Sparred with a taller dude today and let me tell you...

nice 2.0 wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

Tyson ruled a weak era and was exposed when his luck ran out against Douglas, and exposed worse when the natural light-heavyweight Holyfield completely outclassed him.

Peak Tyson would not have beat peak Foreman. No way.

6/10

nice

Nearly everybody who follows boxing would agree with Wiggins here.

1990s Foreman would have beaten prime Tyson and Tyson knew it. Tyaon told Don King that he could fight Foreman himself if he wanted to primote a Foreman fight for Tyson's belt. Prime Tyson against prime Foreman would have been even more brutal than Foreman vs Frazier. The difference would be that Frazier somehow got up off the canvas six times. Tyson would be out cold the first or second knockdown.

Tyson also would probably have lost to either Klitschko, based on the pounding Vitaly dished out to Lennox Lewis before losing on a cut stoppage.

The unbeatable Foreman...gets the same folklore as the little 185 pound guy who wins against anybody in fantasy matches.

professor sillybottom wrote:

Tell that to Mike Tyson. Being strong and fierce and fast and most importantly well-trained will get you farther than being tall.

I was watching Tyson's fight against Lennox Lewis recently. It looked almost unfair, like a tall guy bullying a midget.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Tyson ruled a weak era and was exposed when his luck ran out against Douglas, and exposed worse when the natural light-heavyweight Holyfield completely outclassed him.

Peak Tyson would not have beat peak Foreman. No way.

He didn't train for the Buster Douglas fight. After that, his stint in the joint took a toll on his already worrisome psych and he was never the same, but not because of Buster D's. fight. Besides if you saw the fight then you should know when Buster D. was sent to the canvas he spent a bit more than 10 seconds down, had the referee counted correctly, we wouldn't be having this chat.

How insecure is a person to make a post like this? Why not just scream "i AM attractive, i AM attractive" into your bathroom mirror for some self confirmation.

doctorj wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

Tyson ruled a weak era and was exposed when his luck ran out against Douglas, and exposed worse when the natural light-heavyweight Holyfield completely outclassed him.

Peak Tyson would not have beat peak Foreman. No way.

He didn't train for the Buster Douglas fight. After that, his stint in the joint took a toll on his already worrisome psych and he was never the same, but not because of Buster D's. fight. Besides if you saw the fight then you should know when Buster D. was sent to the canvas he spent a bit more than 10 seconds down, had the referee counted correctly, we wouldn't be having this chat.

Douglas dominated the fight from the start and Tyson landed a lucky punch. The referee messed up the count and Douglas would have easily gotten up in time had he not.

Tyson also had to lose a lot of weight in a short period of time for the fight which cost him some strength. If they had fought a year or 2 earlier, Tyson would have won easily. Douglas wasn't that good.

Tyson is the "What If?".

Up until the Spinks fight no one in boxing was going to beat him. Put anyone in there and he knocks them out.

After Cus died and he fired Rooney it was all over. He went from the technical, defensive, peek-a-boo style that won him the belt to just relying on speed, power, and the one shot.

Alan

Tyson is the most dangerous Boxer in history in his weight class, his defence, transition and counter punching were superb, his speed un-matched by any heavy weight and he was one of the hardest hitters ever, under Cus wing he was totally unshakable mentally and his boxing was perfection. He's easily on any top-10 all time list. For me close to n1. Haters gonna hate.

Runningart2004 wrote:

Tyson is the "What If?".

Up until the Spinks fight no one in boxing was going to beat him. Put anyone in there and he knocks them out.

After Cus died and he fired Rooney it was all over. He went from the technical, defensive, peek-a-boo style that won him the belt to just relying on speed, power, and the one shot.

Alan

Prime Tyson was an outstanding fighter, but not unbeatable. Lennox Lewis or Evander Holyfield either one probably would have beaten him. Both of them were just overall better than Tyson.

Whenever I aparred with a lanky boxer, my first thought would always be - 'tiimmmmmberrrr'.

Coevett wrote:

nice 2.0 wrote:

6/10

nice

Nearly everybody who follows boxing would agree with Wiggins here.

1990s Foreman would have beaten prime Tyson and Tyson knew it. Tyaon told Don King that he could fight Foreman himself if he wanted to primote a Foreman fight for Tyson's belt. Prime Tyson against prime Foreman would have been even more brutal than Foreman vs Frazier. The difference would be that Frazier somehow got up off the canvas six times. Tyson would be out cold the first or second knockdown.

Nearly everybody who ACTUALLY knows something about boxing will tell you that you are wrong on this.

I once watched a kid in bootcamp dismantle a guy with judo and karate training and "belts." The kid was from my area in L.A. and I had run across him from time to time. What the guy with the formal training didnt know before he selected this kid from Whittier to challenge one day behind the barracks was that he was a street boy from a large family who had had to scrap every day in his own family and the neighborhood just to get to school and back in one piece. It happened he was naturally, fast, aggressive, and resourceful. There were no terms of combat: the kid just went straight in, grabbed a bottle off the ground and went to work. Fast. Accurate. No mercy.

Training is great but doesn't always beat talent, heart and raw speed.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Tyson ruled a weak era and was exposed when his luck ran out against Douglas, and exposed worse when the natural light-heavyweight Holyfield completely outclassed him.

Peak Tyson would not have beat peak Foreman. No way.

Oh boy, you're so wrong about it.

Tyson was a great fighter and sensational for his height, but most serious boxing fans don't consider him a top 5 all-time heavyweight. He knows himself he would have likely lost to even 42 year old Foreman, that's why he didn't fight him - despite it being potentially one of the biggest fights in history.

I read online somebody give this critique of Tyson by a former pro boxer, which seems a good summary to me.