hhaehre wrote:This is true but a prepared Tyson with his head screwed on straight would have made short work of Buster on Busters best night. To beat a prime Tyson I think you would have to push him back and gradually grind him down. A good chin would be needed because Tyson would land. I think Holyfield pretty much supplied the blue print for beating Tyson and not many would be able to beat a prime Tyson, maybe not even Holyfield.
I forgot that Tyson was completely shot at 23. Forgive me.
Yes, just like the p4p king Chavez was shot as soon as he fought Whitaker. That Douglas beats any Tyson imo.
Holyfield had Tyson's number, but that consisted quite a bit of movement. The other thing that made Holyfield all wrong for Tyson was his height (not being a giant). Early evidence of how a Holyfield fighter would fair against Tyson was the Tyson-Tillis fight.
Tyson was at his best against taller guys. Bowe wouldn't be able to get too many punches on the Tyson that got low and moved his head coming in. Tyson hits him hard and often. Slipping a lot of jabs, but taking the odd uppercut inside.
In terms of the result. Two things happen. Either Bowe clings on for dear life or Tyson takes him out early.
I've never seen Holyfield compared to Tillis or had anyone say that Tyson did his best against really tall fighters. Well done!
Tillis was a small heavyweight and he caused Tyson a lot of problems.
Tyson used his disadvantage (his height) as an advantage. He got underneath punches which is easier to do with a taller fighter.
Holyfield had Tyson's number, but that consisted quite a bit of movement. The other thing that made Holyfield all wrong for Tyson was his height (not being a giant). Early evidence of how a Holyfield fighter would fair against Tyson was the Tyson-Tillis fight.
Tyson was at his best against taller guys. Bowe wouldn't be able to get too many punches on the Tyson that got low and moved his head coming in. Tyson hits him hard and often. Slipping a lot of jabs, but taking the odd uppercut inside.
In terms of the result. Two things happen. Either Bowe clings on for dear life or Tyson takes him out early.
I've never seen Holyfield compared to Tillis or had anyone say that Tyson did his best against really tall fighters. Well done!
Tillis was a small heavyweight and he caused Tyson a lot of problems.
Tyson used his disadvantage (his height) as an advantage. He got underneath punches which is easier to do with a taller fighter.
It's not rocket science.
It's hard to imagine you watched the fights if you think Holyfield employed the same style that Tillis did. He used movement to bother Mike, Evander muscled him around on the inside with his superior physical strength.
Mike struggled with Bonehugger & Tucker too. He won easily but their size caused him problems because they could just tie him up and Mike was pretty clueless in a clinch.
I've never seen Holyfield compared to Tillis or had anyone say that Tyson did his best against really tall fighters. Well done!
Tillis was a small heavyweight and he caused Tyson a lot of problems.
Tyson used his disadvantage (his height) as an advantage. He got underneath punches which is easier to do with a taller fighter.
It's not rocket science.
It's hard to imagine you watched the fights if you think Holyfield employed the same style that Tillis did. He used movement to bother Mike, Evander muscled him around on the inside with his superior physical strength.
Mike struggled with Bonehugger & Tucker too. He won easily but their size caused him problems because they could just tie him up and Mike was pretty clueless in a clinch.
It's called styles make fights.
Holyfield did use some movement. He didn't just muscle Tyson. I;m not saying Tillis is the same at all.
Bowe had no guts. He may well have quit on his stool.
J-C wrote:Bowe had plenty of heart as he showed against Holyfield and in the two Golota fights when he was getting the shit kicked out of him but kept coming.
Bowe did have a great heart in the ring.
There was nothing wrong with the stoppage in his Olympic fight against Lewis. It was an amatuer fight where they usually don't allow people to get decapitated, and clearly Bowe was rocked on several ocassions.
keithmoonhangover wrote:
Tillis was a small heavyweight and he caused Tyson a lot of problems.
Tyson used his disadvantage (his height) as an advantage. He got underneath punches which is easier to do with a taller fighter.
It's not rocket science.
It's hard to imagine you watched the fights if you think Holyfield employed the same style that Tillis did. He used movement to bother Mike, Evander muscled him around on the inside with his superior physical strength.
Mike struggled with Bonehugger & Tucker too. He won easily but their size caused him problems because they could just tie him up and Mike was pretty clueless in a clinch.
It's called styles make fights.
Holyfield did use some movement. He didn't just muscle Tyson. I;m not saying Tillis is the same at all.
Bowe had no guts. He may well have quit on his stool.
Dude, take a look at the second Golota fight and tell me Bowe had no heart. He may not have had much discipline but he had heart in spades. He would NEVER have quit on his stool.
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
It's hard to imagine you watched the fights if you think Holyfield employed the same style that Tillis did. He used movement to bother Mike, Evander muscled him around on the inside with his superior physical strength.
Mike struggled with Bonehugger & Tucker too. He won easily but their size caused him problems because they could just tie him up and Mike was pretty clueless in a clinch.
