BoxRec

ThatOne wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Teddy Atlas?

Gee, I can't think of any reason he'd have an axe to grind where Tyson is concerned

I think that's called argumentum ad hominem; attacking the person who made the argument (Teddy Atlas) and not the argument itself.

Of course Teddy Atlas was mad at Mike Tyson for sexually assaulting his 13 year old ?, fifteen year old? niece but he was prophetic in predicting that Tyson would get frustrated by Holyfield and would extricate himself from the fight by getting disaqualified. We have the benefit of hindsight to evaluate his prediction and his prediction turned out to be correct.

As often as not, the individual & the baggage which comes with them is as relevant, if not, moreso, than their opinion.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

ThatOne wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Teddy Atlas?

Gee, I can't think of any reason he'd have an axe to grind where Tyson is concerned

I think that's called argumentum ad hominem; attacking the person who made the argument (Teddy Atlas) and not the argument itself.

Of course Teddy Atlas was mad at Mike Tyson for sexually assaulting his 13 year old ?, fifteen year old? niece but he was prophetic in predicting that Tyson would get frustrated by Holyfield and would extricate himself from the fight by getting disaqualified. We have the benefit of hindsight to evaluate his prediction and his prediction turned out to be correct.

As often as not, the individual & the baggage which comes with them is as relevant, if not, moreso, than their opinion.

But he was spot on in his opinion and he went out on a limb. To predict a loss is one thing but to predict a loss via disqualifaction is something else.

lithium...granberry.....lithium.....and I'm not sure you meant to say thorazine......so I ignored it, to be kind. I think he was on lorazapam and lithium...or at least that was the rumor. lithium can indeed cause the things you mention, but not TAKEN AS DIRECTED if kept within certain time frames.. At least that is prevailing wisdom.

And their are differing opinions....yours being one of them. However I was attempting to agree with your sloppy assertion. I did hear tell about thorazine as well, but what butcher would give a guy worth as much money as Tyson Thorazine? That's for the paupers and medicaid folks. Anyone with money would bypass that one.

Anyway, try to capture the spirit of things, don't be overly obsessed with details.

True enough, but he had insight into Tyson most of us don't.

That said --- & as a general fan of Atlas --- I cannot possibly view him as objective when it comes to Tyson. If he says Holyfield would always have beaten him, I'm dismissing it. Atlas might nominate me to always beat Tyson. I don't blame him one bit for his bias (in point of fact, I admire the fact he had the balls to say & do what D'Amato didn't, & he should be applauded for some of his efforts in Tyson's camp), but they exist, & they are powerful influences on him.

by the way, EVERY new drug has seemingly few side effects.....but over time EVERY drug seems to get worse and worse......strange eh?

MEISINGER wrote:holyfield had his number.
evander had no fear and a great chin

Holyfield can't be intimidated. Tyson relies on backing you up and putting you on the end of those explosive overhand shots and power hooks. Holyfield came to Tyson, got inside his power and frustrated him.

Was Holyfield intimidated by Cooper? By Bowe in their first meet?

I only ask because it is apparently the rule in this match-up for people that if Tyson cannot intimidate Holyfield, his devastating blend of power, accuracy & handspeed immediately desert him, leaving Holyfield with nothing more to pick apart than a glorified Earnie Shavers.

BoxBuzz wrote:lithium...granberry.....lithium.....and I'm not sure you meant to say thorazine......so I ignored it, to be kind. I think he was on lorazapam and lithium...or at least that was the rumor. lithium can indeed cause the things you mention, but not TAKEN AS DIRECTED if kept within certain time frames.. At least that is prevailing wisdom.

And their are differing opinions....yours being one of them. However I was attempting to agree with your sloppy assertion. I did hear tell about thorazine as well, but what butcher would give a guy worth as much money as Tyson Thorazine? That's for the paupers and medicaid folks. Anyone with money would bypass that one.

Anyway, try to capture the spirit of things, don't be overly obsessed with details.

Take this and shove it up your ass, buz:

No longer on lithium and Thorazine, the antipsychotic drugs he had been taking, Tyson fired back. Last Friday he filed his own petition in New Jersey for divorce or annulment, claiming that he had married Givens after she had falsely told him she was pregnant.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm

BoxBuzz wrote:lithium...granberry.....lithium.....and I'm not sure you meant to say thorazine......so I ignored it, to be kind. I think he was on lorazapam and lithium...or at least that was the rumor. lithium can indeed cause the things you mention, but not TAKEN AS DIRECTED if kept within certain time frames.. At least that is prevailing wisdom.

