If Tyson Had Been In Prime, In His Fights With Holyfield and Lewis?

[QueensburyRules]

Absolutely it was around pre-90s, HGH in particular was very rampant in the 80s and Tyson has mentioned some of those drugs in past interviews indicating he knows more than his fans would wish to believe.

It was very obvious he was given and taking it since an early age, he had a very typical growth hormone look in his skull and obviously he was incredibly muscular/ripped while doing no weight lifting and massive amounts of cardio, while recovering on a superhuman fast level. Come on, this one was so obvious.

Lastly, there was no PED testing in boxing pre 90s. Tyson also admitted using a fake p4n1s with clean urine to pass his drug tests. It would be silly and naive to think he was ever clean at any point of his career.

So I gues the main point is Evander Holyfield never had an unfair advantage over Tyson when it came to drugs.

- - Watching you Viagra Boys turn into giggles of jiggling, gelatinous jelly every time Mike Tyson is mentioned is a guaranteed a lifetime of PRICELESS ! ! !

Some boys were always going to become more manly than you, the way it has been since time immemorial, just as others smarter than you...

Cus took in Mike from some youth detention around age 13 give or take, and he was always a block of muscle. We had fast maturing boys like that too in my day. Cus as old school as it gets ran a tight ship that was perfect in their moment of time together when Mike started his pro run. The only drugs he started using were dangerous psychotropic experimental sedatives that he was on by the time of Buster where he looked like a sleep walking zombie.

In prison for 3 years, he would've been exposed to that steroid/weight lifting culture, no different than being exposed to cigs/alcohol in civilian life. He wasn't cig addicted nor an alcoholic as a civilian, and likely same deal in his prison life. At some point, it was the first Vander fight where he shows any interest in drug testing possibilities, to eventually succumbed around his 2nd prison term. Problem being WE DON'T have factual evidence and Mike himself is too looney to rely on for any truth, and more importantly, the way boxing conducts it's business, see LooneyTunes Teddy for our poster boy, we cannot rely on other inside sources.

Really, you cannot stay as Peter Pan for the whole of your life, so time to put on your bigboy pants and man up to who you are.

[shawnkemp804]

With Tyson, you always have to consider a major factor: oftentimes, he didn't seriously train for fights. It is well known that he was sleeping with **********s and didn't train before the Douglas fight. It is equally well known that he won the title in 1986 against Berbick while suffering from a STD. The list might go on and on. Whereas, Holyfield was struggling with someone like Cooper and Stewart even at the peak of his physical condition.

Under Richie Giachetti, Tyson showed the last remnants of what he could have been without jail time, Don King, Robin Givens and his own indiscipline. My idea about the second Holyfield fight has always been the same: it would have been a fantastic fight, that a more disciplined and better trained Tyson could have won (OK - I'll give you the "could" instead of "would" )

As little as I regard the hypothetical matchups, one should always think of the fighters involved at their best, at least in the period under analysis. That's why this is always little more than a funny game. No opinion is to be considered carved in stone.

Lol who said Holyfield didn't sleep around kid? If you want to use that logic George Foreman was known to sleep around and not take fighters seriously. So I guess we are going to excuse that right? We are only going to act like Tyson didn't train hard for all of his fights right?

The point is kid Tyson struggled with James Tillis while Tim Witherspoon smashed him. The point is Buster Douglas knocked out Mike Tyson while Holyfield destroyed Douglas. The point is Holyfield is older than Tyson and still knocked out a 30 year old Tyson.

[Tatabanya]

Lol who said Holyfield didn't sleep around kid? If you want to use that logic George Foreman was known to sleep around and not take fighters seriously. So I guess we are going to excuse that right? We are only going to act like Tyson didn't train hard for all of his fights right?

The point is kid Tyson struggled with James Tillis while Tim Witherspoon smashed him. The point is Buster Douglas knocked out Mike Tyson while Holyfield destroyed Douglas. The point is Holyfield is older than Tyson and still knocked out a 30 year old Tyson.

Yes, and Holyfield lost to Michael Moorer whereas an ancient Foreman knocked him out cold. Not to mention Holyfield losing to John Ruiz...

But those were different years and circumstances. As I said, every fight has its own story behind, and there are too many variables in a top-level heavyweight's career to affirm with absolute certainty whatever one wants to think. Just sayin', reversing roles for fun, If Holyfield had spent three years in jail, I doubt that he would have been able to do anything to an active Tyson.

However, I have no problem with your points. The comparison between Tyson and most everybody else in the HW division will always bring this kind of debate. Tyson was a one-of-a-kind phenomenon, in good and bad.

"Holyfield destroyed Douglas" seems a little exaggerated, though. More like "A thoroughly out-of-shape Douglas went down from a nice right hand, and waited for the referee to count him out before cashing his huge check and going all the way to an almost deadly battle with diabetes".