Mike Tyson: Did we really see his "PRIME"???

[elmersalsa]

Did we really see Tyson's PRIME???

Looking back at his fights in the 80s, even though he looked awesome, to me he had a lot to learn. He seemed to be confused everytime someone passes the 5th round against him, and did not know how to fight in the clinches. Sometimes in the clinches it was like he was comfortable there and didn't know what to do. He had speed, power and underrated defense with that peek a boo style, but had problems with big guys that tied him up close.

When I see a Joe Louis of 1938-41 or a Muhmmad Ali of 1965-67, were complete fighting machines at their total peak. Tyson to me, never reached that peak. Even the Tyson of 1986-88, was not a developed fighter like Louis and Ali in their primes.

Was Tyson in his COMPLETE prime or we missed the best that he had to offer??? I think he was close to it, but never reached it. What are your thoughts on this???

[Ezzard]

We got the best the man had to offer simply because that man with the great power and fantastic hand speed was also the same man who could not win a fight once he had lost a couple of back-to-back rounds. Tyson was always the same person it's simply that the faults weren't obvious when he was blowing everyone away and his psyche was not being tested. The moment Tyson came under scrutiny he failed.

Mike still has enought to beat a lot of HOF's simply because of his physical attributes.

Too many people ignore the mental side of the sport. Imagine Louis never winning a significant fight after losing to Schmeling.

Tyson gave us the best he was able to.

[The Great John L]

We got the best the man had to offer simply because that man with the great power and fantastic hand speed was also the same man who could not win a fight once he had lost a couple of back-to-back rounds. Tyson was always the same person it's simply that the faults weren't obvious when he was blowing everyone away and his psyche was not being tested. The moment Tyson came under scrutiny he failed.

Mike still has enought to beat a lot of HOF's simply because of his physical attributes.

Too many people ignore the mental side of the sport. Imagine Louis never winning a significant fight after losing to Schmeling.

Tyson gave us the best he was able to.

Nice summary Ezz.

[cultus]

nice Ezzard .. trying to pull the Black n white scenario. He beat Razor after the loss two times, even if it wasn't that significant it was an important win. And after the Prison he was just lost.. and never the same. Did the Brown bomber go Prison?.. or was he inactive 4 years .. then fighting 3 and being inactive again for two years... Tyson had a ride, it is not as black and white as some ponder.

after the prison he was gone mentally and skill wise... give him a brake.

[Ezzard]

The thing is everyone who ever stepped in the ring is beatable. Tyson was always beatable by someone with the right skills and gameplan. I just feel that too many people seem to think that all of these external factors are somehow unrelated to Tyson the man. Tyson was both brilliant and weak at the same time. I'm not the one with balck and white thinking here.

Joe Louis went in the army, not the same thing but he was inactive.

You can also argue the thing the other way. Look at Ali...

That time out of the ring took away the prime years but also prolonged him in an athletic sense. All those punhces he didn't take when he was inactive meant that he was physically a "younger" boxer when he met Foreman than he would have been had he not sat out those years.

I'm not saying this is definitely the case I'm just offering the possibility of a different interpretation.

[josh576]

I think we saw tyson's prime. he was a decent fighter who won fights solely based on his reputation. he beat spinks and berbick et al before they even stepped in the ring. buster douglas was the first fighter he faced up against that wasnt throughly scared of him. sure he fought guys after that that soon realized that he wasnt a machine, but their last names included seldon, botha and ruddock, not exactly world beaters. tyson was a decent fighter buy he was lucky enough to start in the era that he did. if he had been five years earlier, he wouldve been beaten by holmes....five years later, by lewis and holyfield (which he was anyway)....but overall tyson imo was a good fighter, not was he was cracked up to be

[evndrbsn]

The thing is everyone who ever stepped in the ring is beatable. Tyson was always beatable by someone with the right skills and gameplan. I just feel that too many people seem to think that all of these external factors are somehow unrelated to Tyson the man. Tyson was both brilliant and weak at the same time. I'm not the one with balck and white thinking here.

Joe Louis went in the army, not the same thing but he was inactive.

You can also argue the thing the other way. Look at Ali...

That time out of the ring took away the prime years but also prolonged him in an athletic sense. All those punhces he didn't take when he was inactive meant that he was physically a "younger" boxer when he met Foreman than he would have been had he not sat out those years.

I'm not saying this is definitely the case I'm just offering the possibility of a different interpretation.

Joe Louis was also fighting exhibitions while in the army. A ton of them actually.

[Gordon]

I always came out and argued the case we NEVER saw him in his prime.

He was shot at 24yrs old, before he went to prison.

I read an interview with Mike whilst behind bars and he gave a frank insight into his mind during each of his fights. He just didn't care, he was built up for the Title fight with Berbick and imploded before the fight. He was on a downward spiral from then onwards

Whilst Cus D'Amato was alive Mike trained like a man with a mission. After the old man died a little light inside Tysons head went out.

That light was his light of reason, the one that pushed him into the ring, the one that kept some sort of control over him, the one that kept him mentally focused on the job he had to do.

After D'Amato died Tyson became a loose cannon. He was a young man with a lot of money to burn and a lot of energy to burn with it.

The spartan conditions of training camp were not for him, he wanted to party, he didn't want to train.

He became a victim of his own reputation and imploded.

Tyson NEVER reached the potential he could have if guided properly.

I will always argue he could have been an all time great but he no longer had the hunger or ambition to go on and it showed in his mental atitude towards his fights and his opponents.

[cultus]

I always came out and argued the case we NEVER saw him in his prime.

He was shot at 24yrs old, before he went to prison.

I read an interview with Mike whilst behind bars and he gave a frank insight into his mind during each of his fights. He just didn't care, he was built up for the Title fight with Berbick and imploded before the fight. He was on a downward spiral from then onwards

Whilst Cus D'Amato was alive Mike trained like a man with a mission. After the old man dad a little light inside Tysons head went out.

That light was his light of reason, the one that pushed him into the ring, the one that kept some sort of control over him, the one that kept him mentally focused on the job hew had to do.

After D'Amato died Tyson became a loose cannon. He was a young man with a lot of money to burn and a lot of energy to burn with it.

The spartan conditions of training camp were not for him, he wanted to party, he didn't want to train.

He became a victim of his own reputation and imploded.

Tyson NEVER reached the potential he could have if guided properly.

I will always argue he could have been an all time great but he no longer had the hunger or ambition to go on and it showed in his mental atitude towards his fights and his opponents.

agreed.. though I think Cuz could have added only some few years to his prime cose he was goin off with A'mato also. The chance could have been that he could have matured enaugh to get into somekinda rythm.

[Ezzard]

Countless fighters would have benefitted from better guidance. My point is that you cannot simply divorce the man from the boxer. They are one and the same thing. Tyson was as good as he was for the same reasons he was as weak as he was.

Tyson was huge even before he won a version of the title. if you ask me that is pretty good guidance.

[wolverine1]

Both Ezzard and Gordon make some really good points. However, I tend to side with Gordon on this one. I, too, would have liked to know just how good Tyson could have been under longer tutelage by either Cus or Teddy Atlas.