Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 02 May 2024, 14:57
by apollo creed
Zhang would stop the 88 version of Tyson. Wlad would do it too.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 02 May 2024, 15:40
by Jakub079
apollo creed wrote: ↑02 May 2024, 14:57
Zhang would stop the 88 version of Tyson. Wlad would do it too.
exactly yes, if Zhang had been born in 1966, he would have become the youngest world champion. Unfortunately, he found himself in the most difficult era in boxing with Jerry Forrest, Hrgovic and Parker, who are much stronger than Holmes.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
apollo creed wrote: ↑02 May 2024, 14:57
Zhang would stop the 88 version of Tyson. Wlad would do it too.
exactly yes, if Zhang had been born in 1966, he would have become the youngest world champion. Unfortunately, he found himself in the most difficult era in boxing with Jerry Forrest, Hrgovic and Parker, who are much stronger than Holmes.
Top versions of Praker, AJ, Usyk ,Hrgovic, Zhang, Fury, Wlad would've stopped that 2 years lay-off & 38y/o version of Holmes too.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 03 May 2024, 10:26
by Jakub079
apollo creed wrote: ↑03 May 2024, 09:50
<font style="vertical-align: inherit;"><font style="vertical-align: inherit;">
apollo creed wrote: ↑02 May 2024, 14:57 </font></font>
<font style="vertical-align: inherit;"><font style="vertical-align: inherit;">Zhang powstrzymałby 88 wersję Tysona. Władysław też by to zrobił. </font></font>
<font style="vertical-align: inherit;"><font style="vertical-align: inherit;">[/cytat] </font></font>
<font style="vertical-align: inherit;"><font style="vertical-align: inherit;">dokładnie tak, gdyby Zhang urodził się w 1966 roku, zostałby najmłodszym mistrzem świata. Niestety, znalazł się w najtrudniejszym okresie w boksie z Jerrym Forrestem, Hrgoviciem i Parkerem, którzy są znacznie silniejsi od Holmesa. </font></font>
<font style="vertical-align: inherit;"><font style="vertical-align: inherit;">[/cytat] </font></font>
<font style="vertical-align: inherit;"><font style="vertical-align: inherit;">Najlepsze wersje Prakera, AJ-a, Usyka, Hrgovica, Zhanga, Fury'ego i Wlada powstrzymałyby tę 2-letnią przerwę i 38-letnią wersję Holmesa. </font></font>
Well, I guess so, you're right, my friend. If they would stop Tyson, it is logical that they would do the same to 38-year-old Holmes, who had no chance against Tyson. And they would completely destroy the 42-year-old version of Holmes who gave tough fights to Mercer and Holyfield, but they certainly wouldn't do it with someone like Hrgović, Zhang or Jerry Forrest
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 03 May 2024, 11:09
by BroughtonRulesRefuge
- This a thread that keeps giving for addled soft lads growing up bullied who carry the scars of their juvenile shame to this very day. Clusterfesting over the ultimate Bully both in and out of his prime, Iron Mike Tyson, natch they can never know Mike is still relevant and fighting today for Big $$$ unlike his era compatriots and most of the rest of the boxing community..
As a cogent historical reference, IBRO updated 2019 ratings has Tyson #11 between #9 Lewis and #12 Field. Those will change over time as the Ali ol'timers are the first to age out as the Louis ol'timers did before him.
Now this latest cash grab by young Jake Paul who has shamed boxing by promoting Big Purse$ match ups with Jake now scheduled in a Texas Sanctioned fight against Tyson using cartoon rules is telling. Nobody is courting Field who tried and fell down like a new born fawn recently, nor boorish LennieLewis nor Big Dummy Bowe to fight with Lennie still being a Lineal Champ in spite of retiring in ignominy a day before being stripped of his last title belt, the WBC.
