I have questions reguarding Tyson's resume

[slicksouthpaw16]

Why didn't Tyson fight any of the elite name fighters in his era? Fighters that presented a real challenge such as Riddock Bowe, Ray Mercer, peak Holyfield peak Lewis or even Tommy Morrison? Was that careful match making on the part of Tyson's management?

[-CANE-]

Why didn't Tyson fight any of the elite name fighters in his era? Fighters that presented a real challenge such as Riddock Bowe, Ray Mercer, peak Holyfield peak Lewis or even Tommy Morrison? Was that careful match making on the part of Tyson's management?

In his early career, they were not around for him to fight, and then he went and lost to Douglas. Had he won Holyfield would have been next and maybe followed by the others.

Tyson though even at his very best still would have struggled with Holyfield,Bowe,Lewis and Mercer. Not saying he would have definately lost, but they were all capable of beating him in his prime, but the possibility existed for him to have beaten them.


I think maybe after the Douglas defeat, everyone knew Tyson wasn't the same and maybe there was some careful matchmaking. All credit to Tyson though for facing Ruddock who was the most dangerous opponent at the time.

The one and only time Tyson managed to dig farely deep in his career and fight back when someone posed him plenty of problems.

[slicksouthpaw16]

Yes, indeed. I was also imprssed with Tyson in the Ruddock fight. However, when i look back at the fighters that he struggled with(Ruddock, Rabalita,Tillis, Douglas ect) and see that these fighters were not in the upper echlon at heavyweight, then i get the impression that his management knew that he would not be able to handle those tough skilled elite guys. I am not trying to discredit Tyson by no means, but he did not fight the fighters that were serious threats to him. Ruddock was a good fighter, but was never a champion and known for looking good while lossing his biggest fights. Him being stopped by Morrison and Lewis after that fight makes me wonder as well. If Tyson was such a powerful destroyer, then why couldn't he get rid of Ruddock?

[Boogie Nights]

In his early career, they were not around for him to fight, and then he went and lost to Douglas. Had he won Holyfield would have been next and maybe followed by the others.

Tyson though even at his very best still would have struggled with Holyfield,Bowe,Lewis and Mercer. Not saying he would have definately lost, but they were all capable of beating him in his prime, but the possibility existed for him to have beaten them.


I think maybe after the Douglas defeat, everyone knew Tyson wasn't the same and maybe there was some careful matchmaking. All credit to Tyson though for facing Ruddock who was the most dangerous opponent at the time.

The one and only time Tyson managed to dig farely deep in his career and fight back when someone posed him plenty of problems.

i told that to slick in the other thread and he pretty much told me that i know nothing about boxing. he's a good ole boy that slick is, i like his attitude.

hopefully if he heard that from someone else he would take that into account

[slicksouthpaw16]

i told that to slick in the other thread and he pretty much told me that i know nothing about boxing. he's a good ole boy that slick is, i like his attitude.

You still have yet to tell me a great fighter that Tyson has beaten that was in their prime. Especially since you know everything about Tyson.

[-CANE-]

Yes, indeed. I was also imprssed with Tyson in the Ruddock fight. However, when i look back at the fighters that he struggled with(Ruddock, Rabalita,Tillis, Douglas ect) and see that these fighters were not in the upper echlon at heavyweight, then i get the impression that his management knew that he would not be able to handle those tough skilled elite guys. I am not trying to discredit Tyson by no means, but he did not fight the fighters that were serious threats to him. Ruddock was a good fighter, but was never a champion and known for looking good while lossing his biggest fights. Him being stopped by Morrison and Lewis after that fight makes me wonder as well. If Tyson was such a powerful destroyer, then why couldn't he get rid of Ruddock?

Tyson was probably the best 5 round fighter in history, along with Dempsey.

He had the skills to be one of the greatest, if not the greatest of all time. But mental deficincies stopped him from achieving this.

He lost concentration too easy and got bored after a few rounds, neglecting his awesome skills and resorting to throwing single bombs and rushing straight in. His defense was suddenly non existant and so was his probing offense.

His biggest weakness was confidence and if someone managed to take his punches and fire back this affected him big time.

Even as a 14 yr old amatuer he was pounding men and in one particular fight he kept knocking this one guy down. His opponent kept getting up, and although not having Tyson in trouble but just because he showed heart and no fear this affected him. Tyson tried quitting on his stool between rounds claiming injury. Atlas said he did this after all 3 rounds. Tyson won and got a decision.

His boxing knowledge was incredible, having studied so many fights, but when it came down to it, he could never work out what he had to do when things got difficult.

He was always a man though and took his punishment like a man.

Tyson should have been so much better and achieved so much more than he actually did. Had he the heart and mental attitude of Holyfield or Ali he could have been the greatest of all time.

[Boogie Nights]

You still have yet to tell me a great fighter that Tyson has beaten that was in their prime. Especially since you know everything about Tyson.

im not gonna go through with this again, i listed all the good wins he had. you can take them for best, or for worst, with you there's no reasoning. it's really based on one's preference. you call guys like walcott and max baer all time greats

well may i ask you politely what great fighters have they beat to have their names pinned next to ali, holyfield, robinsons, louis, and many others

i already know that you'll use the name ezzard charles for walcott who also beat him twice. a fighter who will always be an all time great light heavyweight, but not a legitimate great heavyweight.

baer, the biggest clown also never beat a great fighter, except for maybe underrated max shmeling

according to you it makes them into greats

[Boogie Nights]

You still have yet to tell me a great fighter that Tyson has beaten that was in their prime. Especially since you know everything about Tyson.

ill tell you this slick, im not here to flame on your thread, but i would prefer to never have a discussion with you on here again. not just because you disagree, everyone has the right to voice their opinion or stand by it. and it's not because you think im loosing to arguement against you

it's because you're a fresh kid who shows no respect to his elders. you have completely mocked everything i wrote and dismissed my posts at your convinience. you posted your opinion without backing them with any kind of knoweledge or facts strong enough to support what you wrote. you showed extreme biase, and accused me of making false statements

in reality you're a 17 year old brat who has yet to learn some manners, and some boxing history while you're at it.

[slicksouthpaw16]

im not gonna go through with this again, i listed all the good wins he had. you can take them for best, or for worst, with you there's no reasoning. it's really based on one's preference. you call guys like walcott and max baer all time greats

well may i ask you politely what great fighters have they beat to have their names pinned next to ali, holyfield, robinsons, louis, and many others

i already know that you'll use the name ezzard charles for walcott who also beat him twice. a fighter who will always be an all time great light heavyweight, but not a legitimate heavyweight.

baer, the biggest clown also never beat a great fighter, except for maybe underrated max shmeling

according to you it makes them into greats

You listed good fighters that were no real challenge to Tyson. I want GREAT fighters. The majority of the fighters that you named were not even champions like Golota, Biggs, Ruddock, Tubbs ect when you even said that skills alone does not make you great. Are we condradicting ourselves here?

[Silencers]

Tyson did beat most of the top contenders of his time but it is true that he never beat a prime, great fighter.