Would Tyson have surpassed Marciano's record if he stayed on track?

Properly prepared Tyson beats Douglas. I know it's not a fact and never went down but it's difficult to see a peak Tyson losing to someone like Douglas, even Tokyo Douglas. You see, Buster was able to do his thing because Tyson wasn't doing his own thing.

 

By the start of 1990 Tyson was 37-0. So in 5-6 years he needs to win 13 bouts, that's an average of 2.6 fights a year. So 3 fights in 1990, 2 in 91, 3 in 92, 2 in 93, 3 in 94 and 2 more in 95 is 15 fights so that is definitely possible.

Also, in 1988 Mike fought 3 times before July 1st. That's 3 fights in almost half a year. And those were title defenses. In 1987 he made 4 title defenses.

These are the 80's & 90's we're talking about, not 2023 where champions fight twice a year, if that!

 

You can be as bold as you like sir. But I stand by my opinions and I'm happy to debate them as long as you'd like.

 

Fighters were fighting twice a year, pace was already slowing by then. Tyson himself was on a 2-3 fight a year schedule by the time he fought Douglas and it would have only slowed down with the trajectory he was on with Don King. Either way, Bowe and Holyfield and Lewis all beat him 2/3 times. But yeah, I guess those guys couldn't frustrate Tyson and survive, they're no Mitch Green. He'll run up 50-0 and win 3 fights that are 100x tougher than any fight he actually won.

 

Douglas had the size the jab and was able to push the smaller Tyson off. He had all the attributes to beat Tyson, and it is very debatable if any version of Tyson could of beat that version of Douglas. As for Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield, well Tyson never beat anyone on the level of those fighters. And whilst he was fantastic in his prime, and his opposition often does get underrated during his reign in the 80s. He never truly beat a great fighter in their prime, so really it's all speculation without actual context of Tyson beating anyone of the level of Bowe, Lewis, Holyfield, because theres no evidence of it.

 

I lean strongly toward this idea. Mike wasn't 100% that night. That said, Douglas did fight the kind of fight that would beat prime Mike...

No, I think Mike would have ended up either strongly decisioning or stopping Buster in 1988.

I'm not so sure he would have gotten past the prime Holyfield, Bowe, or Steward Lewis. I think at least one of them would have stopped him, literally.

 

Why bring up Mitch Green? If winning every second of every round against a fighter with height and reach advantages who was never floored is struggling then maybe you think Mike Tyson is better than the credit you're giving him!?

Food for thought.

Lesser fighters than Mike Tyson gave all 3 of them fighters hell. Oliver McCall, Hasim Rahman, Michael Moorer and even Bert Cooper ring some bells? I'm game if this is the game you wanna play?

Also, Tyson had Douglas in February, was signed to face Holyfield in June which leaves another 6 months for an opponent. That's why I placed 2 and 3 fights every other year. Tyson faced 3 opponents in 1988, only 2 in 1989 for various reasons and was on pace to fight 3 times in 1990. You don't know for fact that Mike would fall off and fight only twice a year because he did so in 1989, whether he's with Don King or without.

The thread's title is "If Mike Tyson stayed on track"...is it not?

 

Hold up. Tyson fought every single one of the fighters you just mentioned after his 3 year stint in prison and 4 years away from the ring. We have to keep his career in context. Would Tyson not be favored against Bowe, Holyfield or Lewis? We're talking about the early to mid 90's here.

Tons of heavyweights had the attributes to beat Mike Tyson and because Douglas did on a night where Tyson was possibly at his worst means he would've always beaten Mike Tyson? Not buying it for a minute. History has proven it was a total fluke whether you like it or not.

And tons...TONS of ATG fighters never beat another prime ATG. Using that as an example to knock a fighter's greatness is petty and elementary.

Which prime ATG did Larry Holmes beat? Who did Joe Louis beat? What about Jack Johnson? Or Dempsey? Or Liston? Marciano? Lewis? Who did Holyfield beat in their prime? You see using that as a barometer to measure whether a fighter can beat an "ATG" isn't sound and I wouldn't hold any weight to that method at all.

 

An on-track Tyson takes care of Bowe and destroys Holyfield. I believe he would have surpassed Marciano before he fought Lennox Lewis. That would have been a great fight and I'm not sure who would have won.

 

Against the Bowe of 92 ? highly debatable Tyson beats a peak Bowe, Bowe had the size the workrate and the skills to compete with Tyson its a close match up. Against Lewis ? well Lewis was certainly more beatable in the early 90s, but was still a very dangerous opponent as evident when he blew away Ruddock in 2 rounds, who a still good version of Tyson went 12 with. And just say for example Tyson fought Lewis in 95 or 96 without his prison stint, your also assuming Tyson doesn't have any wear and tear, his style was never made for longevity.

Tyson would of always of had trouble vs that version of Douglas at any stage of his career, Douglas had all the attributes like an ATG jab and the size to beat Tyson. And history has not proven it was a "fluke" because Tyson was dominated in the fight and KO'ed, it wasn't like Douglas landed a lucky punch on Tyson. He dominated Tyson from the opening bell and knocked him out.

Now i'm not saying Tyson was at his absolute best vs Douglas for various reasons, but in his prior fight to Douglas he showed no signs of that, destroying number 2 ranked Carl Williams in 1 round. His focus and dedication may of not been fully there for Douglas, but i still believe it's always a very tough task for any version of Tyson to beat that version of Douglas.

Yes i get what your saying but fighters like Louis, Holmes, Lewis, had longevity on their side that adds to their greatness. I also think fighters like Lewis, Holyfield, beat better opposition overall than Tyson.

Overall i like Tyson as a fighter, and i'm often the one who defends his achievements in the 80s. But his style wasn't meant for longevity, and i think people assuming Tyson with his style of fighting, managing to fight 50 fights with no wear and tear, beating the best opposition he would of beaten by far in Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield, that he goes 50-0 ? is a very bold statement and not a realistic one IMO.

 

It's possible, but guys like Bowe, Lewis, Holyfield and Moorer coming up it would have been tough. Come to think of it, had Mike beat these guys every single person on earth would have Tyson as the greatest heavyweight of all time by a country mile

 

Too many people who could have beaten him. Douglas cannot be written off, he had all the tools just didn't have the right mentality. Hoylfield might have always beaten him. He likely beats old Foreman but that's still a wild card and an ugly matchup. Bowe and Lewis were monsters and both could neutralize the peak a boo onslaught. Mercer and Witherspoon at their best might be able to pull something off.

Just too many guys that might have upset the apple cart. Tyson could potentially beat all of them, but to expect him to remain 100% focused well into the 90's and keep that same level of intensity and discipline into the ring? Ain't happening. Even if he avoids drinks, girls and jail at some point either he slips up, or someone shows up with the perfect gameplan to beat him.