The Official Boxing Thread
Options
Comments
-
They bout to ? on wards career something serious.
-
A prime Mike Tyson lost to a journeymen.
here's where u wrong...
mike may have still be in his physical prime, but mike was on the decline the second kevin rooney was no longer his trainer.....
dude was at his best the night he fought spinks, and he never looked that good again after that night....
the pairing of boxer/trainer is a very sacred one....
kevin rooney was the last remaining person in tyson's corner who was there from day 1 when they took him off the streets....
once rooney was gone....tyson was no longer perfect...
a lotta fighters can beat a rooney-less tyson...
but under rooney....the Mike that knocked out spinks in 1988 when he was 34-0...that's the best version of tyson...even if he was only 21
i don't consider any fight after that point as a reference point when discussing tyson, because he simply was no longer the same fighter....
that was him at his best
And I respect that but this is the thing with Tyson. U always get , if ? wouldn't have died, or if Rooney was still in his corner etc etc. The fact of the matter is , his flaws and obstacles are a part of the narrative. The way his career turned out he was a good not great fighter. Now u bring the spinks fight up being his last prime fight. So to me is says during his prime be never beat a great fighter. And that counts when u want to be considered a great fighter. Tyson is overrated. Oscar DeLa Hoya lost as his tough fights, but still beat tougher and greater fighter the Tyson. Like I said people love the nostalgia of Tyson but is resume is trash
he still won championships after ? died....
he didn't start losing fights, and gassing, and develop a reputation for being reckless till they removed rooney....
i mean there's a reason people stress the important about your day ones and being surrounded around good people.....good people keep you honest...
after rooney was gone, mike no longer had good people around him..
he was a 22 year old millionaire with no guidance or anyone looking out for his best interests...
not making excuses.. just point out he wasn't at his best anymore when they took his corner away
I agree all u saying is true. Still doesn't change the fact of what happened and how he performed. Fighters always go thru b.s. some over come it some fall victim. Doesn't change the resume tho. As a I said he was a very good fighter. But not the best of his era . He never beat a great fighter. That's facts. The reason why is irrelevant. Not only did he lose , he lost convincingly to the his peers.
no great fighter switched trainers like that and was still great.....
every time i've seen a fighter switch trainers... they looked off.....
i mean i could be wrong and talking out my neck
but both ali and ray leonard looked their best with angelo dundee
and i mean it's the same in other sports....
is brady as goon with belichick..
do jordan & kobe win as many championships without phil jackson....
that man in your corner makes a huge difference.....
it's just part of the sport
Again I agree not saying it's not a factor , it is . All i am saying the final result is what matters. Of course the player/coach/trainer is crucial. But there are also other sides. LeBron never had a great coach , Peyton was successful without dungy. But again as i said i agree ,however with all that said Tyson is the 3rd best HW of his era imo. -
Again I agree not saying it's not a factor , it is . All i am saying the final result is what matters. Of course the player/coach/trainer is crucial. But there are also other sides. LeBron never had a great coach , Peyton was successful without dungy. But again as i said i agree ,however with all that said Tyson is the 3rd best HW of his era imo.
You kinda arguing a different point though. It seems you're saying that from a career standpoint, Mike wasn't one of the alltime greats. There is validity to that and I have no problem with people downing Mike from that standpoint. Where my problem comes in is where people ignore his skill set. If you watched Mike fight, you have to admit, there is probably no other HW in boxing history that had his combination of footwork, head movement, power, and technique. Sure, he didn't fight great fighters, but let's be real, most boxers have at most 3-5 really good opponents over their careers and the rest range from cans to gatekeepers.
The difference between Tyson and others is that the gaps between him and his opponents were clear. Ali fought ? and sometimes took five, six, seven+ rounds to finish them. Tyson fought bums and they barely made it halfway through the first round. The majority of the fighters in that video with Foreman weren't great. Compare what it took for him to knock them out to what it took for Tyson to knock the guys in his video out. Let's say we all agree that Foreman had the heavier hands. Why is it that he had throw 5-10+ punches to get the KO when Tyson routinely got the same result in 1 or 2 punches. Tyson was a hell of a lot more skilled. That's the difference.
-
and once those skills diminished from not having a trainer who knew how to keep them sharp... tyson grew into an average fighter with just 1 or 2 good punches..
the tyson that fought buster douglas, holyfield, lennox..... he was not displaying the same skillset that spinks faced -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »
Again I agree not saying it's not a factor , it is . All i am saying the final result is what matters. Of course the player/coach/trainer is crucial. But there are also other sides. LeBron never had a great coach , Peyton was successful without dungy. But again as i said i agree ,however with all that said Tyson is the 3rd best HW of his era imo.
You kinda arguing a different point though. It seems you're saying that from a career standpoint, Mike wasn't one of the alltime greats. There is validity to that and I have no problem with people downing Mike from that standpoint. Where my problem comes in is where people ignore his skill set. If you watched Mike fight, you have to admit, there is probably no other HW in boxing history that had his combination of footwork, head movement, power, and technique. Sure, he didn't fight great fighters, but let's be real, most boxers have at most 3-5 really good opponents over their careers and the rest range from cans to gatekeepers.
