I don't get it. He was always called a new/samoan Tyson coming up through the ranks, and people still refer to him as a poor mans Tyson in debates and talk about how similar they were. I don't see the similarities, they're both short, hit hard, and are durable but that's it. Stylewise they are very, very different, Tua has always reminded me a lot of Marciano with the way he slips and parries shots and in his stance. Anyone else think that Tua is more of a poor mans Marciano than a poor mans Tyson?
Because there wasn't a fighter that fought sucessfully like Tyson until Tua. Short squatty knockout artist.
On the flip side of the coin, a fair few people compared Mike Tyson to Rocky Marciano early in his career. An equaly inapropriate but popular comparison.
I think the Marciano/Tyson comparison derived more from when Tyson was trying have more starting consecutive ko's in a row than Marciano. Rocky Marciano started his career with 16 in a row and Tyson was trying to beat it and succeeded with starting his career with 19.
He should've just carried Holmes' jockstrap, it would have been much quicker and easier. I'm sure Larry would have given it to him if he asked politely.
:rofl Man I haven't seen the Holmes-M. Spinks fights in awhile I'll check them out & maybe score them possibly before this year is over.
Interesting. I understand that he was also interested in beating Tommy Burns's record for the most back to back knockouts in title fights.
Also interesting. Burns had quite a bit of title fight ko's between after he beat Jack ' Brien in 1907 and before he lost to Jack Johnson in 1908. It toke less time for Brien to achieve those ko's too because he fought so often and that was just in about two years.
