Post-Dougals fight, Tyson's best performance was?

[Rocky Balboa]

Earlier today I read a message regarding Mike Tyson. The poster felt all people seem to remeber is the post-prison version of Mike Tyson. Since Mike lost to Buster Douglas in 1990, what has been his best or most effective performance since Tokyo?

You are entitled to your opinion, and your choice can be for whatever reason you feel.

My choice is Mike Tyson vs Alex Stewart. Now people may say, Stewart was starched in a round and that's no good etc. Fact is, Stewart was a very good and determined fighter, asseen in his bout with Evander Holyfield prior to the bout with Tyson.

Mike Tyson looked fantastic in this fight. Fair enough, it did not go long enough to discover anything else, but Mike was in tremendous shape. I have the fight on video, and Ian Darke goes bonkers when Stewart goes down from the first right hand Tyson throws.

What people must remember is this: Alex Stewart had a very good record going into the fight and had a number of KO's on his resume. He gave Evander Holyfield an extremely tough time when they fought.

There you have it - my choice and reasons why I pick that fight.

Thanks.

[overhand_right]

either of the ruddock fights or the 2nd frank bruno fight, contests where strong technique and big punching broke down large, powerful and dangerous fellas.

[barry]

I was the one who posted that most people only remember the post jail Tyson. The reason I say that is because he missed what, three, four, or five years in the ring? That much of an abscence would be the end for most, especially anyone wishing to gain any title be it a paper title, or not, but Tyson still won a paper title and looked great in winning the WBC title from Bruno. Post Buster Douglas, I agree, Stewart was a quality heavyweight, but he was psyched out before he stepped through the ropes. Whether you hate him, or love him, Tyson was one of the best when he was in his prime.

[Eric the Viking]

I was the one who posted that most people only remember the post jail Tyson. The reason I say that is because he missed what, three, four, or five years in the ring? That much of an abscence would be the end for most, especially anyone wishing to gain any title be it a paper title, or not, but Tyson still won a paper title and looked great in winning the WBC title from Bruno. Post Buster Douglas, I agree, Stewart was a quality heavyweight, but he was psyched out before he stepped through the ropes. Whether you hate him, or love him, Tyson was one of the best when he was in his prime.

He missed just over 4 years, which is roughly a half-year longer than Ali missed due to the draft-dodging conviction. Ali still managed to put together a halfway-decent career after that.

And let's not forget that the Douglas loss was BEFORE the rape conviction, as was the first fight with Frank Bruno (which explains why Bruno was psyched out in the rematch, even though the Tyson mystique had pretty much evaporated by then as far as other top fighters were concerned). If Tyson wasn't in his prime then, then when was this mythical "Tyson prime"? My point is, IMO the Douglas loss dispelled the aura of invincibility Tyson had used to win many fights before they even started. Every time he met a really top heavyweight after that, he lost badly. The problem with evaluating even his short prime (call it from '86 to '89) is that he never faced another really top true heavyweight near his prime in it. Berbick was a so-so champion, Mike Spinks was a natural light-heavy and was totally psyched out from the get-go, Holmes was not intimidated but was way past HIS prime. So we'll never know how good the "prime" Tyson was, because he never met anyone with the skills, will and size to really test him. But we do know that he was spanked by a journeyman (even if it was the latter's finest hour - I won't take that away from Douglas) during this supposed prime, and was taken the distance by some guys with decent but less than world-beating skills.

[The Keed]

I was the one who posted that most people only remember the post jail Tyson. The reason I say that is because he missed what, three, four, or five years in the ring? That much of an abscence would be the end for most, especially anyone wishing to gain any title be it a paper title, or not, but Tyson still won a paper title and looked great in winning the WBC title from Bruno. Post Buster Douglas, I agree, Stewart was a quality heavyweight, but he was psyched out before he stepped through the ropes. Whether you hate him, or love him, Tyson was one of the best when he was in his prime.

He missed just over 4 years, which is roughly a half-year longer than Ali missed due to the draft-dodging conviction. Ali still managed to put together a halfway-decent career after that.

And let's not forget that the Douglas loss was BEFORE the rape conviction, as was the first fight with Frank Bruno (which explains why Bruno was psyched out in the rematch, even though the Tyson mystique had pretty much evaporated by then as far as other top fighters were concerned). If Tyson wasn't in his prime then, then when was this mythical "Tyson prime"? My point is, IMO the Douglas loss dispelled the aura of invincibility Tyson had used to win many fights before they even started. Every time he met a really top heavyweight after that, he lost badly. The problem with evaluating even his short prime (call it from '86 to '89) is that he never faced another really top true heavyweight near his prime in it. Berbick was a so-so champion, Mike Spinks was a natural light-heavy and was totally psyched out from the get-go, Holmes was not intimidated but was way past HIS prime. So we'll never know how good the "prime" Tyson was, because he never met anyone with the skills, will and size to really test him. But we do know that he was spanked by a journeyman (even if it was the latter's finest hour - I won't take that away from Douglas) during this supposed prime, and was taken the distance by some guys with decent but less than world-beating skills.

