BoxRec

Posted: **17 Jul 2026, 15:15**

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 13:36
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 12:48
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑16 Jul 2026, 17:35

Sure in 1988 I think Witherspoon has a good chance if he shows up in shape.

Tysons fights at other points in time are potentially relevant to this fight though which is why I brought them up
So you want to take into account Tyson's fights outside of '88, but not Witherspoon's obliteration by Bonecrusher?
Sure he was technically prime for that fight if badly out of shape so you can count it. He beat Smith comfortably the other time they fought though winning virtually every round.

If you believe Tim he claims he deliberately threw the Smith fight to get out his contract with King.

Posted: **17 Jul 2026, 16:06**

keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 14:18
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 13:36
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 12:48

So you want to take into account Tyson's fights outside of '88, but not Witherspoon's obliteration by Bonecrusher?
Sure he was technically prime for that fight if badly out of shape so you can count it. He beat Smith comfortably the other time they fought though winning virtually every round.
You're not making yourself clear. Are we judging Tyson and as they were in 1988? Or not?

Yes of course

Posted: **17 Jul 2026, 17:01**

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 16:06
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 14:18
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 13:36

Sure he was technically prime for that fight if badly out of shape so you can count it. He beat Smith comfortably the other time they fought though winning virtually every round.
You're not making yourself clear. Are we judging Tyson and as they were in 1988? Or not?
Yes of course

So this is the Tyson who just destroyed unbeaten lineal heavyweight champion in 91 seconds. Witherspoon has already been stopped in a round previously, but is now in better shape. Tyson is at his absolute peak, Witherspoon is four years past arguably his best performance.

Posted: **18 Jul 2026, 17:35**

keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 17:01
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 16:06
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 14:18

You're not making yourself clear. Are we judging Tyson and as they were in 1988? Or not?
Yes of course
So this is the Tyson who just destroyed unbeaten lineal heavyweight champion in 91 seconds. Witherspoon has already been stopped in a round previously, but is now in better shape. Tyson is at his absolute peak, Witherspoon is four years past arguably his best performance.

I just don't buy that the 88 Tyson was significantly different than the version that lost to Douglas and Holyfield. The versions that showed up against Tyson may well beat even the Tyson of the Spinks fight

Posted: **18 Jul 2026, 18:12**

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑18 Jul 2026, 17:35
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 17:01
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 16:06

Yes of course
So this is the Tyson who just destroyed unbeaten lineal heavyweight champion in 91 seconds. Witherspoon has already been stopped in a round previously, but is now in better shape. Tyson is at his absolute peak, Witherspoon is four years past arguably his best performance.
I just don't buy that the 88 Tyson was significantly different than the version that lost to Douglas and Holyfield.

But you buy Witherspoon was different to the guy who was blasted out in a round by 'crusher?

Posted: **18 Jul 2026, 18:17**

Between 1987 and 1989 Witherspoon won 2 Split Decisions over rather unheralded opponents.

Split Decisions usually indicate a tough bout.

If he's struggling with the likes of Mike Williams and Larry Alexander, he ain't beating no Mike Tyson.

Posted: **18 Jul 2026, 19:13**

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jul 2026, 18:17 Between 1987 and 1989 Witherspoon won 2 Split Decisions over rather unheralded opponents.

Split Decisions usually indicate a tough bout.

If he's struggling with the likes of Mike Williams and Larry Alexander, he ain't beating no Mike Tyson.

Yeah, I think exactly that, and I hate the rapist. Tyson at his peak before he changed trainers;

Posted: **19 Jul 2026, 03:49**

Controversial wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 15:15
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 13:36
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 12:48

So you want to take into account Tyson's fights outside of '88, but not Witherspoon's obliteration by Bonecrusher?
Sure he was technically prime for that fight if badly out of shape so you can count it. He beat Smith comfortably the other time they fought though winning virtually every round.
If you believe Tim he claims he deliberately threw the Smith fight to get out his contract with King.

Lol. Theres less painful ways of throwing a fight than getting your face caved in and repeatedly coming back for more. Tim was swinging bombs trying to save himself!

Posted: **19 Jul 2026, 03:54**

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑18 Jul 2026, 17:35
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 17:01
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 16:06

Yes of course
So this is the Tyson who just destroyed unbeaten lineal heavyweight champion in 91 seconds. Witherspoon has already been stopped in a round previously, but is now in better shape. Tyson is at his absolute peak, Witherspoon is four years past arguably his best performance.
I just don't buy that the 88 Tyson was significantly different than the version that lost to Douglas and Holyfield. The versions that showed up against Tyson may well beat even the Tyson of the Spinks fight

You defended Witherspoon's MDs and SDs by saying 'most people thought he won comfortably'.