Then the sublime irony of soft lads not understanding a great in their own time, Oleksander Usyk, and so the Klitschko Bros are still laughing their way to the bank while dominating Heavyweight Boxing. Usyk has been fighting on average much larger credentialed traditional Heavies than most Heavyweight champs in History, currently 27-0, 16 KO pro record with a 11-0, 5 KO title record
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 03 May 2024, 13:41
by Caractacus
-2014-
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
If the competition has improved, what did the leading player who was considered finished in the Tyson era, Larry Holmes, do? what did George Foreman do with the belt, whose face was smashed by the fighter completely destroyed by Tyson, i.e. Stewarts? how on earth did the broken and fat Tubbs give an equal fight to prime Bowe, and Bruno, who was knocked out three times in a weak era, became champion at the end of his career when he was prime? where is the logic here? Botha won the first four rounds against Tyson, no one did that in the 1980s. Was there no one as good as Botha in the 1980s? Berbick, Tucker, Thomas, Spinks, Holmes, Ruddock, Biggs - Botha was the hardest of them
He wasn't losing to run of the mill contenders though just Holyfield. He was still bombing out everybody else. Him being past prime doesn't fit with him crushing everybody he faced bar Holyfield and looking good doing it. He looked good vs Golota, Savarese, Norris, Bruno, Stewart, etc.
Botha he was coming off a layoff so not really a good example.
He looked great with Stewart but it was 1990, 6 years before Holy!! Golota was hopeless, Norris was nothing special, both fights were no contest. Tyson's last solid win was against Ruddock. After prison, he did not do any fitness training, his pace dropped after just two rounds. Have you watched any of his fights??
Bruno is a solid win and so is Golota. Golota is considered a big win for Lewis and should be for Tyson as well if were being consistent. No way to tell his pace dropped off as the only fight to go late was Holyfield where he was getting beaten up and hit a lot which would have affected his endurance.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 03 May 2024, 22:37
by Ambling Alp II
Speaking of consistency, you need to take that in consideration when evaluating fighters. Golota was about as inconsistent as you can get. He had meltdowns against Lewis and Tyson. They were not big wins for them.
Ray Mercer was also inconsistent. His performances varied greatly. Looked terrible against Feguson and not much better against Holmes. Looked very good against Morrison. Didn't look that good against Damiani, but turned it around and pulled out the fight. fought a good fight against Holyfield but just came up a little short. fought a very good fight against Lewis but didn't get the decision.
The thing is that you can't give a lot of credit to someone who beat an inconsistent fighter if that inconsistent fighter was awful in that fight.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
He wasn't losing to run of the mill contenders though just Holyfield. He was still bombing out everybody else. Him being past prime doesn't fit with him crushing everybody he faced bar Holyfield and looking good doing it. He looked good vs Golota, Savarese, Norris, Bruno, Stewart, etc.
Botha he was coming off a layoff so not really a good example.
He looked great with Stewart but it was 1990, 6 years before Holy!! Golota was hopeless, Norris was nothing special, both fights were no contest. Tyson's last solid win was against Ruddock. After prison, he did not do any fitness training, his pace dropped after just two rounds. Have you watched any of his fights??
Bruno is a solid win and so is Golota. Golota is considered a big win for Lewis and should be for Tyson as well if were being consistent. No way to tell his pace dropped off as the only fight to go late was Holyfield where he was getting beaten up and hit a lot which would have affected his endurance.
yes, Tyson was solid but the fights with Bruno and Golota were at a low level. what you can see in Tyson's case is a drop in dynamics after a few minutes of the fight. I am convinced that Tyson would have lost the Golota fight against Holmes 88 in the 7th round at the latest. It's hard to say with Bruno because Frank didn't take the fight, perhaps remembering the fight from 1989. It's a pity... In my opinion, Tyson's last truly valuable victory was Ruddock in 1991.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Jakub079 wrote: ↑30 Apr 2024, 18:55
He looked great with Stewart but it was 1990, 6 years before Holy!! Golota was hopeless, Norris was nothing special, both fights were no contest. Tyson's last solid win was against Ruddock. After prison, he did not do any fitness training, his pace dropped after just two rounds. Have you watched any of his fights??
