Why Holyfield is a difficult match-up for Tyson.

[Pugilist89]

Evander was great on the inside, Tyson being shorter needed to get on the inside.

Tyson was a puncher but Holyfield had a stellar jaw.

The worst possible match-up for Tyson. He can't impose his game and his opponent has a granite chin.

For my money, assuming Holyfield is equally determined each bout, I think Holyfield beats Tyson 10 out of 10.

Even though I don't think Holyfield is that much better, I just think this match-up is horrible for Tyson. Yes, even worse than fighting Lewis (who I actually think a younger Tyson beats a few times in ten tries) .

Agree?

[Cash in]

The whole package of Holyfield is just a better fighter than Tyson. Tyson, whilst a hard puncher, was never a 10/10 single-shot puncher, like say, a Wilder. Wilder's hardest shot is much harder than Tyson's. With Tyson, it was that all of his shots hurt, and he threw them fast in combinations. But even against a B/C level guy in Douglas, who had a good, not even great jab, and no fear, that was enough to completely outbox Tyson, before knocking him out, because let's get it right, it was not an out of nowhere KO, Douglas won every round except the one he got knocked down in. Cash in.

[Pugilist89]

The whole package of Holyfield is just a better fighter than Tyson. Tyson, whilst a hard puncher, was never a 10/10 single-shot puncher, like say, a Wilder. Wilder's hardest shot is much harder than Tyson's. With Tyson, it was that all of his shots hurt, and he threw them fast in combinations. But even against a B/C level guy in Douglas, who had a good, not even great jab, and no fear, that was enough to completely outbox Tyson, before knocking him out, because let's get it right, it was not an out of nowhere KO, Douglas won every round except the one he got knocked down in. Cash in.

To be fair, Tyson did score a solid one punch KO against Henry Tillman right on the temple.

[joseph5620]

The whole package of Holyfield is just a better fighter than Tyson. Tyson, whilst a hard puncher, was never a 10/10 single-shot puncher, like say, a Wilder. Wilder's hardest shot is much harder than Tyson's. With Tyson, it was that all of his shots hurt, and he threw them fast in combinations. But even against a B/C level guy in Douglas, who had a good, not even great jab, and no fear, that was enough to completely outbox Tyson, before knocking him out, because let's get it right, it was not an out of nowhere KO, Douglas won every round except the one he got knocked down in. Cash in.

Holyfield is one of the best combination counter puncher in history. A stylistic nightmare for Tyson.

[The D3vil]

Why is this in the Global Boxing Scene forum?




Eh, we don't know what a young, dynamic Tyson would've done against Holyfield.

By the time he fought Holyfield in '96, it was a decade after he first became champion and after he had been to prison for 3 years.

A fighter like Tyson peaked early and flamed out young due to his style dependent on speed & quickness, also his hedonistic lifestyle, mental illness, and going to prison

People keep forgetting that post-prison Tyson was the ghost of Mike Tyson.

Holyfield was bigger & stronger (thanks to roids), but also wasn't afraid due to his faith in God & himself.

Holyfield was also battle-tested with wars with Foreman, Holmes, Bowe, and Moorer, all while Mike was locked up.

[Pugilist89]

Holyfield is one of the best combination counter puncher in history. A stylistic nightmare for Tyson.

Yeah. And loves in-fighting. Not too big either. Bigger than tyson but not overly.

[StarshipTrooper]

Holyfield was a very good in-fighter, Tyson was not. Despite his short stature and short arms, Tyson was NOT an inside fighter: Tyson was ideal at mid-range where he could put his body into his punches for maximum leverage. When he would end up on the inside, he'd try to clinch immediately and get the referee to put him back out where he wanted to be. When thinking of Tyson, think Dempsey not Marciano. Prime vs prime I think it's a dead-even fight.

[YGriffith]

(thanks to roids)

Basically the same as everyone else from that era.
Holyfield on steroids is better than tyson on steroids.

[YGriffith]

Douglas won every round except the one he got knocked down in. Cash in.

Ikr, so many people are blinded to see that, and alot of these fanatics probably did even watch the whole fight.
Most of the judges had it a 8 to 1, one being the knocked down round.

[Cash in]

Ikr, so many people are blinded to see that, and alot of these fanatics probably did even watch the whole fight.
Most of the judges had it a 8 to 1, one being the knocked down round.

It's incredible how blind to what they are seeing Mike Tyson fans are. I watched the fight again a few months ago, and Douglas absolutely bossed it. Tyson had zero case for any round, except the one with the knockdown. Losing 8 out of 9 rounds to Douglas, in his absolute peak, shows that he was far from a master boxer, in fact, he' s very one-dimensional. A fantastic on-top bully against limited opposition, but even Douglas, a 3rd-tier HW was far too much for him.

Douglas is the type of guy that any top guy, even on their worst night, finds a way to win. All Tyson found was a way lose round after round, have no answers at all as far as adapting, and getting knocked out.

And then, as Holyfield showed, you stand up to the bully, you show the bully no fear, then the bully is shown for what he really is. You enter the ring afraid of Tyson (Spinks, prime example. never seen anyone look so scared in a ring before), he beats you up, you enter you ring not afraid, and with any kind of ability, he's very beatable. Cash in