the better career. Tyson did.

2) Styles make fights and just because a guy is ‘better’ doesn’t mean he would beat a particular over guy no matter how many times they fought. You know this.

3) Douglas or Holyfield could have beaten Tyson 10 times in a row and there would be people on here making excuses for Tyson and explaining why he’s better than those two and the results are just flukes. This wasn’t a fluke.

4) Every fighter every takes life circumstances throughout their career. Nothing in Tyson’s life circumstances stopped him from being his best in the ring that night in Tokyo. I’m sure most fighters who lost to Tyson can tell you some reason they weren’t 100% … but nobody goes around making excuses for them.

 

Was Tyson Prime when he lost to Douglas? Yes. Was he in peak form and at the top of his game? No. And that’s the difference.

Was Douglas a better fighter than Tyson? I doubt it strongly, but on the night, yes he was. All this talk of Tillis, Rooney, Cus, Buster’s mum (RIP) etc, are all interesting footnotes to the bottom line…an in form decent but inconsistent fighter whooped an ATG fighter who had a bad day.

It’s really that simple in my eyes.

 

Mercer was tougher than Tyson. He walked through Morrison's bombs and destroyed him. Ate up Coopers punches all night. Took bombs from Lewis. He arguably won all 3 of those fights. Handled the power of Holyfield and Witherspoon too, but you think Tyson beats him up? Mercer at his peak had a cinder block for a chin and never stopped coming forward.

Mercer had a few off nights struggling with Jesse Ferguson, sure, you can say that. But he avenged the loss, something Tyson never did in his entire career. Tyson struggled with Tillis and lost to Douglas. Every fighter has odd matchups where you'd expect them to win easily.

Tyson obviously has faster hands, but they'd both be fighting on the front foot at ring center trading blows. It would inevitably become a slug fest. Unless Tyson manages to stop him in the first 5 rounds (unlikely), I see Mercer dragging him into deep waters and drowning him. He doesn't need to be smart, he just needs to grit his teeth and survive. Tyson wasn't known for late round stamina or power.

 

i think it’s rather disingenuous of you to include the Douglas fight as one of the fights he had going IN to the Douglas fight. It really is very simple. From February of 1989 to February of 1990 he fought once. Carl Williams. 93 seconds. Saying that he fought three times in that year INCLUDING Douglas going up against DOUGLAS is intentionally misleading

 

Thank you. This sums it up perfectly and is a much better summary than those who try to say that it was a case of either Tyson being a hype job or Tokyo Douglas being a once in a life time Superman

 

PEAK Tyson was an awesome fighting machine. Extremely high ceiling. Was never built to last. I consider his career over once he went to prison. The guy that came out and fought after wasn’t the same guy. So that would put him at 41-1. Douglas beat him up good. But it happens. Was Tyson invincible no, no one is. But he had speed, two handed power, elusiveness and a great chin. He was a force.
Once the dedication and youth passed he was the youngest champion, the stamina slipped and so did the defensive technique. Being that Tyson was often the smaller man made for tough nights work for him.