Why a prime Tyson is better than both Lewis and Holyfield

the Tyson that annihilated Spinks with Rooney, I think could put them both away, I have said before that Holyfield always had his number, but Tyson on that particular night was so flawless, Douglas wouldn't have stood a chance

 

But why wasn’t a prime Tyson better than Buster Douglas?

(By the way, some dogs just kind of pick at their breakfast.)

 

Tyson had 11 total fights when Cus died. When Cus died Tyson had 6 completed rounds under his belt.

So after Cus died Tyson powered to the title, unified all the belts and convincingly won 10 fights with titles on the line. By the time he lost almost half a decade had passed since his death.

That really sounds like a guy who was struggling to come to terms.

You'd be better off parading out the post Rooney off the rails story rather than Cus as it's a stronger argument.

Slagging off his main (perceived) opposition (Lewis and Holyfield) to better your Tyson claims has always been a desperate shallow act. If an argument can't be made for the man via his own merits and achievements then you are pushing copious amounts of excrement uphill.

I'm partial to Tyson being a bit of a mental midget and going off the rails and discarding the best guy for him. I'm not partial to automatically assuming he would have blown thru Lewis and Holyfield under ideal circumstances. It's a tough debate.

At the end of the day he simply didn't have what it took mentally to have a long reign and seperate himself from his peers and almost peers. Getting locked up didn't help as he may or may not have went on to have a better career than the one he did actually have Cus or no Cus.

 

Nothing backs up saying his prime was all that great tbh. He doesn't have that elite win and he lost to Holyfield twice n Lewis when they did fight. I can excuse Williams n McBride losses but the Douglas fight is the biggest fumble I can think of a favourite in any sport making. Not avenging it is another fumble. I always say he was a much needed spark in the sport after Ali but that was for his power n excitement imho.

I will defend him against his criticisms against his heart bcuz I didn't see quit against him against Ferguson, Tillis n Ruddock twice when neither men to me looked intimidated unlike say a Spinks. Holyfield 2 was the only time but I get critiquing him for biting that fight was wild.

 

Holmes was kind of kicking his ass till he got KOed, overrated defense. he's a great but Holyfield has his number and prob. Lewis too.

 

Pinklon Thomas had a great chin b4 succumbing. Showed good recuperation abilities too. Also has a book out too I plan on getting.

This content is protected

 

Holmes didn't win a round.

 

Just watch it, I felt like he was landing pretty nicely for a completely washed guy vs. a "prime destroyer of worlds."

 

Watched it about 43 times. Even well past his best Holmes was a very awkward customer. He was mostly fighting for survival and it's about the only time I've seen him look dare i say scared in the ring. He was mostly fighting for survival and his years of experience and durability still made him a tough out. I thought it was actually a superb performance from Tyson, one of his best. He had to stay patient, bide his time, set things up and he did.

No-one looked like stopping Holmes thereafter. He's still the only guy to stop Holmes, green, prime or old.

 

Are you having a laugh mate?

 

Tyson was wonderfully gifted physically but he had a serious flaw that became apparent to the inner circle very early on. He could take physical punishment & in the right frame of mind could overcome a bit of resistance, but as John said, he was a mental midget. There was an interesting quote from him about the Douglas fight that sums him up perfectly. " Sometimes a guy will just break your will in a way & you just say f*** it " Could you see Holyfield uttering those words?

There was a reason why he was trained to end fights ASAP. Because they knew the longer a fight lasted the more potential the flaw has to reveal itself, & it did a few times even in winning fights. Even when winning he could become listless & disinterested. When we look at the Douglas loss the most common reason used is that he didn't train properly, & he didn't, but he didn't for Bruno or Williams either, But with Bruno, as with Ruddock later he knew he'd win with sheer physicality & Williams lasted 93 seconds. With Douglas he realised very early that the resistance was going to require more & he just didn't have that tool in his bag. The sloppiness that people point to as him being poorly trained was the flaw that'd been there his whole career.

So IMO Tyson was physically more talented than Holyfield & Lewis, but that's not to say that he'd ever beat them prime for prime. I think at certain points he could have beaten them & I actually picked him to beat Holyfield in 1991 but I'm less & less convinced the more I think about it. Holyfield was much smaller in the late 80's & early 90's & may not have been able to overcome that problem but he always had the antidote to the Tyson venom & it wasn't physical.

 

Whether one agrees or not that's a bloody good post.

 

I look forward to that.

 

Thanks John.