Were the Tyson comparisons justified?

Tyson had 27 fights before he fought for a title, even though he was young and very busy they built him the right way. If Itauma had 27 fights before he fought Hrgovic I’m sure the outcome would have been different.

 

Not at all. The British media are just sychopantic arse lickers desperate for another golden goose.

 

Tyson got exposed early on by being knocked out by Buster Douglas. Who was a far, far bigger underdog than Hrgovic.

Itauma looked very impressive and very talented up until this point just like Tyson did when he was young. So there was nothing wrong with comparing the two. It's just the Tyson fanboys get all sensitive when you compare anyone to him!

If Itauma had faced a lesser fighter for the title like Trevor Berbick with 4 losses and 1 draw, he'd be the world champion now. Hrgovic being so granite chinned, tough, seasoned , experienced and confident was the wrong move for a super talented but inexperienced and untested young fighter.

Highly likely Itauma won't have as many as 7 losses to his name at the end of his career like Mike Tyson has.

 

The funny thing is if Itauma had faced Frank Sanchez for the vacant title, or someone like a Martin Bakole, Jared Anderson. He'd have destroyed them early and all the threads now would be how he's better than Tyson!

He's clearly a massive talent. He just got rushed far too soon, and they chose the ****ing wrong guy to face!

As always Mike Tyson is being overrated like he was an untouchable, unbeatable mythical God. When clearly that actually wasn't the case, see the Buster Douglas fight, and see some other early fights were he went the distance and didn't look that impressive.