Well if that's an argument, most people think 88 Tyson was a different fighter to Tokyo Tyson and especially 96 post prison prison Tyson. The Kevin Rooney model was a fighting machine. The post Rooney model was a predictable head hunter.

The arbitrary nature of your idiotic arguments are really exposed here. To claim post prison Tyson was no different to his 1988 prime is really embarrassing.

Posted: **19 Jul 2026, 11:25**

Tyson was a different animal to the top HWs in his unbeaten stage, most were overweight, unmotivated and had never fought anyone as fast and powerful as Tyson. We saw this as he blew so many away, Spinks, Tubbs, Holmes, Bruno, Williams, Thomas, Berbick etc. I don't see Witherspoon being any different.

Posted: **19 Jul 2026, 13:01**

Tyson would ko spoon in 1 likely.

Posted: **23 Jul 2026, 19:44**

Tyson by stoppage. If Spoon's in shape and fights his best, it could go 7 or 8 rounds. If he's in less-than-perfect condition, Tyson bowls him over in one round.

I don't mean this as disrespect to Witherspoon, who was one of the best heavyweights of the 1980s. But ability-wise, Tyson was in another league altogether.

Posted: **24 Jul 2026, 17:53**

Would have to pick Tyson obviously. The question is how competitive be? As mentioned Tyson did blow out a lot of guys. However, it didn't happen every time. Tucker gave him a tough fight. Tills gave him trouble as well.

Best guess is that it would be something like the Thomas fight. Watching the fight, you tell Thomas is actually fighting fairly well. He landed some shots here and there and gave a good effort. But he still couldn't win a round and was stopped in 6. Something like that may happen here.

Posted: **29 Jul 2026, 14:10**

Riddick Bowie wrote: ↑19 Jul 2026, 03:54
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑18 Jul 2026, 17:35
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 17:01

So this is the Tyson who just destroyed unbeaten lineal heavyweight champion in 91 seconds. Witherspoon has already been stopped in a round previously, but is now in better shape. Tyson is at his absolute peak, Witherspoon is four years past arguably his best performance.
I just don't buy that the 88 Tyson was significantly different than the version that lost to Douglas and Holyfield. The versions that showed up against Tyson may well beat even the Tyson of the Spinks fight
You defended Witherspoon's MDs and SDs by saying 'most people thought he won comfortably'.

Well if that's an argument, most people think 88 Tyson was a different fighter to Tokyo Tyson and especially 96 post prison prison Tyson. The Kevin Rooney model was a fighting machine. The post Rooney model was a predictable head hunter.

The arbitrary nature of your idiotic arguments are really exposed here. To claim post prison Tyson was no different to his 1988 prime is really embarrassing.

Tyson had plenty of excellent performances post Rooney though. So that argument doesn't hold up

His fights pre and post Douglas were quick blowouts in which he looked very good so I think him looking bad against Douglas is largely due to Douglas

Posted: **29 Jul 2026, 14:14**

keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑18 Jul 2026, 18:12
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑18 Jul 2026, 17:35
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑17 Jul 2026, 17:01

So this is the Tyson who just destroyed unbeaten lineal heavyweight champion in 91 seconds. Witherspoon has already been stopped in a round previously, but is now in better shape. Tyson is at his absolute peak, Witherspoon is four years past arguably his best performance.
I just don't buy that the 88 Tyson was significantly different than the version that lost to Douglas and Holyfield.
But you buy Witherspoon was different to the guy who was blasted out in a round by 'crusher?

Yes because he was visibility out of shape for that fight and in an earlier fight with the same opponent won decisively taking virtually every round

Posted: **29 Jul 2026, 14:27**

Whether Witherspoon is 100% as prepared and ready as he can get or if he's out of shape and has half assed his training. The only difference in the outcome is how Mike Tyson wins.

If Tim comes in having half assed his training, he's getting blasted out in 1 or 2 rounds.

If Tim comes in as ready as he can be. He'd lose by TKO around the 7th or 8th round.

Either way he's going to get stopped by Tyson I think. He's just not good enough to have a real shot at beating him, and he gets hit too much to last the distance.

