Who gives a prime Tyson nightmares ?

And the prison guards. and the inmates, maybe he got a taste of his own line.... I'll **** ya till ya love me.
:rofl

 

If anyone has a poor grasp of history I'm telling you it is yourself.

Get your facts right for once in your life. Partying, drugs, and booze and definitely hookers ( or innocent victims, it didn't matter to the future ****** scum ) were part of Tysons life, at least 2 years before the Douglas fight. The cry babies were quite happy whilst he was doing this and knocking over stiffs..

However, typically they screamed like stuck pigs when he lost.

Now, go away and do your research, then come back with some more revisionist garbage.

 

Apparently it was the other way 'round.

 

so because tyson was not living proprely for 2 years before tokyo he was in top shape for tokyo? or that he was in topshape for the fights leading up to it as well, like smoking isn't bad for you? your argument makes no sense.

since the accepted facts are that tyson didn't prepare properly, it is your version of events that is a revision to the current accepted story. which is not a problem, revisionist history is neither good or bad by default, if recorded history was perfect it wouldn't need revising

 

Of course it makes no sense to the likes of you, and it shouldn't because you are more than likely a Tyson fanboy.

Unbiased people understand the simple truth that Tyson was partying, whoring, drinking, and doing recreational drugs and was prepared to the same standard as the Douglas fight, for at least 2 years before that.

The difference was although Douglas was perceived as yet another stiff ( hence the 42 - 1 odds ) he fought back and Tyson got fvcked.

I really don't give a toss about the opinions of idiot Tyson fanboys. I am quite happy in the knowledge that his out of ring lifestyle, and under preparedness did NOT suddenly materialise in the build up to Tokyo in 1990.

Tyson fans are not boxing fans they are simply fanboy scum. They would rather eat their own **** than give Douglas credit for exposing the fool.

Sadly not enough of them have eaten it.

 

i really don't understand, if your so clever you should be able to explain yourself better, you say he partied for 2 years, how did he do this without diminishing his physical performance? how? was he superman?

no one is taking anything away from douglas, everyone has said that but you keep parrotting ''fanboy fanboy' without a ****ing clue abou who your talking to and what they think of tyson, and ignoring every point anyone said, yet i need to grow up? whatever, have your bottle baby.

 

Try using you brain before using your keyboard and you just might get there in the end.

Tyson, after D'Amato died started to party more and train less. He was still only little more than a kid, so his natural fitness got him by, particularly fighting the kind of opponents he fought in 88, and 89.

Those 4 fights lasted a total of 9 rounds. Just look at the shape of Tyson in those four fights, and then the Douglas fight. There is no difference.

He trained no more, or no less for Douglas than he had for the previous 4 fights. He partied no more, or no less than he had for the previous 4 fights.

He just got fvcked by a man who wouldn't be bullied or intimidated by him. It isn't rocket science. He was completely exposed.

Just look at the crap they fed him afterwards, Tillman, and Stewart. If as his fanboys claim it was a matter of not applying himself properly, why not just force him to knuckle down, get back to the dedicated hard work, and put him in with someone decent?

Now you work it out for yourself just WHY that wasn't the case.

 

Tyson is also the classic case of what happens when kids get pushed too hard too early. Man the guy never had his high school years because of being in the gym preparing to beat fully grown men.

inability to maintain themselves in later life, no attention spared for learning to balance aspects of life. the pattern sets in as a teenager and repeats for decades to come.

 

Hang on a minute here.

What do you mean "particularly fighting the opponents he did in '88 and '89?"
What was wrong with them?

And then "exposed" by Douglas? Only two men ever beat what one could consider 'prime' Tyson. Douglas and Holyfield.
To me, an "exposed" fighter is one where everyone now has the book on how to beat him, and he suffers loss after loss as a result.

"Just look at the crap they fed him afterwards, Tillman, and Stewart."

Tillman was a gimme sure, but it was Tyson's first fight back after his first loss, so it's understandable.
Stewart was respectable. He gave Holyfield and later Foreman real wars. You also conveniently forget to mention Ruddock, who was among the most feared and avoided heavyweights in the game at that stage, and Tyson fought him twice when no-one else wanted a part of him.

You also fail to mention Tyson's hopeless corner in Tokyo. They didn't even have an enswell. If these guys didn't even have basic equipment with them, how can we expect them to train him properly?

 

Anyone that stood his ground with him, and the other ATG heavyweights. Tyson may still win some, but if one refuses to be intimidated, he gets discouraged.

 

foreman, ali liston, were all good mentions. Holmes is a joke dude got blasted out in 5 rounds and had a dirt nap. People want to say but he was past prime or he was old but larry holmes was younger than ken norton when he lost to tyson, no one says well norton was past prime and larry barely won. Tyson won convincingly. I will never get people who think larry is great on this thread, he is basically a fighter like klitschko who beat alot of bums but no great fighter when he was good.

People forget old foreman chin got better because older boxers are more skilled at absorbing punches and have some fat to absorb the blows. Larry could never beat mike tyson because he could never take the power of his punches. Its simple as that.