Why did Mike Tyson fail to KO James Tillis in ‘86?

I have to admit, Mercer could be uneven (his loss to Holmes definitely seemed very strange after the Morrison win...but hey, two different styles, and Mercer probably, understandably underestimated Holmes a bit).

But Mercer could be quite a warrior...to be honest I'm amazed Seldon ever won a title in the 90s and Mercer didn't (although his at-the-time-lightly-regarded WBO belt could be seen as a title in retrospect).

 

Mercer definitely lost focus for many fights. But then he comes out of obscurity to give both Holyfield and Lewis hell in back to back bouts. The two best fighters he ever faced. He did struggle with certain styles, ie. the 80's guys with skill over power: Damiani, Ferguson, Holmes, Witherspoon.

And Seldon had some tools but lacked, I don't know...focus I guess!? He showed heart against Tucker but lost it against McCall, Bowe and Tyson. I think he's an example of how tough it is to get to the top and stay there.

 

Seldon kind of reminded me of Mike Weaver (of course, they had different styles, plus Bruce probably wasn't as good a fighter as Mike) in that way you mentioned, seeming lack of focus. He'd do startlingly well in one fight then seemingly turn into a zombie for others.

 

A lot of those 80's guys were inconsistent, Weaver definitely being one of em. And don't forget...Seldon turned Joe Hipp's face into hamburger!

 

Not on par, obviously Tyson has much better achievements but when you comapare Tyson’s achievements and overall greatness to Holyfield’s, Tyson is closer to someone like Morrison than he is to Holyfield

 

More or less what you say. Tyson was still improving, he hadn't being a pro for two minutes at this point, Tillis was a very good contender with experience. If this had been a twelve rounder then we could have been looking at a draw at the very least, it was close at the end.

 

I disagree 100%. I don't think anyone on this forum would agree with you. This is as close to sounding like a troll as anyone on this forum.

 

Jesus Christ.

 

Obviously it’s a bias statement lol

 

I’ll admit I don’t even agree with that our other debate just got me going

 

I was at the fight. Lots of folks in the audience thought Tyson lost the fight. And Tillis was brought in as an opponent to be another highlight reel ko. He had been ko'd in 4 of his previous 5 fights.

It was a bout where live in the audience was a lot different than watching it on tv. Sometimes bouts are like that. This is an example of it & Tyson was barely landing anything. especially clean punches--those were all Tillis.

 

I have to rewatch it. I remember that it was about Tillis lasting and being competitive than Tyson having to scramble to get the win but fresh eyes can’t hurt.

 

Morrison was crap. No comparison with Tyson.

On a greatness scale where Holyfield is 100, Tyson might come in at 80.
Morrison would be minus 100.

 

Damiani was better than Morrison.

42 year old Holmes was much better than Morrison.

 

I dunno. Holyfield was a great fighter but his best heavyweight win is still his win against Bowe in their second fight.