PRIME MIKE TYSON VS PRIME LARRY HOLMES

Tantum · Post by **Tantum** » 15 Jul 2005, 02:02

A younger Larry Holmes wouldn't have to run from Tyson.

You two fail to realize that a fighter who takes a fight on 2 weeks notice after a 2 year lay off, is not going to give an optimal performance.

If Lennox Lewis came out of retirement to fight Samuel Peter on two weeks notice, weighed 260lbs, and got knocked out in two rounds, would you be saying Peter could beat any Lennox Lewis?

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 15 Jul 2005, 03:53

Cus D'Amato did Tyson more harm than good in the bugger picture. The preferential treatment and turning a blind eye to Tyson's growing propensity for self destruction did Tyson no favours whatsoever. D'Amato was only ever interested in Tyson the fighter and in the process helped create a monster that went out of control

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 15 Jul 2005, 04:15

zslayton wrote:here is the deal guys. i see some serious tyson hating on this site all the time. i try not to hate on any fighter. i try to look at them from an objective standpoint and measure them in that manner whether i like them or not.

No hating. Just ebcasue I don't rate him as a top 10 Heavy doesn't mean I hate him.

wrote:here is the thing. with out cus, tyson wasn't half of what he was with him. yeah, he was young when douglas beat him, but what about his mental and emotional state? he lost cus, he had been with don king long enough to fornicate him up, robin givens was divorcing him which was probably too much for him to handle therefore he wouldn't take shit as seriously as he needed too in order to stay at the level he needed to be at.

This just proves what a brittle psyche Tyson had and this is a big part of what makes a fighter. He was mentally weak and this is why he lsoes these amtch ups nto becasue eh couldn't punch ro wasn't quick enough.

wrote: plain and simple. tyson with cus, beats nearly any heavy at any time in their careers. cus could control him and make him do things no other person could make him do. i am not saying that he wouldn't lose later on down the road, but i am saying that with cus he wouldn't have lost to douglas, he wouldn't have gone to jail, and he wouldn't have lost what should have been his best years. he would have stood up and kept fighting like he did agains bone crusher smith (whom he couldn't knock out and kept throwing back) and against mitch green. he would have bobbed and weaved and thrown a jab, and he would have used smarts in the ring like he did early in his career.

Maybe he wouldn't have lost to Douglas with Cus around but he'd have still been given a hell of a fight. Douglas did things that night that only Larry had tried to do, stand up, put the jab out, etc... Larry was too old and under conditioned to keep it up but Douglas did.

I've said ti ebfore but, when it comes to it, Tyson was one fo the most mentally fragile HW champions ever. And that would not have changed whoever was there. Once Tyson was under any kind of pressure he would ahve folded.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 15 Jul 2005, 08:55

Grimm wrote: Hey I'm laughing because you have to know that the Tyson that fought Douglas was not the same Tyson that went 12 rounds with Tony Tucker, or the same Tyson that Ko'd an undefeated Michael Spinks in 91 seconds.

It wasn't the same Tyson? It wasn't the same Tyson? Well...what happened to him?...Was he in a car wreck?...Did he get Arterial Lateral Sclerosis or some other serious disease?... Did he suddenly age 15 years?..Or maybe...he went on vacation and got a body double to fight Douglass...You just don't get it!...Tyson was responsible for losing to Douglass...Tyson was responsible for losing twice to Holyfield...Tyson was responsible for wasting his once remarkable talent...Tyson was responsible for all that went wrong...hey, people die everyday...I would have liked to Cus D 'Amato and Jimmy Jacobs both be living today...But people are supposed to go on with life and not use things like that as an excuse for failure...a lot of people get divorced...a lot of fighters get upset and lose a fight... but the great ones came back, Tyson never did! It was the same Tyson...He just wasn't as successful...and it was his own doing...Mike Tyson had the world by the balls in the late '80's...and then let it slip away, nobody took it from him...he just chose to go down a different path in life...of course it was the same Tyson...he just couldn't handle success!

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 15 Jul 2005, 09:35

Sweet Scientist wrote:the great ones came back, Tyson never did

Totally agree...

