Do you think Tyson was different?

CorkMan

With the ferocity of his boxing, there was no one like that since Jack Dempsey. It is rare you see a fighter who could attack as hard as Tyson.

I think he had a bit of an animal inside of him TBH.

Wolfe Tone

He certainly did have a wild animalistic nature, just look at the two events most people know him for, biting Holyfields ear and being a rapist.

joepenguin

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

He certainly did have a wild animalistic nature, just look at the two events most people know him for, biting Holyfields ear and being a rapist.

Id have thought most people woulda known him for been one of the best to ever lace up a pair of gloves.

bilbo79

Duran was also like that, many of the top fighters have that fire and pure aggression that helps bring them further than others

gene_tunney

Valero was the same, but not as powerful, even at his weight.

mrgardener

joepenguin wrote: »

Id have thought most people woulda known him for been one of the best to ever lace up a pair of gloves.

Unfortunately, MUSSOLINI is correct.
However, Tyson did re-ignite the heavyweight division which benefited all the weight divisions. Shame he turned out to be a basketcase.

walshb

joepenguin wrote: »

Id have thought most people woulda known him for been one of the best to ever lace up a pair of gloves.

My single personal memory is the night he destroyed Berbick to become the youngest ever champion. That night he was a maniac, so so powerful and strong and heavy handed. He looked unbeatable. After this, I only think of him being a scumbag, and rapist, and savage.....

walshb

gene_tunney wrote: »

Valero was the same, but not as powerful, even at his weight.

Yeah, looking great vs. a bunch of cans. The guy never got to show if he really was a demon in the ring. Wild, crude and sloppy. I see NO comparison to a peak Tyson.

joepenguin

mrgardener wrote: »

Unfortunately, MUSSOLINI is correct.
However, Tyson did re-ignite the heavyweight division which benefited all the weight divisions. Shame he turned out to be a basketcase.

I beg to differ. The headlines read World boxing champ mike tyson convicted of rape. Not rapist mike tyson wins boxing world title.

6 of one half a dozen of the other but lets call a spade a spade, no matter what he did / does outside the ring he'll always be known for what he did inside it.

gene_tunney

joepenguin wrote: »

I beg to differ. The headlines read World boxing champ mike tyson convicted of rape. Not rapist mike tyson wins boxing world title.

6 of one half a dozen of the other but lets call a spade a spade, no matter what he did / does outside the ring he'll always be known for what he did inside it.

Exactly, a lot of boxers have bad pasts, but as boxing fans we focus on the boxing.

Kaizer Sosa

I just watched the documentary 'Tyson' over the weekend and found myself feeling really sorry for the guy. He obviously isn't the brightest tool in the box and he had a pretty horrific up-bringing.

I'm not an apologist for him but it was impossible not to be moved by the footage of him genuinely struggling with emotion when he spoke about Cus D'Amato's faith in him and how affected he was by his death.

With regards to the Holyfield incident, I wasn't aware how dirty Holyfield had been in both their fights. He headbutted him a number of times in both fights. Tyson spoke of blacking out each time he got butted. Again, don't mean to defend the indefensible, but that fact was rarely highlighted during the media furore.

walshb

Kaizer Sosa wrote: »

I just watched the documentary 'Tyson' over the weekend and found myself feeling really sorry for the guy. He obviously isn't the brightest tool in the box and he had a pretty horrific up-bringing.

I'm not an apologist for him but it was impossible not to be moved by the footage of him genuinely struggling with emotion when he spoke about Cus D'Amato's faith in him and how affected he was by his death.

With regards to the Holyfield incident, I wasn't aware how dirty Holyfield had been in both their fights. He headbutted him a number of times in both fights. Tyson spoke of blacking out each time he got butted. Again, don't mean to defend the indefensible, but that fact was rarely highlighted during the media furore.

So, maybe Holyfield was butting, but what Mike did was depraved and weird.
Biting lumps out of people is something that should be a complete last resort.
Mike did it after a few "fouls?"

Butt Holy back, kick him, even hit him low, but biting a lump out of the guys
ear? No, that just told me that Tyson was one depraved and sick person, and
I guess it just reaffirmed my belief that he did rape that girl.

Kaizer Sosa

Yeah, it was depraved alright but can I ask why you would condone butting? I would consider that far more serious injury can result from headbutts. It might not look as gruesome an act but Holyfield was never going to die from that bite and tear but headbutting is hitting somebody with a blunt instrument.

Boooourns

joepenguin wrote: »

Id have thought most people woulda known him for been one of the best to ever lace up a pair of gloves.

Do you think he was one of the best ever to lace them up?
Personally i don't, he's in the top ten heavyweights but not top ten all time boxers.

walshb

Kaizer Sosa wrote: »

Yeah, it was depraved alright but can I ask why you would condone butting? I would consider that far more serious injury can result from headbutts. It might not look as gruesome an act but Holyfield was never going to die from that bite and tear but headbutting is hitting somebody with a blunt instrument.

I condoned butting?

I don't believe I did. Actually, butting in a boxing match is nasty. BUT, what Mike did went a step further in the depravity stakes. The weird and wild animal came out. Biting lumps out of people is right at the bottom of the pile.