It's called styles make fights.
Holyfield did use some movement. He didn't just muscle Tyson. I;m not saying Tillis is the same at all.
Bowe had no guts. He may well have quit on his stool.
Dude, take a look at the second Golota fight and tell me Bowe had no heart. He may not have had much discipline but he had heart in spades. He would NEVER have quit on his stool.
Tyson would have hit him so hard and often that Bowe would have hung on for dear life, got knocked out or quit.
hhaehre wrote:This is true but a prepared Tyson with his head screwed on straight would have made short work of Buster on Busters best night. To beat a prime Tyson I think you would have to push him back and gradually grind him down. A good chin would be needed because Tyson would land. I think Holyfield pretty much supplied the blue print for beating Tyson and not many would be able to beat a prime Tyson, maybe not even Holyfield.
I forgot that Tyson was completely shot at 23. Forgive me.
Yes, just like the p4p king Chavez was shot as soon as he fought Whitaker. That Douglas beats any Tyson imo.
The Tyson that lost to Holyfield would have beaten any version of Douglas imo. Tyson was completely messed up for the Douglas fight. Buster put on a great fight that night in Tokyo but he was never as good as Tyson made him look.
keithmoonhangover wrote:
Holyfield did use some movement. He didn't just muscle Tyson. I;m not saying Tillis is the same at all.
Bowe had no guts. He may well have quit on his stool.
Dude, take a look at the second Golota fight and tell me Bowe had no heart. He may not have had much discipline but he had heart in spades. He would NEVER have quit on his stool.
Tyson would have hit him so hard and often that Bowe would have hung on for dear life, got knocked out or quit.
Knocked out maybe but quit, no way. The savage beating he took against Golota in their second fight is among the worst I have seen but there was no quit in Bowe. Heart was all he had in that fight but he had plenty of it.
hhaehre wrote:
Dude, take a look at the second Golota fight and tell me Bowe had no heart. He may not have had much discipline but he had heart in spades. He would NEVER have quit on his stool.
Tyson would have hit him so hard and often that Bowe would have hung on for dear life, got knocked out or quit.
Knocked out maybe but quit, no way. The savage beating he took against Golota in their second fight is among the worst I have seen but there was no quit in Bowe. Heart was all he had in that fight but he had plenty of it.
The Great John L wrote:
I forgot that Tyson was completely shot at 23. Forgive me.
Yes, just like the p4p king Chavez was shot as soon as he fought Whitaker. That Douglas beats any Tyson imo.
The Tyson that lost to Holyfield would have beaten any version of Douglas imo. Tyson was completely messed up for the Douglas fight. Buster put on a great fight that night in Tokyo but he was never as good as Tyson made him look.
I would never call Buster great, you didn't have to be to beat Tyson. I think his issues in Tokyo were Buster Douglas.
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I would never call Buster great, you didn't have to be to beat Tyson. I think his issues in Tokyo were Buster Douglas.
Better to just drop this. Nobody ever wants to admit their favorites actually lost a fight. Fans seem to have more excuses than fighters.
Many people seem to think Douglas could have beaten anyone on the night he faced Tyson, I don't. Buster never displayed those qualities before or after Tokyo. It's not like he had the perfect fighting style to beat Tyson either as Tyson crushed better fighters who fought in a similar way to Douglas.
Tyson was of course (like any fighter in history) not unbeatable, even when he was in his prime and 100% right but it would take more than Buster to do it and Holyfield showed how it could be done.
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I would never call Buster great, you didn't have to be to beat Tyson. I think his issues in Tokyo were Buster Douglas.
Better to just drop this. Nobody ever wants to admit their favorites actually lost a fight. Fans seem to have more excuses than fighters.
Many people seem to think Douglas could have beaten anyone on the night he faced Tyson, I don't. Buster never displayed those qualities before or after Tokyo. It's not like he had the perfect fighting style to beat Tyson either as Tyson crushed better fighters who fought in a similar way to Douglas.
Tyson was of course (like any fighter in history) not unbeatable, even when he was in his prime and 100% right but it would take more than Buster to do it and Holyfield showed how it could be done.
Tyson freely admits that his career ended in 1991. He was never the same fighter after that fight.
keithmoonhangover wrote:
Tillis was a small heavyweight and he caused Tyson a lot of problems.
Tyson used his disadvantage (his height) as an advantage. He got underneath punches which is easier to do with a taller fighter.
It's not rocket science.
It's hard to imagine you watched the fights if you think Holyfield employed the same style that Tillis did. He used movement to bother Mike, Evander muscled him around on the inside with his superior physical strength.
Mike struggled with Bonehugger & Tucker too. He won easily but their size caused him problems because they could just tie him up and Mike was pretty clueless in a clinch.
It's called styles make fights.
Holyfield did use some movement. He didn't just muscle Tyson. I;m not saying Tillis is the same at all.
Bowe had no guts. He may well have quit on his stool.