Let's take the Tyson line for argument's sake. Tyson lost to Douglas. maybe he took him lightly, maybe he was having a hard time. Louis lost to Schmeling. Johnson and Dempsey lost on their way up, etc... So let's give him a break. He fights Holyfield a naturally smaller man and gets spanked. Holyfield was more ring worn than Tyson but Tyson had the lay off so maybe Tyson understeimated him and didn't take him seriously enough. Okay, we'll give him the benefit of the doubt again. he has a rematch wioth Holyfield, this time he must have trained properly. he knew what he had to do to win. This time there can be no excuse... But what did he do? he found a way of quitting. He couldn't take it, didn't have the heart for a fight with someone who was firing back at him.

When Tyson came on the scene he was cleaning up a division in disgrace, flabby men making a lot of money but who couldn't even be bothered to train properly. he was a breath of fresh air and looked like a top 10 all time heavy. i thought well if he can take a punch then he's got it all. It turned out that he could take a punch but had a fatal flaw: he was metally weak. This is why he self-destructed inside and outside of the ring. The moment a fight became competitive he lost. Mental strength is just as important (maybe more important) as any other attribute.

wouter · Post by **wouter** » 15 Jul 2005, 10:05

Tyson's prime lasted about half a round

Grimm · Post by **Grimm** » 15 Jul 2005, 10:52

wouter wrote:Tyson's prime lasted about half a round

So did most of his fights.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 15 Jul 2005, 12:44

i agree with grimm and zslayton. BUT TO ADD ON

i think it was not just cus that helped control him and keep him at his best. i think jim jacobs and kevin rooney were a big part. when cus died, he was still ok cause he had jimmy and rooney. when jimmy died, it was really tough on tyson cause he really had no fatherly figure left. but he still had kevin rooney. kevin rooney was a huge part of tyson. tysons PEAK FIGHT against spinks was when jimmy and cus were not there. kevin rooney was a greta trianer for tyson and had him doing all the right things physically.
NOTICE HOW WHEN ROONEY WASNT IN HIS CORNER ANYMORE, BRUNO HIT TYSON HARDER THAN ANY OTHER OPPONENT

sweet scientist, tyson lost his adopted father, his manager who he loved, his wife had a misscarriage, don king got a hold of him, his wife divorced him, he fired bill slatyon and rooney cause of don. losing rooney was a big deal. if those things wouldnt break u down mentally what would????
boxing is 90 % mental.

btw, u keep saying how douglass boxing skills won him the match against tyson. thats wrong, tyson beat himself more than douglas did. douglas deserves credit for stepping up, but not all the credit. DOUGLAS WAS THE WORST OF ALL THE CHALLENGERS, IF ANY CHALLENGER WAS GOING TO "EXPOSE" TYSON, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SPINKS, OR TUCKER, OR EVEN HOLMES. DEFITNELTY NOT BUSTER.

NO ONE HAS COME IN THE HEVAYWEIGHT DIVISION AND BLASTED OUT AND CLEANED OUT AN ENTRIE DIVISION AS QUICKLY AND DECISEVELY AS TYSON DID. DO U REALIZE HOW UNSTOPPABLE HE WAS????? BONECRUSHER HELD TYSON FOR 12 ROUNDS AND GOT ACCLAIM FOR A GOOD PREFORMANCE JUST CAUSE HE SURVIVED 12 ROUNDS. TYSON COULD FIGHT 12 ROUNDS BACK THEN, AS HE SHOWED AGAINST TUCKER.

GUYS LIKE PINKLON THOMAS,TUBBS, WILLIAMS, HOLMES, THEY WERE NEVER KNOCKED OUT BEEFORE AND TYSON TOOK THEM OUT BADLY. TYSON JSUT DESTROYED THEM. HE HAD SO MUCH POWER AND QUICKNESS./

dnahar32 · Post by **dnahar32** » 15 Jul 2005, 15:48

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
btw, u keep saying how douglass boxing skills won him the match against tyson. thats wrong, tyson beat himself more than douglas did. douglas deserves credit for stepping up, but not all the credit. DOUGLAS WAS THE WORST OF ALL THE CHALLENGERS, IF ANY CHALLENGER WAS GOING TO "EXPOSE" TYSON, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SPINKS, OR TUCKER, OR EVEN HOLMES. DEFITNELTY NOT BUSTER.

Brockton, your enthusiasm for boxing is admirable but you have to stop making these grand pronouncements, in caps no less.