And their are differing opinions....yours being one of them. However I was attempting to agree with your sloppy assertion. I did hear tell about thorazine as well, but what butcher would give a guy worth as much money as Tyson Thorazine? That's for the paupers and medicaid folks. Anyone with money would bypass that one.

Anyway, try to capture the spirit of things, don't be overly obsessed with details.

Take this and shove it up your ass, buz:

Perhaps the strangest episode of the soap opera that unfolded over the following weeks was last month's 20/20 interview, during which a docile Tyson silently stroked his wife's neck while she described him to Barbara Walters as a violent and dangerous "manic-depressive." Like everything else in their lives, the interview almost instantly became a bone of contention. "He insisted on doing it," says Givens. "He told me that you cannot snub Barbara Walters. I thought, 'Oh, well, if this gets him to treatment, it'll be good.' " For his part, Tyson now claims that, at his wife's insistence, he was under the heavily tranquilizing influence of Thorazine and lithium during the interview. "People say the medication would ruin his ability to fight," she says. "He is a fighter, and it is part of his job to be dangerous in the ring. But there is a life outside of the ring, and he has to live there, too."

http://www.people.com/people/archive/ar ... 74,00.html

granberry if it's true then it's true. I'm genuinely surprised and still wonder if they got it right, don't you often question that mags credibility? I'll overlook your insulting manner since it is directed at me. Please Don't do it to others.

However you seem to have SOME knowledge about these drugs, I am rather familiar with them. Throrazine isn't even all that recommended for the entry level poor violent person....UNLESS they are nearly certifiable and POOR. IT's CHEAP! 20 cents a pill! Even you and I could afford it! And as you seem to be aware it's sort of "bleach for the brain". I just can't understand why a guy worth this much would be offered that from his physician. Yes yes it is "legal" and it is appropriate for his diagnosis. But there would be so many better choices without such potential consequences.

But you seem to have provided documentation. I never called you a name for saying it. However even you must admit that's an odd script for a rich man. If the info came from Tyson himself...didn't he also claim to have fought with a broken back?

BoxBuzz wrote:granberry if it's true then it's true. I'm genuinely surprised and still wonder if they got it right, don't you often question that mags credibility? I'll overlook your insulting manner since it is directed at me. Please Don't do it to others.

However you seem to have SOME knowledge about these drugs, I am rather familiar with them. Throrazine isn't even all that recommended for the entry level poor violent person....UNLESS they are nearly certifiable and POOR. IT's CHEAP! 20 cents a pill! Even you and I could afford it! And as you seem to be aware it's sort of "bleach for the brain". I just can't understand why a guy worth this much would be offered that from his physician. Yes yes it is "legal" and it is appropriate for his diagnosis. But there would be so many better choices without such potential consequences.

But you seem to have provided documentation. I never called you a name for saying it. However even you must admit that's an odd script for a rich man. If the info came from Tyson himself...didn't he also claim to have fought with a broken back?

What's ironic is that granberry deems People Magazine a credible news source and not Sports Illustrated when they both are owned by Time Warner and the former is a gossip magazine to boot... I feel sorry for such an intellectually dishonest person.


Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus.

All that aside, I don't appreciate being told to take any sort of suppository from anyone other than a Dr.

"Yep, TIME magazine is certainly the authority when it comes to boxing.

LOL

TheOne has finally admitted that he and his kind (fellow members of The Religion of Ali)
have no interest in boxing at all."

-Granberry

"Whoopee. I'm convinced.

If Farts Illustrated says it and wikipedia reports that then you have absoulute "proof."

No question.

TheOne demonstrates that he is an enthusiastic swallower of whatever his "news" media shovels at him."


-Granberry

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Was Holyfield intimidated by Cooper? By Bowe in their first meet?

I only ask because it is apparently the rule in this match-up for people that if Tyson cannot intimidate Holyfield, his devastating blend of power, accuracy & handspeed immediately desert him, leaving Holyfield with nothing more to pick apart than a glorified Earnie Shavers.

I'm talking more about physical intimidation rather than psycho-emotional intimidation, although the latter certainly is a huge factor in executing game plans. Against power punches it has a lot to do with mechanics. When you get backed up by power shots your opponent coming forward has great leverage and momentum and the punches have the room to reach maximum acceleration, and unfortunatley you can find yourself on the end of them. Tyson's bob-and-weave, overhand-bomb style is intentionally custom made for a small HW taking on bigger HWs. Holyfield is a CW who did not get backed up, but came inside where Tyson is ineffective. Holyfield is an extremely well-rounded boxer and beats Tyson on any night.

