Port Vale Devil
Full Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 3,830
- Supports
- Port Vale
Tyson was great, although not as good as Holyfield or Lewis. The 90's was insane.
Great video for 90s heavyweights
Tyson was great, although not as good as Holyfield or Lewis. The 90's was insane.
Wasn’t Tyson scared of fighting Foreman? The story is that his trainer made him watch many times Foreman’s duel with Frazier (where Foreman demolished Frazier) in order for Tyson to learn the hazards of fighting much bigger boxers. So when the time came for Tyson to potentially fight Foreman, Tyson said that he didn’t want to have nothing with that beast.I would have LOVED to see Tyson V Foreman. If Tyson doesn't go to prison I think it happens.
The reason he is used is because he is a good boxer that was dealt with. A far higher standard than most of what Fury and Wilder have fought. Ortiz I didn’t see a point in mentioning as he beat wilder from pIllar to post and even though the right hand bailed Wilder out again. It shows how corrupt boxing is that the judges had Wilder in front in their last fight. Because there was no chance.And please can we stop talking about guys like Povetkin like they're former killers when they aren't. How can we use Povetkin, who Joshua fought when he was 39 years old ffs but discredit Wilder for beating Ortiz who was also 39 at the time? Ortiz looked an absolute killer that not many people wanted to fight as well but Povetkin is for some reason held up higher because he's more known to UK fans because he's fought Joshua and Whyte
Neither wanted to fight the other although people always wondered about the what if of them fighting.Wasn’t Tyson scared of fighting Foreman? The story is that his trainer made him watch many times Foreman’s duel with Frazier (where Foreman demolished Frazier) in order for Tyson to learn the hazards of fighting much bigger boxers. So when the time came for Tyson to potentially fight Foreman, Tyson said that he didn’t want to have nothing with that beast.
Neither wanted to fight the other although people always wondered about the what if of them fighting.
Here's Foreman's thoughts:
Young Foreman wouldn't have the same attitude, mind.
Amplify that by 100 for the 70's version.
I just watched Tyson-Ruddock 2 and on the same VHS tape there is Thomas Hearns X Virgil Hill
How good of a boxer was Thomas ? From what i've read, he used to bounce around weight classes.
Friendly killer in his second phase. Killer-killer in his first!Foreman is such a great bloke.
I just watched Tyson-Ruddock 2 and on the same VHS tape there is Thomas Hearns X Virgil Hill
How good of a boxer was Thomas ? From what i've read, he used to bounce around weight classes.
Foreman says a lot of puzzling things though. Look at his all-time rankings and he’s also previously said Lewis is the best ever. He was a great fighter but I tend not to listen to his views.Foreman said if Tyson had continued that peak he'd have been his number 1 HW of all time.
Peak Frazier Vs Tyson would've been interesting. I thought that Tyson probably didn't have the heart of the other greats.
Hearns could do it all box and had a terrific punch.
His fights with Hagler, Leonard and Duran are all time classics.
If he had a failing it was his chin but he was one of the most exciting fighters to watch.
That era is in my opinion the best of boxing. Great fighters who actually fought each other to office who was better.
Leonard is my favourite as he always seemed to find a way to win and overcame a serious injury to come back and compete at the highest level after a long retirement
Hearns was an all-time great. Unfortunately he lost his two biggest fights, which were two of the biggest fights in history too but he also collected titles from 147 to 175, bombed out Cuevas, Duran and won a chess match with a master boxer in Benitez (the fifth king), got stiffed in the Leonard rematch and also gave a great account of himself in Leonard I.I just watched Tyson-Ruddock 2 and on the same VHS tape there is Thomas Hearns X Virgil Hill
How good of a boxer was Thomas ? From what i've read, he used to bounce around weight classes.
that 2nd fight was needed, the first fight was very biased in favour of Tyson. He got away with some dirty tricks and the stoppage was a joke.He won the rematch, tough fight still but Tyson deserved that win.
Hearns was an all-time great. Unfortunately he lost his two biggest fights, which were two of the biggest fights in history too but he also collected titles from 147 to 175, bombed out Cuevas, Duran and won a chess match with a master boxer in Benitez (the fifth king), got stiffed in the Leonard rematch and also gave a great account of himself in Leonard I.
That second fight is generally considered the end of ''peak Tyson'' aswell ? You get the sense that after prison he tried to be the same but was never quite the same.
Mcneeley, Buster Mathis Jr, Old Bruno and Seldon were a bit of overmatched opponents I think. Holyfield was his first true test post prison.
Peak Tyson was 86-88. He just didn't have the mental strength to deal with private life turmoil.
That's because Cus trained him to be the baddest man alive. He never had the time to chat to Mike about life stuff and unfortunately Mike never had a father while his mother was always battling addiction.
When you add Don King and Robin Givens to the mix...oh well.
But still, he could have found a way to win the fights he lost... look at Jon Jones. no matter what's going on he never loses.
But maybe Tyson always needed someone to make him feel confident. I guess guys like Mayweather and Jones always truly got the confidence to perform.
Maybe those same years down the line, Wilder will come round, but for now, it's not hard to imagine it's all very, very raw for him. He truly believed in his hype until he met Fury, then Fury came along, told him what he would do to him in each fight, and went out and executed it, that's soul crushing for someone like Wilder.
