I see Ricky Fatton has encouraged AJ to keep Rob in his training camp, and that the key was to go grab the effing fight by the balls. I have to say, I agree with the second part.
In other words, Fatton, like me, saw AJ fighting scared....
He did improve in my view after McCall, but you still need to consider the manner of his losses for a Tyson fantasy fight, same way you would consider the manner of Tyson's losses vs Douglas and Holyfield.
This is where debate can be fun and interesting, because in this instance, Tyson's manner of loss is not as damaging/detrimental
Tyson lost to Douglas after 10 solid and consistent offensive rds from Douglas. He was beat down eventually to be dropped and counted out. This lends well to Tyson when factoring in how Lewis can beat Tyson. It's fair to deduce that to beat Tyson, you need to beat him up and outpoint or stop him. He takes a great shot!!! In Holyfield 1 he was beat down for 9-10 rds, and still on his feet at the stoppage
Where it is more damaging to Lewis is that Lewis was twice stopped with one single shot scenarios. Fight ending split seconds. That's why you have to factor it in, and logically deduce that a peak Tyson could well get to land these type shots to close the show, and even land them when he himself could be in trouble.
Both Lewis KO losses were at different times in his career, so he can be hit/badly hurt no mater when it is.
btw, I am not overly confident that Tyson beats Lewis. I am only 60-40, and I gave my reasons why I think he does, and it's perfectly logical to use power/chin here. Both men had game changing power, but for me, Tyson had the better chin. Tyson stands a clearer chance to end it with one shot than Lewis.
Yes, exactly what I saw...and it was nothing to do with opposition
Bruno in 1995 was not as good as Bruno in 1989, and in 1995 I saw a less than prime Tyson. The chap was still very good, but visually you could see he was not as sharp. fast, explosive. He just wasn't. He was 29 at this stage (not old), but had been inactive due to being incarcerated for over three years.
Holyfield was his opposition for back to back losses. A clearly past his best Holyfield. A Holyfield that was knocked out in Bowe 3, and had lost to Michael freaking Moorer!!!! So opposition isn't really a factor here.
I find it very odd that people would even try to say that mid 90s Tyson was as good as the 1980s championship Tyson. He was clearly not.
Right I looked again and again. The knee did dip alright but I still think he should’ve had the chance to fight on he wanted to and had the hands up. He always maintained he was fit to continue himself even if arrogance had a part to play there.
this was before manny trained him too and as the 90s wore on he became harder and harder to beat.
in the rematch I think mccaul could’ve caused him problems had he fought him
I decided to watch some of Tyson’s fights from the mid 90s yesterday.
I'm very surprised there is any debate that he was past his best at that point.
He seemed very static. Very little upper body movement and just lunged in with power shots.
Maybe the opposition was tougher but his style definitely took a turn for the worst.
Hour long interview with Joshua at 6pm tonight on IFL YouTube page.
As far as i remember he was swaying on his feet and out of it, If i remember correctly didn't his knees buckle just as the ref waved it,
Also didn't Lewis have his back to the camera when it was stopped . the ref was looking straight in his eyes ,
A good stoppage in my opinion ,
What you think of referee's call in the McCall fight? I am surprised squinn thinks my take is way off
I can understand an argument being made, but I think majority folks would have called the referee correct to not allow Lewis continue. He was very shaky.
Lewis got extremely lucky in the Briggs fight , In the first round 5 to 10- seconds more & it would have been another loss on his record,
I simply said it’s difficult to overlook the two times he was knocked out/stopped by one punch shots. Why is it mental to consider this, and to think a prime Tyson could do the trick with one shot? Isn’t that what is done when assessing fantasy fights, strengths/weaknesses/vulnerabilities/performances?
in 1994 Lewis was at or near prime..
and sorry, he was all over the place. No idea what you were watching. Up at 2/3 and very wobbly and unsteady on legs. The ref was bang on. Him being a champion should have nothing to do with it. Referees are there to ensure the safety of the fighters.
had the referee allowed Lewis continue and McCall whacked him hard again to finish it, and Lewis suffered serious injury, or worse, you’d have folks slating the referee for allowing Lewis continue.
Watched it again. I totally disagree as a champion he should have got the chance to fight on. Up at 2 counted out at 4 with his gloves up? You’re not serious!!
in any event to use it as evidence to say Tyson beats him prime vs prime is mental
I think he was in better shape than both wilder and fury the other week ill
look again though. Anyway it shouldn’t be used in a peak Tyson argument. Against Rachman he turned up worse than Tyson vs bd. I can’t believe you want to use it as evidence for your argument
Lewis was no way ready to continue v McCall. The ref was holding him up. He was banjoed!
McCall fight was not off night. It was early in fight and he got knocked out by one shot.
v Rahman he was a wee bit too casual and got clean knocked out.
Lewis had two terribly off nights vs both of those especially rachman. Against mccaul the truth is I think he was well fit to continue. You can’t pick them unless you’re willing to pick the Tyson who got put on his ass by BD
Yes. I think Lewis has enough power to hurt, and possibly badly enough, to end it.
I still think Tyson had a great chin to take a great shot. Him and that 20 inch neck.
I don't disagree that if he gets the shot it could be lights out for Lewis but Lewis was so rangy and it's hard for Tyson to get in. His attempts to get in could be where it finishes as Lewis also had serious power.
Yes. I get you.
Put it this way. Tyson would need to be on form..