Bruno is a solid win and so is Golota. Golota is considered a big win for Lewis and should be for Tyson as well if were being consistent. No way to tell his pace dropped off as the only fight to go late was Holyfield where he was getting beaten up and hit a lot which would have affected his endurance.
yes, Tyson was solid but the fights with Bruno and Golota were at a low level. what you can see in Tyson's case is a drop in dynamics after a few minutes of the fight. I am convinced that Tyson would have lost the Golota fight against Holmes 88 in the 7th round at the latest. It's hard to say with Bruno because Frank didn't take the fight, perhaps remembering the fight from 1989. It's a pity... In my opinion, Tyson's last truly valuable victory was Ruddock in 1991.
Mike had some solid wins but he didn't beat/or at least have a close fight against a top HW like Lennox, Bowe, Holy, Ike.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 04 May 2024, 03:18
by Jakub079
Of course. After 1991, he did not win against anyone at the level of Berbick, Holmes, Spinks, Thomas... the best would be past prime Bruno, but it is difficult to take seriously a fight in which one boxer only defended himself. Maybe Botha, but Mike lost all the rounds there
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 05 May 2024, 16:19
by Ambling Alp II
yes and no. going into the 2nd Bruno fight, Bruno was considered had some credibility. He was coming off his win over McCall, which was the biggest win of his career. . Tyson actually fought one of best fights after getting out of prison in that fight.
There was also some risk going into the Golota fight. You never knew what you were going to get with Golota. A focused Golota was a pretty good fighter. He obviously wasn't focused against Tyson and wanted to quit after the first round. (Yes the doctors came up with a fake injury later).
Tyson did fight a decent fight against Holyfield in their first fight. Holyfield just was a bit better and Tyson started wilting when it became apparent that he wasn't going to get the easy KO that he thought he was going to get.
Always thought his scheduling was bad after Holyfield II. didn't fight enough and fought inferior opponents. It's always a fine line between fighting too many tough fighters and going the opposite way.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 05 May 2024, 19:00
by Controversial
Tyson took the easy option fighting Bruno for the belt. McCall was never really anyone special, made a name for having a granite chin and of course for stopping Lewis but he was very inconsistent and often didn’t turn up for the fight.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 06 May 2024, 21:42
by Ambling Alp II
The easy option? The IBF title was vacant. The WBA title was held by Bruce Seldon, and the WBC title was held by Bruno.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 07 May 2024, 02:59
by Controversial
I meant easy as in the route to the title, he didn't fight anyone decent before fighting Bruno, two quick wins over McNeeley and Mathis Jr and then a title shot.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 07 May 2024, 10:57
by apollo creed
Controversial wrote: ↑07 May 2024, 02:59
I meant easy as in the route to the title, he didn't fight anyone decent before fighting Bruno, two quick wins over McNeeley and Mathis Jr and then a title shot.
Mike was brought up so smooth. He had a relatively easy route to get big fights.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 07 May 2024, 14:31
by Caractacus
it's a known fact that Mike Tyson's bodyguards are not there to protect Mike Tyson from the Public,
but they are there to protect the Public from Mike Tyson !
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 11 May 2024, 17:49
by Cojimar 1946
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑03 May 2024, 22:37
Speaking of consistency, you need to take that in consideration when evaluating fighters. Golota was about as inconsistent as you can get. He had meltdowns against Lewis and Tyson. They were not big wins for them.
Ray Mercer was also inconsistent. His performances varied greatly. Looked terrible against Feguson and not much better against Holmes. Looked very good against Morrison. Didn't look that good against Damiani, but turned it around and pulled out the fight. fought a good fight against Holyfield but just came up a little short. fought a very good fight against Lewis but didn't get the decision.
The thing is that you can't give a lot of credit to someone who beat an inconsistent fighter if that inconsistent fighter was awful in that fight.
A lot of the guys Tyson beat in the 1980s have very little in the way of quality wins though making those wins hard to evaluate. Ruddock never beat a guy who was clearly in the top 10 and Bruno and Tucker beat very few. Who did Carl Williams ever beat? One can question the value of those wins given the spectacularly bad resumes of the fighters.
