ESPN's "Boxing's greatest" list

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • BezO
    MVP
    • Jul 2004
    • 4414

    #16
    Re: ESPN's "Boxing's greatest" list

    Originally posted by thelwig14
    ...and he got as much out of his career that a 5'10 fighter could possibly imagine.
    I wouldn't say he got as much as he could, but shorter heavy weights do tend to fizz out earlier.

    Originally posted by thelwig14
    But no matter what, unless he grew 6 inches and a Tin Man heart transplant, he would have never beaten Evander or Lennox. Tyson was great, but those two were on a whole different level.
    Folks tend to remember Mike on his decline. Mike had plenty of heart. Taking shots from Ruddock proved that to me. And later, though he got knocked out, he took tremendous shots from Lenox.

    Had he fought Holyfield with Rooney in his corner, I think the fight would've been much different. Mike was a completely different fighter after Rooney. Mike "forgot" how to throw combinations and became a one puch artist once he fired him. His "trainers" since then haven't been even average.

    Also, in Mike's prime, Lenox was just starting out. I doubt Lennox could've handled Mike back than... 86-89.
    Shout out to The Watcher! Where you at bruh?

    Comment

    • BezO
      MVP
      • Jul 2004
      • 4414

      #17
      Re: ESPN's "Boxing's greatest" list

      Originally posted by Complex
      You could argue that Holyfield did beat Tyson in his prime. IMO he is the only person to legitly (is that a word?) kick Tyson's assets. He stood toe to toe and pummelled him.
      Anything after Kevin Rooney can't be considered Mike's prime. Mike's career was on the decline since 89, Douglas fight forward.
      Shout out to The Watcher! Where you at bruh?

      Comment

      • thelwig14
        Banned
        • Jul 2002
        • 3145

        #18
        Re: ESPN's "Boxing's greatest" list

        Originally posted by BezO
        I wouldn't say he got as much as he could, but shorter heavy weights do tend to fizz out earlier.

        Folks tend to remember Mike on his decline. Mike had plenty of heart. Taking shots from Ruddock proved that to me. And later, though he got knocked out, he took tremendous shots from Lenox.

        Had he fought Holyfield with Rooney in his corner, I think the fight would've been much different. Mike was a completely different fighter after Rooney. Mike "forgot" how to throw combinations and became a one puch artist once he fired him. His "trainers" since then haven't been even average.

        Also, in Mike's prime, Lenox was just starting out. I doubt Lennox could've handled Mike back than... 86-89.

        Trust me, I have every fight of Mike's on dvd and remember him during his "prime" (which lasted two years and he peaked at 20.....joke).

        Lennox handled Mike easily when the amateurs and during 86-89....Lennox was winning a Gold Medal embarrassing Rid**** and honing his craft.

        Tyson, at no point in his career from age 10 until now, would never had a chance against Holyfield and Lewis. They were in a whole different league. They were decorated amateurs and pros that could adjust to any style. Not taking anything away from Mike, but he is not in their league. This cannot be disputed.

        Comment

        • BezO
          MVP
          • Jul 2004
          • 4414

          #19
          Re: ESPN's "Boxing's greatest" list

          Originally posted by thelwig14
          Trust me, I have every fight of Mike's on dvd and remember him during his "prime" (which lasted two years and he peaked at 20.....joke).
          He won the title at 20. I'd sayd he peaked at 22. Still a joke, but there was a clear difference in Mike pre/post Kevin Rooney. I believe Rooney's abscence had much more to do with Mike's decline than his physical or mental skill.

          Originally posted by thelwig14
          Lennox handled Mike easily when the amateurs and during 86-89....Lennox was winning a Gold Medal embarrassing Rid**** and honing his craft.
          You're bringing up amateur fights? These are heavy weights. Though Lennox may be a points boxer, Tyson is far from one. I'd suspect many boxers that lost to Mike as pros could beat him as an ametuer.

          Originally posted by thelwig14
          Tyson, at no point in his career from age 10 until now, would never had a chance against Holyfield and Lewis. They were in a whole different league. They were decorated amateurs and pros that could adjust to any style. Not taking anything away from Mike, but he is not in their league. This cannot be disputed.
          Both Holyfield and Lews have losses, both in their primes. It's a sport, and no one knows what would have happen had they faught when Mike was in his prime.

          But I was unaware of your status. I take back everything I said and apologize for disputing your opinion.
          Shout out to The Watcher! Where you at bruh?

          Comment

          • thelwig14
            Banned
            • Jul 2002
            • 3145

            #20
            Re: ESPN's "Boxing's greatest" list

            Originally posted by BezO
            He won the title at 20. I'd sayd he peaked at 22. Still a joke, but there was a clear difference in Mike pre/post Kevin Rooney. I believe Rooney's abscence had much more to do with Mike's decline than his physical or mental skill.

            You're bringing up amateur fights? These are heavy weights. Though Lennox may be a points boxer, Tyson is far from one. I'd suspect many boxers that lost to Mike as pros could beat him as an ametuer.

            Both Holyfield and Lews have losses, both in their primes. It's a sport, and no one knows what would have happen had they faught when Mike was in his prime.

            But I was unaware of your status. I take back everything I said and apologize for disputing your opinion.


            There is no point breaking down Tyson's career to blinded nuthuggers. They just don't get it and are blinded by Tyson destroying average at best fighters during the worst era of all-time that Holmes already cleaned up. Tyson's best wins are against a semi retired Holmes, a light heavyweight looking to retire, and Razor Ruddock. With Rooney in the corner, average boxers with little talent went 12. But based on this, he could still beat God by a TKO in 3.

            Comment

            • Complex
              MVP
              • Oct 2005
              • 2494

              #21
              Re: ESPN's "Boxing's greatest" list

              Peaked at 22? I beg to differ. Although losing his father figure and trainer was a huge loss, Tyson is a professional and his training and preparation should not be based on a trainer at this point. DLH loses his trainer and hires another and still performs well. RJJ and Shane both switched trainers at one point or another. Tyson was the victim of his own actions and the leeches around him.

              In his mid 20s he still had could improve, he just didnt. Once the fear he gave opponents wore off, it was a wrap for him.

              Also he stopped doing the things that made him great. He stopped bobbing and weaving. Tyson wasnt light on his feet but he had great head movment that avoided lots of punches and gave his opponents a moving target. Later in his career he stopped for some reason and just stood and threw blows. Anybody with a Jab could take him down (ala Douglas).
              Follow me on Twitter - http://twitter.com/complex219

              Comment

              Working...