I agree with Eric... IMO, Tyson was ALWAYS an overrated, obviously-limited fighter just waiting to get exposed. Most of the guys Tyson fought prior to (and after) the Douglas fight were slow, stiff fellows with little feet or head movement. Berbick, Thomas, Bonecrusher, Spinks, Bruno, Truth Williams, Stewart, Ruddock, and the OLD Holmes (who, if you'll remember, was also having his very FIRST fight off a two-year layoff as well), among others, ALL pretty much fit into that category. Douglas was one of the very, very few guys Tyson had fought at that time with a truly good defense, who could move and box well, and he exposed all the limitations that had ALWAYS been in Tyson and were evident to anyone who took the time to look. Tyson was always VERY one-dimensional, he couldn't fight for sh*t backing up, and he wasn't comfortable fighting on the inside either. On top of that, he often used to get wild and sloppy if a fight used to go beyond a few rounds or if the guy managed to frustrate him somehow. The reason it took him as long as it did to get so well and truly exposed was that he was around in one of the weakest eras in heavyweight history, and it just so happened that none of the guys he fought for a while had the right style to do the job.

In other words, Tyson is not, and NEVER was, at ANY time, one of the very best.

[Eric the Viking]

Just in case any of you might have gotten the impression that Keed and I are annoyingly ... agreeable ... well, let's just say there are certain other fighters we don't quite see eye-to-eye on. ;)

[The Keed]

Just in case any of you might have gotten the impression that Keed and I are annoyingly ... agreeable ... well, let's just say there are certain other fighters we don't quite see eye-to-eye on. ;)

Actually, just one.

As soon as he retires, Eric and I plan to tie the knot.

[Eric the Viking]

Just in case any of you might have gotten the impression that Keed and I are annoyingly ... agreeable ... well, let's just say there are certain other fighters we don't quite see eye-to-eye on. ;)

Actually, just one.

As soon as he retires, Eric and I plan to tie the knot.

What a sweet, proposal, Keed - I am truly touched (hey, hands off 'til you get me that ring, bub!) Look at me, I'm blushing... ;)

[knockout artist]

Of course Tyson was one of the best.

Who else, in the mid to late 1980's ko'd Berbick & Tubbs the way Tyson did?

Mike Tyson beat a very gifted and prime Tony Tucker, despite conceding lots of physical advantages. FIVE years before Lewis looked pedestrian in outpointed the crack head version.

Who else beat Michael Spinks, let alone Ko'd him in a round.

Who else stopped Carl Williams as impressively as Tyson did?

Who else beat Frank Bruno as convincinly as Tyson did twice.

Who else KO'd Alex Stewart in a round?

There are lots of other questions I could ask.

Dont let your dislike of Tyson the person cloud your judgement of him as a fighter.

In his brief prime, he was, of course, great.

The Tyson that KO'd Berbick, Tubbs, Spinks Williams and Stewart would have been competetive with EVERY HW Champion in History.

Whether he would have beaten them all? I dont think so, but I feel he would have stopped many of them early.

[Southpaw Stylist]

Has Tyson ever actually beaten a great heavyweight IN THEIR PRIME?

[The Keed]

Has Tyson ever actually beaten a great heavyweight IN THEIR PRIME?

NO.

[knockout artist]

Has Tyson ever actually beaten a great heavyweight IN THEIR PRIME?

NO.

You could ask the same question Lennox Lewis, and Muhammad Ali and come up with the same answer.

[The Keed]

Has Tyson ever actually beaten a great heavyweight IN THEIR PRIME?

NO.

You could ask the same question Lennox Lewis, and Muhammad Ali and come up with the same answer.

Muhammad Ali??

Liston, Frazier, and Foreman weren't great??

[Eric the Viking]

Liston, Frazier, and Foreman weren't great??

And the first Frazier fight was after Ali's 3-year layoff, so you could make the same argument as the Tysonites do, that we never saw Ali in his prime after that. Whether you believe that or not, he definitely was past his prime vs. Foreman, who was most definitely in his prime at the time - that Foreman inspired at least as much fear and awe as "prime" Tyson did. Coming into the fight with Ali, Foreman was 40-0 with 38 KOs, and had blasted out both Frazier and Ken Norton in less than 2 rounds previously that very same year- - Now THAT's what I call a great heavyweight in his prime.

Sheesh.

