What type of chance would Tim Witherpsoon have vs Mike Tyson in 1986-1990?

Green was belted across the ring for 10 rounds the only round he came close to winning was the 8th

Smith basically hung on for dear life .

Tucker did well in the early rounds but eventually was beaten (Tyson was outjabbing Tucker from round 7 on)

Because those three lasted the distance does'nt mean that they where ever close to winning.

 

Wrong,

The Smith fight was a fix, and Witherspoon was blackmailed into taking a dive with the understanding that if he hadn't he would test positive for drugs, which he did anyway. Spoon stated this in interviews years later, and actually wound up filing a multi-million dollar law suit against Don king productions for sabotaging his career.

Tim Witherspoon's loss to Boncrusher Smith was not a legitimate victory for Smith.

 

LOL, Actually the lawsuit was about lost earnings in the Bruno fight.

And having watched Smith/Whitherspoon I can think less painful ways of fixing a fight

The Smith fight was arranged so late as well, I seriously doubt there was time to put a fix in.

The truth is Whitherspoon wasted a potentially amazing talent because of lack of motivation and drug abuse, he is pin up child of The Lost Generation.

 

Good post

 

Witherspoon; one of the biggest underachievers of his generation. A zinging jab, decent physical tools and thudding right hand. In the right frame of mind he would have been somewhere between Tucker and Douglas in a match-up with Tyson.

Tim had the power to shudder Tyson with that right and the speed and technique to land it, his jab would have been a significant weapon too. Tyson of course has edges in speed, agility and raw power.

Good fight scuppered by Witherspoons contractually inspired 1 round knockout loss to Smith.

 

Tubbs was not fearful of him and neither was Berbick. Even if they were all afraid it doesnt mean that Tyson used intimidation tactics rather all he did to bring fear to his opponents was brutally assualt and KO the fighter that preceeded them. Irregardless, Tyson would have beaten them whether or not they came to fight.

Spinks would have always been the better win regardless of whether or not Tyson beat Tim.

If that's the case then Dempsey, Liston, Foreman they all got "overhyped." They were punchers, consequently the public will always develop a fascination with them. The difference is that Tyson brought a level of technical competance that was never seen before from a puncher. His speed was incredible, his defense was stellar and his pure aggressive yet technical style combined with his power made for a fan friendly style. In retrospect he was as good as they said he was for a while. In the Lewis fight those who backed Tyson did so on the premise that Lewis's "shaky" chin would do him in. That's why I picked Tyson.

When the early KO did not happen Tyson in general continued to assault his opponents and score a mid rounds KO or win a lopsided decision. Fergeson, Tillis, Green, Ribalta, Smith, Thomas, Tucker, Biggs, Ruddock 2x and Nielson are fighters who went 6 rounds or more against Mike and still lost. Then of course there is Douglas, Holyfield and Lewis but the key thing is that Tyson, when he was relevant, never lost a fight in which he was ahead after 2 rounds. So the notion that you have to get Tyson into the later rounds to beat him is nonsense. Most Tyson fights looking back have been decided within the first 2 rounds. Douglas, Holyfield and Lewis dominated early. Douglas won the first 2 rounds against Tyson, Holyfield (first fight) won the second round with the first being even or for either fighter, Lewis won the second round of thier fight in 2002. So he doesnt fall apart as the rounds wear on.

Evander Holyfield once said that the only man of which he knew that can outwork him in the gym was Mike Tyson. Tyson had a great heart, from his rise from poverty to success in boxing takes heart to stomach what he went through. During the death of D'mato and Jacobs and his ugly divorce to Robin Givens being on public display he continued to win convincingly despite the drama around him. His will to win was very present in the Douglas fight after taking the beating that Buster administered throughout that fight. It was the first time in his career he was losing in such convincing fashion. Yet in the 8th round, he landed what could have been a fight ending uppercut- was that not the will to win? The moment Tyson fell out of love with being a fighter was the moment that Tyson began openly act on his frustrations. Getting off the deck to win a fight is not a criteria for greatness because frankly I believe you shouldnt be on the deck at all

 

Amen to the above poster - the notion that you had to only be a "skilled big man who showed no fear" to beat Tyson is simply garbage.

It's a damn shame he split up with Rooney when he did, you could see the end coming from then on.

D'Amato's death and Rooney's firing weakened Tyson to such a point that Don King killed him. Look at the goons in his corner during the Douglas fight - they didn't even bring a ****ing enswell and were holding a rubber glove to his face...what the **** was that?

 

Around 1986, he would have a decent chance, especially if he made it to the late rounds.After 86, forget it.

 

What is going to change if he makes into the later rounds?

 

\

I think he would have a good chance of winning, but it wouldn't be much more.