I have a feeling a peak Tyson adapts and adjusts to Lewis more than the reverse. Tyson was a real student of the game under Rooney.
two key areas: defense and chin. Tyson for me takes a better shot, and has a better defense. Like Wilder, I think Tyson’s short stature aids Tyson more than Lewis’ height aids Lewis.
also: it’s difficult to look past the two times where Lewis was beaten by one punch. Not a beat down. One punch type endings. Mike definitely can end it with one punch. And hits as hard as McCall and Rahman.
I can see a right cross/hook Larry Holmes type shot catching Lennox to cause serious damage.
See I'm not so sure about Tyson against Lewis. When you try to get in you have to get past that powerful straight jab. It's very difficult to get past it and you pay dearly if you get caught flush with it.
Oh, and if any fighter has a verifiable injury in a fight, of course it can affect the outcome of the fight. Of course, some fights it can affect more than others and so on.
I think conflation is unnecessarily happening.
I have made 0 excuses for any Tyson losses. He lost his fights because on the nights, his opponents were better.
Now, discussing what we see for the losses is just a little more analysis. That’s all.
I won’t go near his later losses:
You can discuss fights and wins and losses without excusing them and making excuses for the losses.
Lewis and Holyfield both better than any Tyson’s championship opponents pre and post prison. Both can beat Tyson, as both have strengths to do so. Tyson can beat both because Tyson has strengths. I’m leaning with Tyson more because I think at his best he will have a little too much in terms of speed/power and finishing ability for both.
For what it’s worth I do agree with you more here. Tyson had as obvious a prime as there has been in the division. There is however a legitimate question as to whether Tyson would ever have beaten the likes of Holyfield or Lewis (I take Bowe in here too) or did those elites or greats just have the game to beat any version of him. I think prime Mike takes virtually anyone but I wouldn’t be fully confident with Lewis especially. It just depends on how you see it. I know my stance on it and I’m not 100% sure. I can see some like you who reckon Tyson takes them all but equally there is compelling evidence when you look at the whole picture to suggest the opposite argument. I’m sure you can see that too - he had plenty of weaknesses or vulnerabilities when judged against the very, very best. Now of course there are ways to rebuke that evidence - he was shot, past his best, on the drink/drugs etc but we could apply that to a lot more than just this thread.
It’s come out now that Wilder was concussed and I think broke his arm or dislocated it in the fight against Fury. I’d say you would immediately dismiss this as nothing to do with the outcome - feel free to correct me but that’s how I’d expect you to react and that is not a criticism of you at all. If Tyson had injured his arm even in the post prime years and lost a fight then I think you’d find that more relevant to the reason for the loss. It’s natural to be biased for a fighter or team or whatever that you like - I do it all the time and as a result overrate certain players, teams etc.
I’d say the answer is likely somewhere in the middle. The fantasy fight in prime vs prime would have been awesome and sometimes Tyson would’ve come out on top, sometimes not.
No offense on my end either pal, Peace ✌️🙂
Well, you seemed to claim that my take was nonsense. So, saying folks haven’t a clue kind of squares it up.
I didn’t take offence to your claim..
You say lets agree to disagree at the start of your post and then say further down that I haven't a clue?
Bit disingenuous of you? No?
I watched the Bruno 2 fight and the Sheldon fight there as you asked and in these two fights before he fought Holyfield he looked awesome, a real wrecking ball.
So, as you say lets agree to disagree but just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they haven't got a clue. That's what difference of opinion and debate is about.
50lbs of shite doesn't count.
We’ll agree to disagree..
I maintain that any fight fan who watched the pre prison 20-25 year old Tyson and watched the post prison 29-31 year old Tyson and cannot see from performance, footage and visuals that the post prison Tyson was past his best, hasn’t a clue. And a post prison chiselled torso doesn’t change that.
and nothing to do with before or after their fights. I can only speak for me: in 1996 I knew Tyson was past his best and I knew Holyfield was.
Like I keep saying it's easy to say Tyson was past his best pre -Holyfield now, years later.
But no one was saying this before the Holyfield fights.
Also, you keep saying both were past their best, why are you bringing Holyfield into this?
I picked you up on a point you made earlier about you noticing Tyson was past his best pre- Holyfield and I questioned it because Tyson fought 4 guys after prison and blew all 4 away in 8 rounds so it felt to me like your making excuses for the man.
You’re conflating here:
Nobody is claiming Holyfield was not past it. We all knew he was
and it is absolutely not nonsense to know at the time, and claim at the time that Tyson too was past his prime.
just because Mike was the favorite doesn’t mean that he was prime.
they both were past prime: It’s nonsense to not see and acknowledge this.
google Tyson’s prime; are there any references from anyone claiming it was post prison?
you’re basing it off what? Him having a chiselled torso, and beating McNeely and a mid 90s Bruno?
Holyfield was sent for a battery of tests before he took on Tyson because some thought he was shot and shouldn't have been getting into a ring with Tyson for their first fight, but big money talks.
Tyson was 25 to 1 favourite before the fight and Holyfield beating him up was as big a shock as Douglas beating Tyson in his first loss and that is a fact.
My point all along has been that before the Holyfield fight you tried to claim that Tyson was already noticeably not the fighter he was and I'm sorry but i think that's nonsense.
It’s simple: watch their footage in 1986-1988 for Mike and 1990-1992 for Holyfield. Watch how they perform, react, punch, move etc..
now watch them perform in 1996/1997, or 2002 for Tyson, as you mention Lewis. Can you see any differences?
I’d be gobsmacked if educated fight fans cannot see that both Tyson and Holyfield were noticeably not the same fighters in 1996/1997 as they were 1986-1988 and 1990-1992