As for Lewis, he disposed of the same kind of opposition as Tyson for much of early career - he wasn't the kind of fast starter Tyson was, so it often took him a few more rounds - big f'in deal. Of course Lewis has the 2 KOs-to-journeymen blemishes on his record, but in neither case was he thoroughly outboxed in every way, like Tyson was by Douglas. He got careless and got caught with big punches, that's all. In both cases he trained his butt off and won the rematches convincingly. He doesn't have a great chin (and I do give Tyson credit for that - he can take a punch), no great secret there. Oh yeah, along the way he also beat Holyfield (twice, in most people's opinions), was blatantly ducked by a prime Bowe, and when he and Tyson finally did meet (both similarly past their physical primes), there was little doubt who was the man.

So, no, Lewis has not FACED any more great heavies in their primes than Tyson, but at least when he did, he actually WON.

[knockout artist]

NO.

You could ask the same question Lennox Lewis, and Muhammad Ali and come up with the same answer.

Muhammad Ali??

Liston, Frazier, and Foreman weren't great??

IN THEIR PRIME?

[The Keed]

Who else stopped Carl Williams as impressively as Tyson did?

Well, a SHOT Mike Weaver for one...

[The Keed]

Of course Tyson was one of the best.

Who else, in the mid to late 1980's ko'd Berbick & Tubbs the way Tyson did?

Mike Tyson beat a very gifted and prime Tony Tucker, despite conceding lots of physical advantages. FIVE years before Lewis looked pedestrian in outpointed the crack head version.

Who else beat Michael Spinks, let alone Ko'd him in a round.

Who else stopped Carl Williams as impressively as Tyson did?

Who else beat Frank Bruno as convincinly as Tyson did twice.

Who else KO'd Alex Stewart in a round?

None of those wins prove anything other than Tyson can punch, which no one ever denied. None of those guys were great. They were all fairly beatable, regardless of whether they were easy to KO or not.


"Mike Tyson beat a very gifted and prime Tony Tucker, despite conceding lots of physical advantages. FIVE years before Lewis looked pedestrian in outpointed the crack head version."

Yeah, but was Tucker fighting the whole fight with Lewis with a broken right hand, as he was against Tyson?

Also, that "pedestrian" Lewis was able to floor Tucker a couple of times, something Tyson couldn't do once, no matter how hard he tried.

[jsc1973]

The best Tyson fight after Douglas before prison was the first Ruddock fight; after prison, the best performance was the rematch with Bruno.

Tony Tucker was a hell of a fighter when Tyson faced him. He probably would have been a titleholder of some sort for quite a while if Mike Tyson hadn't been around. As it was, he was in the picture for eight more years after losing to Tyson, long enough to cause George Foreman to get stripped of a belt for ducking him.

Tyson was one of the greatest ever from 1986-89, but I don't consider that long enough to rate him a top-10 all time HW. Riddick Bowe was great for a couple of years too, but he wasn't as nuts as Tyson so he doesn't stay in the headlines so many years later.

[The_Power]

Tyson's best post douglas performance was Frank Bruno in 96, the way he beat him up made many believe that prison really hadnt effected him, assisted by the fact that he stopped frank 2 rounds quicker than he had in 89.

[dondada]

I think a 1987/8 Mike Tyson would have caused problems for any heavyweight in history. Our sport is a strange one where we often look negatively at fighters instead of what they could do well. At that time he was amazingly quick with great lateral movement and (as he probably still has) devastating power - though then it came in combinations if he needed it.

Comments like "He couldn't fight backing up" are probably correct but IMO aren't particularly relevant (during his prime, I'm limiting my comments to the time above). They ARE relevant when discussing his overall place in history though.

I think when we are looking at a fighter in his prime we should try and discard the deterioration we saw in later fights, in different circumstances - difficult though this may be.

[dondada]

BTW re the original question, I'd probably go for the first Ruddock bout.

[mrbassie]

I would agree that it was Ruddock the first time. He was the only dangerous fighter that Tyson fought between Douglas and Holyfield that actually wasn't intimidated beyond trying to make a fight of it (that I can think of at least), and Tyson dominated him.

[perrycarter]

Joe Louis never beat a great heavyweight in thier prime, Rocky Marciano didn't, Jack Dempsey didn't, Jack Johnson didn't, Larry Holmes didn't. Nobody can argue their greatness. It is very unusual to see two legitimately great fighters in their prime at the time exact time.

As for the original question... slim pickins. He didnt do too much. I am going to say Frans Botha because he overcame adversity to win. He was getting outboxed and was able to land a big punch to end it.

[zurdo]

I would say the second Razor Ruddock fight because he had to overcome some rocky moments to beat a legitimately tough opponent...It was a pretty rough-tough sloppy fight.So its not an asthetic masterpiece but it's pretty entertaining . Its the only time I can remember Tyson really gutting one out...

[mozzainoz]

The Bruno rematch,he had bad intentions in that fight,and poor Bruno knew it.other than that i too would say the first Ruddock fight,although Razor was growing in confidence and finding his target more frequently,should it have been stopped when it was?