Tony Tucker shared an era with Dokes, Ruddock, Witherspoon, Tubbs, Bowe, Holyfield, Mercer, Ruddock, Bruno, etc and somehow failed to fight any of them. He somehow managed to not fight almost all the top fighters of his era.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑03 May 2024, 22:37
Speaking of consistency, you need to take that in consideration when evaluating fighters. Golota was about as inconsistent as you can get. He had meltdowns against Lewis and Tyson. They were not big wins for them.
Ray Mercer was also inconsistent. His performances varied greatly. Looked terrible against Feguson and not much better against Holmes. Looked very good against Morrison. Didn't look that good against Damiani, but turned it around and pulled out the fight. fought a good fight against Holyfield but just came up a little short. fought a very good fight against Lewis but didn't get the decision.
The thing is that you can't give a lot of credit to someone who beat an inconsistent fighter if that inconsistent fighter was awful in that fight.
A lot of the guys Tyson beat in the 1980s have very little in the way of quality wins though making those wins hard to evaluate. Ruddock never beat a guy who was clearly in the top 10 and Bruno and Tucker beat very few. Who did Carl Williams ever beat? One can question the value of those wins given the spectacularly bad resumes of the fighters.
Tony Tucker shared an era with Dokes, Ruddock, Witherspoon, Tubbs, Bowe, Holyfield, Mercer, Ruddock, Bruno, etc and somehow failed to fight any of them. He somehow managed to not fight almost all the top fighters of his era.
You can play this game with lots of HWs. Louis fought a lot of average fighters in his reign. Holmes fought quite a few fighters who were quite inexperienced including Williams who gave him a tough fight. Tyson was fighting the guys there were to fight in his first reign as champ, he wasn’t avoiding anyone. Tucker wasn’t a bad fighter, he broke his hand early against Tyson so that likely affected his plan. Foreman refused to fight Tucker and relinquished his belt. I think someone else also ditched a belt rather than fight Tucker but I can’t remember who it was.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 12 May 2024, 08:38
by Jakub079
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑11 May 2024, 17:49.. Who did Carl Williams ever beat? ...
this is a very common mistake of beginners - you look at the CV, you see the paper, you don't see anyone significant on the green side and you already think that this guy is not worth your attention, Carl Williams gave an equal, probably draw fight Larry Holmes in 1985 in the fight for belt . He also had very good, although lost fights with Morrison and Weaver, where it seemed that it was a coincidence and not a lack of skills that determined the result. A hair of luck and the same boxer who hasn't beaten "anyone" could have a CV as good as Mike Tyson or Lennox Lewis. But it doesn't change what kind of boxer he was, only our perspective changes. Leon Spinks hasn't beaten anyone, before Ali a draw with Le Doux was his greatest success, and suddenly he wins against the Greatest and knocks him off his throne. What was Foreman's biggest victory before Frazier, Frazier before or after Ali, Norton before Ali
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 12 May 2024, 10:04
by Ambling Alp II
That is true, sometimes the results are deceiving. Williams got screwed in that decision against Holmes. He lost a very close decision to Witherspoon that could have gone the other way. He did beat Berbick.
Tucker beat Douglas and McCall.
Tucker, Williams, Ruddock, Douglas, McCall Tubbs, Witherspoon etc were not great fighters. They were good fighters who occasionally turned in a great performance. They all fought several of the guys aof their era and won some and lost some. Tyson beat several of them, usually but not always easily.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑03 May 2024, 22:37
Speaking of consistency, you need to take that in consideration when evaluating fighters. Golota was about as inconsistent as you can get. He had meltdowns against Lewis and Tyson. They were not big wins for them.
Ray Mercer was also inconsistent. His performances varied greatly. Looked terrible against Feguson and not much better against Holmes. Looked very good against Morrison. Didn't look that good against Damiani, but turned it around and pulled out the fight. fought a good fight against Holyfield but just came up a little short. fought a very good fight against Lewis but didn't get the decision.
The thing is that you can't give a lot of credit to someone who beat an inconsistent fighter if that inconsistent fighter was awful in that fight.
A lot of the guys Tyson beat in the 1980s have very little in the way of quality wins though making those wins hard to evaluate. Ruddock never beat a guy who was clearly in the top 10 and Bruno and Tucker beat very few. Who did Carl Williams ever beat? One can question the value of those wins given the spectacularly bad resumes of the fighters.