I have to stand up for Buster Douglas here. I lived near Columbus at the time and I remember following that fight. For one night, Douglas was a badass heavyweight and that Douglas could have beaten any of the fighters you mentioned. He had the determination to fight from losing his mother shortly before the fight. He trained with passion. It was a Villanova/Georgetown situation, and Douglas was super that night. He had the jab working, he mixed in combinations, he did not take off rounds like heavyweights are prone to do, and he even got up from a vicious vintage Tyson uppercut when he got careless for a moment. Who else got up from a Tyson knockdown and won a fight? What more do you want from a fighter?

After the fight, Buster soaked in the victory parades and talk show appearances and lost all of his hunger. He did not lose the Holyfield fight in the ring, he lost it in training and with the hideous blubber he put on after the Tyson fight. Any fight fan in the area could have told you before the fight that he had no chance against Holyfield or any top heavyweight for that matter.

How can you say Douglas was the worst of all of Tyson's challengers? Less than: "Scared" Bruno? the shot Holmes? defensive Tony Tucker? Carl Williams? Tony Tubbs? The Buster that trained for the Tyson fight beats every opponent Tyson has ever faced, save Lewis. An in-shape Buster gives Holyfield the same problems that an in-shape Riddick Bowe did.

Grimm · Post by **Grimm** » 15 Jul 2005, 16:03

dnahar32 wrote:
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
btw, u keep saying how douglass boxing skills won him the match against tyson. thats wrong, tyson beat himself more than douglas did. douglas deserves credit for stepping up, but not all the credit. DOUGLAS WAS THE WORST OF ALL THE CHALLENGERS, IF ANY CHALLENGER WAS GOING TO "EXPOSE" TYSON, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SPINKS, OR TUCKER, OR EVEN HOLMES. DEFITNELTY NOT BUSTER.
Brockton, your enthusiasm for boxing is admirable but you have to stop making these grand pronouncements, in caps no less.

I have to stand up for Buster Douglas here. I lived near Columbus at the time and I remember following that fight. For one night, Douglas was a badass heavyweight and that Douglas could have beaten any of the fighters you mentioned. He had the determination to fight from losing his mother shortly before the fight. He trained with passion. It was a Villanova/Georgetown situation, and Douglas was super that night. He had the jab working, he mixed in combinations, he did not take off rounds like heavyweights are prone to do, and he even got up from a vicious vintage Tyson uppercut when he got careless for a moment. Who else got up from a Tyson knockdown and won a fight? What more do you want from a fighter?

After the fight, Buster soaked in the victory parades and talk show appearances and lost all of his hunger. He did not lose the Holyfield fight in the ring, he lost it in training and with the hideous blubber he put on after the Tyson fight. Any fight fan in the area could have told you before the fight that he had no chance against Holyfield or any top heavyweight for that matter.

How can you say Douglas was the worst of all of Tyson's challengers? Less than: "Scared" Bruno? the shot Holmes? defensive Tony Tucker? Carl Williams? Tony Tubbs? The Buster that trained for the Tyson fight beats every opponent Tyson has ever faced, save Lewis. An in-shape Buster gives Holyfield the same problems that an in-shape Riddick Bowe did.

Other than Tyson the only recognizable names that Douglas beat were Oliver Mcall, Trevor Berbick and Tex Cobb.

Those were the only names that i've heard before and they weren't even good fighters.

He was not even close to the top of the list of Tyson victims.

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 15 Jul 2005, 16:07

So a prime Tyson lost to an average fighter

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 15 Jul 2005, 17:07

i mean to put only a sentence in cap locks but i forget to take it off, and before its too late. my whole summary about the topic is in CAP LOCKS LOL. but thanx for the alert danhar

:P :P :P

6 Pack · Post by **6 Pack** » 15 Jul 2005, 17:45

Hard to say, because I have their REAL fight sketched into my head, and yet I have been conditioned with the old "Larry is a legend, and Tyson is a fraud" over and over too.

In the end I can see Tyson, in his prime with his head movement, hand and foot speed, and awesome power, overwhelming several heavyweights that most would assume he could not beat.

There can be a case that Tyson would catch Holmes with some leather and wack him out. Don't let the images of Tyson in the late 90's and 2000's stick in your head when you think of Tyson. That was not his prime fighting.

On the other hand, Holmes was a master boxer, who had plenty of heart and could come up with some good game plans. If Tyson was built for guys with a good jab, then Tyson was built for Larry Holmes.

