what do you consider the bigger upset?

thunderfromdownunder · Post by **thunderfromdownunder** » 07 Jan 2006, 01:09

max schmelling KO12 Joe Louis
or
Buster Douglas KO10 Mike Tyson?

theone · Post by **theone** » 07 Jan 2006, 02:05

Douglas koing Tyson was the bigger upset. Douglas was a fringe contender and Tyson was a prime undisputed heavyweight champ. Schmeling, although slipping, was still a world class fighter and Louis was still just a promising young contender.

dalek · Post by **dalek** » 07 Jan 2006, 03:32

i'd agree with theone for the same reasons.

Professor X · Post by **Professor X** » 07 Jan 2006, 06:11

Schmeling-Louis

Tyson was overrated, Louis wasn't.

theone · Post by **theone** » 07 Jan 2006, 08:29

Tyson was overrated, Louis wasn't.

Obviously Louis was overrated at the particular point and time. Nobody but Schmeling and his people saw any weakness in the Brown Bombers game.
Schmeling exposed him. After that fight Louis made the neccasary adjustments and lived up to the hype.

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 07 Jan 2006, 13:17

buster over tyson easily. tyson was in the middle of his prime and a that point i would think one of the top fighters at anytime in history.

as for louis.. he wasnt yet in his prime, and he was only a top contender who clealy had it all. and besides schmelling wasnt a bad fighter himsel, because he was also a top contender in those days, and he is a top 50 heavyweight of all time imo.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 07 Jan 2006, 15:57

The only other fight that can compare with Tyson Douglas is Baer Braddock.

Professor X · Post by **Professor X** » 07 Jan 2006, 16:40

[quote="theone"][quote]Tyson was overrated, Louis wasn't.[/quote]

Obviously Louis was overrated at the particular point and time. Nobody but Schmeling and his people saw any weakness in the Brown Bombers game.
Schmeling exposed him. After that fight Louis made the neccasary adjustments and lived up to the hype.[/quote]

That's a question of experience. Louis wasn't experienced enough at that time (of course, there are no excuses for Tyson).

Young Clay should have lost to Cooper, too...but he still wasn't overrated.

Tyson, already experienced, didn't look any better against Ruddock (a literal one armed fighter) than he did against Douglas. Douglas could have beaten him again (provided, again, that he didn't piss his leg). Tyson, over his career, was overrated.

Schmeling could never beat Louis again. Louis wasn't overrated.

Douglas could have beaten

theone · Post by **theone** » 07 Jan 2006, 17:55

Anyone who could survive those first three or four rounds of jab/right to the body/left hook and fight a little could beat Tyson.

Your making it sound way to simple Decagon. Not too many fighters in history could get past the first four rounds againt Tyson at his best, and nearly all who could, would still not have enough to beat him. Tyson had his weakness like every other fighters has had, and Douglas was able to exploit it on that particular night. It doesnt make it a fool proof formula.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 07 Jan 2006, 18:32

Tyson losing would have to be the bigger upset.

Louis was still only a prospect, and nobody would have really expected him to achieve all he did achieve at that point.

But Tyson was seen by most as unbeatable, and he was facing a guy who was something like 30/1 outsider....major upset.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 07 Jan 2006, 19:04

Schmeling-Louis was a big upset, but Tyson-Douglas was a much bigger upset. There really isn't that much comparison.

theone · Post by **theone** » 07 Jan 2006, 19:49

Lots of fighters did get past four rounds against Tyson in his prime:

* James Tillis
* Mitch Green
* Jose Ribalta
* Bonehugger Smith
* Tony Tucker
* Buster Douglas
* Razor Ruddock

Actual you left out four others. I admit I overstated my point, but I believe the general point still stands. Besides Douglas and Tillis none of these fighters were a threat to win even though they got past the fourth round. Ruddock stunned Tyson a few time and made it interesting but Tyson was firmly in control of both contest.

That isn't exactly a "Murderer's Row," is it?

This aint no" murders row" but it aint no "bum of the month club" either.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 07 Jan 2006, 19:49

In his fights before the Douglas defeat only 10 out 37 of Tysons opponents went on after the 4th rnd....and 6 of that 10 got KO`ed a bit later on in the fight....

Not that many really

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 08 Jan 2006, 08:53

theone wrote:This aint no" murders row" but it aint no "bum of the month club" either.

You are correct, it's no "bum of the month club". Most of the guys listed weren't good enough to be in the "bum of the month club".