Tony Tucker shared an era with Dokes, Ruddock, Witherspoon, Tubbs, Bowe, Holyfield, Mercer, Ruddock, Bruno, etc and somehow failed to fight any of them. He somehow managed to not fight almost all the top fighters of his era.
You can play this game with lots of HWs. Louis fought a lot of average fighters in his reign. Holmes fought quite a few fighters who were quite inexperienced including Williams who gave him a tough fight. Tyson was fighting the guys there were to fight in his first reign as champ, he wasn’t avoiding anyone. Tucker wasn’t a bad fighter, he broke his hand early against Tyson so that likely affected his plan. Foreman refused to fight Tucker and relinquished his belt. I think someone else also ditched a belt rather than fight Tucker but I can’t remember who it was.
A key difference is that in earlier eras guys fought each other often enough that we at least knew how they rated in their own era. We don't have enough evidence with guys like Tucker, Bowe, Ruddock to even know how they rate in their own era.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
A lot of the guys Tyson beat in the 1980s have very little in the way of quality wins though making those wins hard to evaluate. Ruddock never beat a guy who was clearly in the top 10 and Bruno and Tucker beat very few. Who did Carl Williams ever beat? One can question the value of those wins given the spectacularly bad resumes of the fighters.
Tony Tucker shared an era with Dokes, Ruddock, Witherspoon, Tubbs, Bowe, Holyfield, Mercer, Ruddock, Bruno, etc and somehow failed to fight any of them. He somehow managed to not fight almost all the top fighters of his era.
You can play this game with lots of HWs. Louis fought a lot of average fighters in his reign. Holmes fought quite a few fighters who were quite inexperienced including Williams who gave him a tough fight. Tyson was fighting the guys there were to fight in his first reign as champ, he wasn’t avoiding anyone. Tucker wasn’t a bad fighter, he broke his hand early against Tyson so that likely affected his plan. Foreman refused to fight Tucker and relinquished his belt. I think someone else also ditched a belt rather than fight Tucker but I can’t remember who it was.
A key difference is that in earlier eras guys fought each other often enough that we at least knew how they rated in their own era. We don't have enough evidence with guys like Tucker, Bowe, Ruddock to even know how they rate in their own era.
Most eras are like that unless there is an outstanding fighter that stands out. All the other contenders could probably cause the odd upset but could also lose fights you'd expect them to win. HWs in general are often inconsistent or prone to not training properly more so than other divisions I think, far easier to cut corners when you don't have to make weight.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 13 May 2024, 09:11
by Ambling Alp II
Several years ago, I ran a thread about this. I took one year from each decade (I think I used 1925, 1935 etc all the way up to 2015) and counted all the fights that Top 10 guys fought the other top 10 at some time in their careers. This was just heavyweights and I used Ring Magazines ratings.
Not surprisingly, fights between the top guys declined started in the 1980s and continued to get worse in the 1990s and worse and worse in the decades of the 2000s.
Probably the biggest factor is the number of title holders. If there is only one, the guys in the top 10 will fight each other. They had to take the risk of fighting a live opponent in order to get a title shot. however, if there are 3 or 4 titleholders, it is smarter to bide your time, know you will get a shot in time.
I will say in the cases of Ruddock, Tucker and Bowe, we at least have something to go on.
Ruddock fought Smith and Dokes before he fought Tyson 2x. Dokes was ranked higher than him at the time. Can you even imagine a Dokes-Ruddock fight happening ine the last 25 years with no title on the line.
Tucker beat Douglas and McCall, and was competitive with Tyson. What never made any sense was why he just disapperaed for 5 years fighting complete no names until he finally fought McCall in 1992.
Would have been nice had Bowe fought more top fighters. However, its not like we have nothing to go one. He beat Tubbs and Witherspoon on his way up. They were past their best but had something left. Prospects never have fights like this anymore. Alos woth mentioned that Bowe did sign to fight Lewis, but the fight fell through because Lewis was upset by McCall. He was also going to fight Mercer, but it fell through because Mercer was upset by Ferguson.