I would think Holmes outpoints Tyson. BUt we should all not scoff at those that pick Tyson by KO, because Holmes got touched by several of his title challengers and was on the brink in a couple fights. If Tyson caught a guy like that while he was in his prime the fight was over.

6 Pack · Post by **6 Pack** » 15 Jul 2005, 17:48

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:DAPA I THINK TYSON HAD MORE POWER THAN SHAVERS AND IF NOT MORE 'POWER" HE HAD TEN TIMES MORE FINISHING POWER THAN SHAVERS. SHAVERS COULD NEVER FINISH ANYONE

I know what you mean. Shavers had great one punch power, but seemed to have trouble finishing his big fights after landing that one big bomb.

One punch at a time Shavers may have hit harder, but in terms of finishing skills, Tyson never let his man off the hook.

But that was the story of Shavers career. He could land the big bomb, but didn't have too much boxing skill, and often got bombed out himself when he could not finish (or before he even got started).

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 15 Jul 2005, 18:05

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote: sweet scientist, tyson lost his adopted father, his manager who he loved, his wife had a misscarriage, don king got a hold of him, his wife divorced him, he fired bill slatyon and rooney cause of don. losing rooney was a big deal. if those things wouldnt break u down mentally what would????
boxing is 90 % mental.

Excuses...excuses...excuses...nobody can defend Tyson's career without excuses...and virtually everything is 90% mental...you have to have your head on straight....someone is accountable...there are no free rides in life...Tyson was responsible...period!

NO ONE HAS COME IN THE HEVAYWEIGHT DIVISION AND BLASTED OUT AND CLEANED OUT AN ENTRIE DIVISION AS QUICKLY AND DECISEVELY AS TYSON DID. DO U REALIZE HOW UNSTOPPABLE HE WAS?????

Unstoppable?...Douglas stopped him...Holyfield stopped him...what are you talking about?...that's why Tyson isn't as good as you say...everytime he couldn't intimidate his opponent...he lost...you can't deny that with more excuses...Joe Louis doesn't need excuses, Ali doesn't need excuses, Jack Johnson doesn't need excuses, Dempsey, Holmes, Foreman, Liston and the rest don't need excuses...but you guys have to make them for Tyson? All that talent, but you have to make excuses for him like he's some kind of little kid...it's bull shit!

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 15 Jul 2005, 19:24

Each at their peak? I would bet on Tyson 3 out of 5 times and I think I walk away money ahead on this matchup.

Holmes was a better boxer in his prime.
Tyson was a better winner in his prime.

Tyson gets points for his ability to intimidate and overwhelm. If it was just boxing I go with Holmes but I bet on fights.

Each at their peak performance with all things considered not just boxing skills. I give Tyson the edge in a one event show.

But like I always say and the Ouma fight says it very clearly, anything can happen.

dnahar32 · Post by **dnahar32** » 15 Jul 2005, 20:39

Brockton wrote:

Other than Tyson the only recognizable names that Douglas beat were Oliver Mcall, Trevor Berbick and Tex Cobb.

Those were the only names that i've heard before and they weren't even good fighters.

He was not even close to the top of the list of Tyson victims.

Did you even read my post? A MOTIVATED Buster Douglas beats all of those Tyson opponents. Buster Douglas quit in a fight with Tony Tucker that was even on points and fought down to the level of his competition many nights. I get that. But for one night, he was great. And I would like to know how Tony Tucker, Larry Holmes, and Michael Spinks would have beaten the Douglas in Tokyo. Especially the Holmes who had come off a 2-yr layoff to fight Tyson. Not to mention Tony Tubbs, Trevor Berbick, Carl Williams, Frank Bruno, etc since you say Douglas was the WORST challenger Tyson faced.

Please explain this in your next post. I hate to nitpick, but when you make comments like the greatest and the worst you need to back them up. Or just be more careful not to include those words.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 15 Jul 2005, 21:32

Dnahar i didnt write that Grimm wrote that.

grimm wrote

Other than Tyson the only recognizable names that Douglas beat were Oliver Mcall, Trevor Berbick and Tex Cobb.

Those were the only names that i've heard before and they weren't even good fighters.

He was not even close to the top of the list of Tyson victims.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 15 Jul 2005, 21:33

Dnahar i didnt write that Grimm wrote that.

grimm wrote

Other than Tyson the only recognizable names that Douglas beat were Oliver Mcall, Trevor Berbick and Tex Cobb.