Yeah, no doubt about what you're saying, but I've never had a man take everything I hold dear about myself away from me, so I try to imagine it from his perspective and I totally get it from there - aside from the physical aspect of being battered from pillar to post and potentially having years of his life and boxing career taken from him, he's also got to wallow in the despair of knowing this one man has taken all that he is as a boxer/professional/public figure away, and even worse (from his perspective) has bested him so badly, he can take pity on him and give words of encouragement to fix his life/self. From [so-called] rival to the dismissed, it's very humiliating for someone calling himself a king/god/destroyer<insert> and he can never do any of that again without someone bring Fury up to hush him back down.I totally agree with what you are saying but I'd also add that the problem with Wilder is that he is so self-absorbed that he has no sense of perspective.
Fury has actually shown Wilder more respect than he has shown any other fighter. In between the insults, he has said that Wilder is better than anyone else out there quite a few times.
He also has to sell his own fight and Fury's antics draw people to boxing and put money in his opponents pockets. He doesn't have to do it and could quite easily just be boring.
He understands boxing's traditions and it's ultimate identity as a gentleman's sport. Wilder just does not get this, at all. He just sees it as being about him.
It was a shame Wilder couldn’t just shake hands at the end of the bout as his stock had increased after that fight.
Wilder eventually congratulated Fury on twitter, hope that's the end of it now. Both warriors and deserve respect for that trilogy.
A big concern, in combination, with Joshua, is having a weak or questionable head (he gets wobbled by looping shots to the temple and around the head a lot) and chin and then not having either the head movement or defence to protect and compensate for his vulnerability. It should never be all three things - usually boxers of a certain quality will excel or be proficient in some combination of the above, and Joshua just isn't, which makes him questionable in any all out war with the big guys and big hitters, and as we've seen with the nimble, more technical boxer, it's only a matter of time before the shots will take their toll, too.I’ve gone down abit of a rabbit hole the last couple weeks of going back and watching full fights or fight highlights, particularly in the modern era. That Whyte vs Chisora fight was absolutely brutal, just too massive blokes landing huge hits and I swear both had steel jaws.
Having now gone back and watched loads of old fights it does stand out just how poor AJs chin is and it’s probably what separates him from the greats. Sure his head speed and defence overall is average but he certainly has the power and actually throws some lovely combinations. If he had the jaw Wilder has he’d be some threat.
I believe so. I think the marketing and mythology behind the idea of a “prime Tyson” has been aggressive and has brainwashed many. He was a great talent and was explosive, accomplished a lot, but he’s not one of the best fighters ever. “Prime” Tyson had limitations too and also benefitted from an uninspired era. The perfect storm. Had he been born 5 years later he likely never wins the title because he wouldnt beat Holyfield, Bowe, or Lewis. 5 years earlier he wouldn’t beat a prime Holmes.
Is prime Mike Tyson overrated? I don't mean Tyson's career in general but the actual prime Mike Tyson? Was he really this great at his peak? I don't have enough knowledge to judge his opponents during his prime days.
(would his prime have been from '86 to '90?)
Just read Eubanks v Williams is going to be PPV too, who the hell they kidding.Sky is done
The only good thing about it these days is RedZone
Just not true IMO. He’s one of the greatest HW’s ever. The problem for him was his inability to deal with stuff outside the ring, (especially with the death of D’Amato) and the fact he went to prison. The guy that came out was not the same fighter. The guy that Lewis beat was not the same fighter. Had Lewis and Holyfield fought Tyson during that period when he was focused and fighting Holmes, Berbick, Spinks etc., I believe Tyson would have destroyed them.
This counts against him being one of the greats. You can't factor what someone could've been into their greatness, you can only factor what actually happened. It's like saying that Edwin Valero is one of the greatest fighters of the recent generation. He might well have been if he hadn't murdered his wife and hung himself. It's stepping into the realm of the counterfactual. There are countless athletes that could've had better careers if things had run better for them in their personal life.
You've also mentioned a couple of myths that are popular with Tyson fans. D'Amato died 4 fights into his pro career. Tyson won 25 fights after the death of D'Amato including all his greatest wins. Tyson was also comprehensively out boxed and knocked out by a non-elite heavyweight James Douglas two years before he entered prison. He was never really on the rails either. He was in all sorts of trouble when he was in D'Amato's troubled boys school. You can actually argue that D'Amato was bad for Tyson on a personal level. Whilst Teddy Atlas has an axe to grind with Tyson his beef seems to stem from D'Amato allowing Tyson to get away with disturbing bad behavior in the troubled boy's school that D'Amato ran. Some of this, at least in Atlas's testimony, was to do with him molesting girls at school (including Atlas's cousin) and being generally manipulative to D'Amato and his family. Atlas accuses Tyson of destroying the spirit of the school because D'Amato was so drunk on the idea of having a heavyweight world champion in his years approaching death that he abandoned the principles that the school was founded on. Tyson was basically held to a much lower behaviour standard than the other boys by D'Amato because of his fighting talent.
Personally I think Tyson is the greatest myth in boxing. Not because he wasn't an elite fighter but because he's held in a far higher esteem by some than his record deserves. He didn't beat an elite heavyweight in their prime, in fact he lost all such fights. The media hype seems to have allowed him be judged on what he might of done rather than what he achieved, which doesn't really stand up to any real scrutiny. This is reflected by how most credible boxing historians assess his career.