Posted: **29 Jul 2026, 14:49**

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑29 Jul 2026, 14:14
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑18 Jul 2026, 18:12
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑18 Jul 2026, 17:35

I just don't buy that the 88 Tyson was significantly different than the version that lost to Douglas and Holyfield.
But you buy Witherspoon was different to the guy who was blasted out in a round by 'crusher?
Yes because he was visibility out of shape for that fight and in an earlier fight with the same opponent won decisively taking virtually every round

Posted: **29 Jul 2026, 14:50**

gilgamesh wrote: ↑29 Jul 2026, 14:27 Whether Witherspoon is 100% as prepared and ready as he can get or if he's out of shape and has half assed his training. The only difference in the outcome is how Mike Tyson wins.

If Tim comes in having half assed his training, he's getting blasted out in 1 or 2 rounds.

If Tim comes in as ready as he can be. He'd lose by TKO around the 7th or 8th round.

Either way he's going to get stopped by Tyson I think. He's just not good enough to have a real shot at beating him, and he gets hit too much to last the distance.

Style wise, I don't think Spoon has the footwork to avoid Tyson. On his day, Tim was a good boxer, but Tyson is all wrong for him IMO.

Posted: **29 Jul 2026, 14:56**

Exactly right. He's just going to be there to be hit too much for Mike, and Mike has a significant edge in speed and power over him. Witherspoon was also a lot more vulnerable defensively than Tyson.

Posted: **30 Jul 2026, 14:28**

gilgamesh wrote: ↑29 Jul 2026, 14:56 Exactly right. He's just going to be there to be hit too much for Mike, and Mike has a significant edge in speed and power over him. Witherspoon was also a lot more vulnerable defensively than Tyson.

Plus, if the Douglas fight proved one thing, it's that Tyson had a hell of chin back then.

Posted: **30 Jul 2026, 14:32**

keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑30 Jul 2026, 14:28
gilgamesh wrote: ↑29 Jul 2026, 14:56 Exactly right. He's just going to be there to be hit too much for Mike, and Mike has a significant edge in speed and power over him. Witherspoon was also a lot more vulnerable defensively than Tyson.
Plus, if the Douglas fight proved one thing, it's that Tyson had a hell of chin back then.

Yeah it usually always took some beating to get Mike outta there at least until those last couple of TKO losses when he would just kinda give up upon running out of gas.

There's no way Witherspoon would ever have been able to land enough blows to get Mike outta there considering he's going to be getting outlanded 2 to 1 (or close to it) the whole time, and Mike's are gonna be harder and cleaner

Posted: **31 Jul 2026, 10:19**

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Jul 2026, 14:32
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑30 Jul 2026, 14:28
gilgamesh wrote: ↑29 Jul 2026, 14:56 Exactly right. He's just going to be there to be hit too much for Mike, and Mike has a significant edge in speed and power over him. Witherspoon was also a lot more vulnerable defensively than Tyson.
Plus, if the Douglas fight proved one thing, it's that Tyson had a hell of chin back then.
Yeah it usually always took some beating to get Mike outta there at least until those last couple of TKO losses when he would just kinda give up upon running out of gas.

There's no way Witherspoon would ever have been able to land enough blows to get Mike outta there considering he's going to be getting outlanded 2 to 1 (or close to it) the whole time, and Mike's are gonna be harder and cleaner

Exactly how I see it.

Posted: **01 Aug 2026, 18:59**

keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑29 Jul 2026, 14:49
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑29 Jul 2026, 14:14
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑18 Jul 2026, 18:12

But you buy Witherspoon was different to the guy who was blasted out in a round by 'crusher?
Yes because he was visibility out of shape for that fight and in an earlier fight with the same opponent won decisively taking virtually every round

He was in much better shape for fight one and won easily. I don't understand your response?

Posted: **01 Aug 2026, 19:01**

gilgamesh wrote: ↑29 Jul 2026, 14:27 Whether Witherspoon is 100% as prepared and ready as he can get or if he's out of shape and has half assed his training. The only difference in the outcome is how Mike Tyson wins.

If Tim comes in having half assed his training, he's getting blasted out in 1 or 2 rounds.

If Tim comes in as ready as he can be. He'd lose by TKO around the 7th or 8th round.

Either way he's going to get stopped by Tyson I think. He's just not good enough to have a real shot at beating him, and he gets hit too much to last the distance.

Tyson couldn't stop Tucker, Smith, Green, Holyfield, etc. Even Ruddock managed to last the distance.

Posted: **01 Aug 2026, 19:09**

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑01 Aug 2026, 18:59
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑29 Jul 2026, 14:49
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑29 Jul 2026, 14:14

Yes because he was visibility out of shape for that fight and in an earlier fight with the same opponent won decisively taking virtually every round

He was in much better shape for fight one and won easily. I don't understand your response?

My response is you're either trolling or delusional.

BoxRec

Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)

Re: Mike Tyson vrs Tim Witherspoon (1988)