Those were the only names that i've heard before and they weren't even good fighters.

He was not even close to the top of the list of Tyson victims.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 15 Jul 2005, 21:34

Dnahar i didnt write that Grimm wrote that.

grimm wrote

Other than Tyson the only recognizable names that Douglas beat were Oliver Mcall, Trevor Berbick and Tex Cobb.

Those were the only names that i've heard before and they weren't even good fighters.

He was not even close to the top of the list of Tyson victims.

dnahar32 · Post by **dnahar32** » 15 Jul 2005, 21:41

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:Dnahar i didnt write that Grimm wrote that.

grimm wrote
Other than Tyson the only recognizable names that Douglas beat were Oliver Mcall, Trevor Berbick and Tex Cobb.

Those were the only names that i've heard before and they weren't even good fighters.

He was not even close to the top of the list of Tyson victims.

Oops, sorry about that. I'll address Grimm.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 16 Jul 2005, 11:22

BoxBuzz wrote:Each at their peak? I would bet on Tyson 3 out of 5 times and I think I walk away money ahead on this matchup.

Holmes was a better boxer in his prime.
Tyson was a better winner in his prime.

Tyson gets points for his ability to intimidate and overwhelm.

Except when he couldn't intimidate (Douglas, Holyfield twice, Lewis & other lesser fighters)...then he collapsed...Holmes in his prime would have won 3 out of 3...because Holmes wasn't prone to 'mental implosion'...Holmes survived tough competitive fights into his 30's...Tyson never won a major fight after age 24...that tells volumes about the inner character and 'heart' of Mike Tyson...he never came back from defeat, and he was only 24!...Larry was mentally tough...Mike was just mental...

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 16 Jul 2005, 13:30

Hey Science

Funny how we tend to disagree but I alway sort of get what your saying.
Ok on this one I think before Tyson was broken he in fact was well...uhh.....unbreakable.

I understand what your saying, Holmes was a bending durable personality and Tyson was a breaking brittle personality. Once Tyson broke that was it bye bye adios la la land permanent resident.

But before he broke, I just can't get my mind around Holmes having his way with him or being the one to break him in his prime. But I see the good clear arguement. You think Holmes had the skill at his peak. I just don't see the forensics.

wlvrne · Post by **wlvrne** » 18 Jul 2005, 17:15

My 2 cents : In all these posts I see nothing about how Tyson was a dedicated body puncher when he was in his prime. Holmes had that great jab, but readers forget that Tyson used to be able to slip the jab, & whack his opponent's body. He would do this round after round until he got to his opponent with his combination punches and eventually KO his opponent.
The writers here for Holmes remember the "storms" he weathered in his fights. Well, in his prime, Holmes never fought a "storm" like Tyson was in his prime, with the exception of Shavers.
A prime Tyson had true skills that readers forget about while focusing on his Douglas defeat, his Holyfield disgraces. Please note that in any of those fights, Tyson did not work the body like he used to. In the first Holyfield fight, he hit Holyfield only once to the body in the 6th round. I've got the tape to prove it.
Tyson even had a jab of his own, if you readers would get out of the emotional state of either defending Holmes or ridiculing Tyson.
Just match up the skills each had in his prime and compare. I would have Tyson winning that fight. Either by a decision a la Bonecrusher, or a KO a la Trevor Berbick.
p.s. yes Douglas beat him. Tyson did not train seriously for that fight. And for one night, Buster's star shone brightly.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 18 Jul 2005, 18:14

wlvrne wrote: A prime Tyson had true skills that readers forget about while focusing on his Douglas defeat, his Holyfield disgraces. Please note that in any of those fights, Tyson did not work the body like he used to.

Why not?

p.s. yes Douglas beat him. Tyson did not train seriously for that fight.

Why not?

...all I see...are more Tyson fan excuses...If Mike would've done this, if Mike would've done that...b-o-r-i-n-g...Mike didn't do those things...but you insist he'd fight a gem of a fight against Holmes?

Why? How do you know he'd train seriously...How do you know he wouldn't forget to go to the body?

...that's the whole point here...Holmes would be ready...and Mike would be Mike...

PRIME MIKE TYSON VS PRIME LARRY HOLMES

prime Tyson vs prime Holmes

Re: prime Tyson vs prime Holmes