An illustrative recent example would be Cotto-Margarito and Mosley-Margarito. Whereas Cotto tried to 'box' the power punching Margarito all night, he got backed up and punished a lot. Mosey, on the other hand, boxed judiciously, interspersed with work on the inside where Margarito is ineffective, all the while staying out of the medium-range where Margarito's power swinging shots have full momentum. Looking at both fights I would say Cotto was 'intimidated' more than Mosley, but I have no idea what's going through their respective minds, just how I see them use the ring. (Of course plaster handwraps may also have been a big factor, but I hope I've demonstrated how I see it.)

IKSRTFO wrote: I don't think a prime Tyson ever would've stopped a fighter like Holyfield or Foreman. Tyson relied on knocking guys out and hurting him and when he couldn't do that he would choke. However I still list Tyson as one of the great heavyweights due to him being a rather short heavyweight destroying guys alot bigger than him with overlooked speed and defense..

I agree.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Was Holyfield intimidated by Cooper? By Bowe in their first meet?

I only ask because it is apparently the rule in this match-up for people that if Tyson cannot intimidate Holyfield, his devastating blend of power, accuracy & handspeed immediately desert him, leaving Holyfield with nothing more to pick apart than a glorified Earnie Shavers.

Those two guys were different in Tyson in that when the fire got turned up on them, they came out looking better. Name one fight where Tyson was getting punished and relied on will and his power to get the win? None. If he didn't knock you out, or have you hurting for 12 rounds with his power then he's almost like what he was in Mike Tyson's Punch out after you last a bit of time, he's just normal.

Ive never thought Tyson was a puncher in the mold of Foreman or Shavers. What made him so tough was his speed. His defense was also excellent earlier. Defense, speed, good power, a mystique are what made Tyson special. He needed to be on his game to beat Holyfield. He would never have just blasted him out. He definitely needed more rounds though prior to the fight.

Plus there is the tendancy of crouching fighters to stand straighter as they age & this hurt him I think.

wvboxer wrote:
. . . His defense was also excellent earlier. . .

Just after he took the Thorazine and lithium in combination

Tyson got hit more in his (first) fight with Frank Bruno

than he did in all his previous fights combined.

There was also something visibly wrong with his balance.

At one point he fell into the ropes with his opponent Bruno far away from him across the ring.

Jake LaMotta was quoted as saying he thought there was something wrong with Tyson's balance.

In a fight after he lost to Douglas, Tyson came out in the first round and fell flat on his face when he missed a right hand near the start of the fight.

He was a mess once those drugs whacked his nervous system.

When a fighter's balance is gone he is through.

The stance (secure balance) is everything.

gran, if a Dr prescribed that for Tyson, he ended his career. On the other hand Tyson did walk into the ring with a broken back.....at least according to him.

the one thing in life that is a sure bet is when one mentions the name tyson

excuses will fly

Controversial wrote:The first Tyson vs Holyfield fight was in 1996, when Tyson was 30 years old and 45-1 (39 kos). He only had 4 comeback fights since being jailed 5 years earlier (these lasted 8 rounds in total). He wasn't the fighter he once was but still young and not as damaged as he was after the Holyfield defeats.

Did Tyson jump into this fight too quickly? Also why do you think Holyfield just walked through Tysons punches without flinching? Tyson one of boxing all time greatest punchers couldn't even stagger the lighter Holyfield.

Or do you think no matter how many comeback fights Tyson had he would have still lost?

I think Tyson would have lost regardless of the amount of comeback fights he had.

Tyson could not handle adversity very well & never fought back from a losing position.

Tyson had not mentally prepared for a tough fight & when it dawned on him that the fight was going to be tough, he was always going to lose.

Saying that, even if he'd have been expecting a tough battle, I still think he would have lost as Holyfield was the worst nightmare for a fighter like Tyson, as Evander was too tough & had too much heart.

ThatOne wrote:"Whoopee. I'm convinced.

If Farts Illustrated says it and wikipedia reports that then you have absoulute "proof."

No question.

TheOne demonstrates that he is an enthusiastic swallower of whatever his "news" media shovels at him."


-Granberry

Granberry humiliated yet again.

Granberry cannot explain why he discredits Sports Illustrated when it doesn't suit his purposes.

Granberry cannot explain why he credits Sports Illustrated when it suits his purposes.

LOL

collins clone knucklez got a pm from his master collins and posted what he was instructed to.

He awaits his next direction from his master.

granberry wrote:collins clone knucklez got a pm from his master collins and posted what he was instructed to.

He awaits his next direction from his master.

Time to lock another thread by anally-infatuated granberry.