When did Tyson's prime end?

It ended when he went to prison.

After beating Spinks he probably wasn't as focussed for every fight anymore, but I don't feel anything was irretrievably lost. And let's not forget that he gained in experience. But being imprisoned and not being able to train properly or fight took something out of him that he couldn't get back.

 

There's an interview with Ali in before his meet with Cooper in 1966 where he talks about how it used to be easy to do the hard training required when he was looking to be champion but how much harder it is when he reached that goal.

And wasn't Liston credited with saying something like "it's a lot harder to get up early and go out for a run when you're sleeping in silk sheets".

I think just about every champion that's reached riches and fame has gone through something similar.

But that doesn't mean they have irretrievably lost something. If faced with a setback, or just a bigger challenge, they can still get back on the horse and find the dedication that made them reach the big time in the first place.

 

Spinks ... that was the high point and Rooney was still in the picture even though hanging by a thread ..

 

I think Mike Tyson truly was a phenomenal fighter. I think physically he could have maintained that edge from 1986-1996 and I believe with a better head on his shoulders he would have.

Tyson was great between 86-96 anyway. It’s just that in the face of actual resistance his performance suffered. People blame it on not having Rooney or that he was no longer prime. That’s rubbish. Tyson looked as bad in a lot of the rounds he had with a washed up Pinklon Thomas. But when things went his way he was always great well into the late 1990s. His rematch win over Bruno is way underrated. His wins over Golota and Saverese match anything in the 1980s.

So I say his prime ended when Holyfeild beat him. But people only believe he was prime when the other guy never performed. If the other guy performed a little bit Tyson wasn’t prime. Well that logic never applies to anyone else. It’s like saying Joe Louis was only great when he knocked out Schmeling in one round and that’s why Johnny paycheck took him too long. That’s ball hang right there.

 

In some ways prison preserved him too.

 

A dictionary? There is no hope for you, none.

 

I will conceed that if Tyson fought from 1992 onwards, i don't think he would have been able to continue beyond 1996-97. The wars eventually catch up, with his lifestyle and his fighting style. He would have worn out much faster.

 

doesn't any fighters performance suffer with resistance though? this rule seems to only be placed on Tyson, if he doesn't get them out in one he is overrated?

Tyson for me looked to be slipping by the time he fought Ruddock, skills wise. I think he would have had an easier time in that fight with the head and foot movement he displayed in previous bouts. Against Razor he was stationary and relying on one punch. so to me, he was well past it by the time he got out of prison. we are talking from his last great performances in 87, 88, to being inactive due to incarceration for four years by 96, but still as good in 96?

All Holyfield showed was how much was missing from Tyson's pervious form. It's clear to see in the footage of that 96 fight. even comparing that performance to the ruddock fights is night and day, an uninspired Tyson was taking massive bombs from Ruddock, getting hurt but still remained determined, he was more robust and used to taking punches, he also showed the grit many people insist he never had.

Against Holyfled he showed signs of getting hurt in round two, he looked shell shocked by six and was running out of steam in four rounds. He looked ok against Bruno because Frank choked, but when you look at the footage you can see Tyson was still missing something, I think if anything that fight gets over rated because of the decent finish.

Personally I'd say he was still prime in the Ruddock fights but was trying something with his style that wasn't quite working. he was still very dangerous then but Ruddock was able to take the punishment, many other fighters would probably have had trouble with that. I think other fighters would have also have had trouble taking Ruddock's offence, which seems to get glossed over a bit.

 

Moron..that is all..lol

 

Wow what a dummy you truly are, double moron on this one...I cant believe you really consider yourself a smart poster when you post idiotic things you THINK are smart?????lol

 

Where can i find that quote?

 

Under your pillow....the same pillow you should get suffocated with ,with the terrible b.s you post on here....lol

 

Oh, you can't even provide evidence of this phrase that you have quoted and even put inverted commas around?

Seriously?

 

Again you are posting opinions. Not sure what your point is here.everything you stated is opinion or false.

1. No one DOMINATED

2. You think Tyson Fury dominates even without Joshua around if Klitchko was? Really this is a fact now? Lol

Extra point........

3. You picked Wlad over Joshua even ignored my thorough breakdown and based your pick on Wlads experinance and ignored age when it suited the argument.

P.S Klitchko was STILL favored over Fury in the rematch!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This would indicate the smart bettors didn't share your assumption Fury would have DOMINATED......

 

Listen dummy go find it yourself, I don't need to say much beyond that BC any moron who thinks prison is beneficial for any athlete with no training or proper nutrition still lives with mommy...lol

Prison preserved Tyson right?