The difference between Tyson and others is that the gaps between him and his opponents were clear. Ali fought ? and sometimes took five, six, seven+ rounds to finish them. Tyson fought bums and they barely made it halfway through the first round. The majority of the fighters in that video with Foreman weren't great. Compare what it took for him to knock them out to what it took for Tyson to knock the guys in his video out. Let's say we all agree that Foreman had the heavier hands. Why is it that he had throw 5-10+ punches to get the KO when Tyson routinely got the same result in 1 or 2 punches. Tyson was a hell of a lot more skilled. That's the difference.
I agree with the skill thing cuz i said it myself but the bolded is problematic.
1. You are comparing different types of fighters in terms of skills/physical makeup.. so on and so forth when comparing tyson/ali/foreman
All three of them were vastly different ;hell all 3 of them were vastly different from themselves... especially ali/foreman(given what made them vastly different)
The difference is speed kills and Tyson got more torque on his punches from the ground up and he threw combos so.. that is a couple among many other factors. -
Damn ward but last fights roc nation did him no favors in promoting the fights lol
-
I love this thread, conversation can switch at any moment, today we talkin Mike Tyson and ? ...
-
no fighter is great without the right trainer....
if you don't understand that importance, then there's really no convincing you... but no fighter does it alone.....they have to have the right trainer...the person who knows them best.....
oscar wasn't as sharp without floyd senior in his corner.....
and floyd jr never fought without either roger or his pops in his corner...
Just to be an ? cause you 100% right about a trainer and fighter relationship Floyd did fight one fight without both of them in the corner.
It was against Baldomir. He still wasn't messing with his father and Roger was locked up for some ? with his woman.
The fact that his uncle and trainer Roger Mayweather was missing from the training camp and the corner made no difference. Roger Mayweather is serving six months in jail for a battery conviction and is under suspension by Nevada officials for setting off a brawl during Floyd Mayweather's fight against Zab Judah in April.
Longtime assistant trainer and adviser Leonard Ellerbe took over in the corner and didn't need to do much.
http://www.espn.com/sports/boxing/news/story?id=2650029 -
playmaker88 wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »
Again I agree not saying it's not a factor , it is . All i am saying the final result is what matters. Of course the player/coach/trainer is crucial. But there are also other sides. LeBron never had a great coach , Peyton was successful without dungy. But again as i said i agree ,however with all that said Tyson is the 3rd best HW of his era imo.
You kinda arguing a different point though. It seems you're saying that from a career standpoint, Mike wasn't one of the alltime greats. There is validity to that and I have no problem with people downing Mike from that standpoint. Where my problem comes in is where people ignore his skill set. If you watched Mike fight, you have to admit, there is probably no other HW in boxing history that had his combination of footwork, head movement, power, and technique. Sure, he didn't fight great fighters, but let's be real, most boxers have at most 3-5 really good opponents over their careers and the rest range from cans to gatekeepers.
The difference between Tyson and others is that the gaps between him and his opponents were clear. Ali fought ? and sometimes took five, six, seven+ rounds to finish them. Tyson fought bums and they barely made it halfway through the first round. The majority of the fighters in that video with Foreman weren't great. Compare what it took for him to knock them out to what it took for Tyson to knock the guys in his video out. Let's say we all agree that Foreman had the heavier hands. Why is it that he had throw 5-10+ punches to get the KO when Tyson routinely got the same result in 1 or 2 punches. Tyson was a hell of a lot more skilled. That's the difference.
I agree with the skill thing cuz i said it myself but the bolded is problematic.
1. You are comparing different types of fighters in terms of skills/physical makeup.. so on and so forth when comparing tyson/ali/foreman
All three of them were vastly different ;hell all 3 of them were vastly different from themselves... especially ali/foreman(given what made them vastly different)
The difference is speed kills and Tyson got more torque on his punches from the ground up and he threw combos so.. that is a couple among many other factors.
That's my whole point though. Styles make fights. Foreman had a good chin and extremely heavy hands, but lacked mobility and had terrible punching technique. He won most of his fights by lumbering forward, cutting off the ring, and barraging the other fighter into submission. Tyson was very mobile, very evasive, fast, had somewhat heavy hands, and probably had the best punching technique in HW history. That last one is my opinion, but I welcome anyone to point at someone that was better. However, for all of that, as Du is pointing out, Tyson was heavily dependent on others coming up with a game plan for him and keeping him on it. And when that gameplan didn't work, he had a hard time adjusting even in his prime.
The reasons why I think it would be very hard for Foreman to win are 1) He threw wild punches and Tyson was very good at dodging. A lot of people call Tyson a brawler, but over his career I'm betting most of his wins came from counter punching. He was a master at dodging while changing his angle forcing his opponent to have to adjust. While the opponent was making that adjustment, Tyson usually capitalized and knocked the person out. 2) Foreman kept his hands down a lot. It was a result of his bad punching technique. He had huge wind-ups on his punches so he basically sped them up and saved energy by not bringing his hands all the way back to his face. Combine those two things and Foreman would be at a huge disadvantage. He's basically tailormade to lose to Tyson. -
Wow Ward done.. he literally peaked beating Kovalev twice nowhere else to go unless he was up to fight Jermall Charlo I guess but mad props to him, he will go down as underappreciated or underrated being in that messed up situation he was in for so long but I commend dude in his career
-
like i aid the only thing disagreed with was the bolded
-
HAPPY RETIREMENT Andre S.O.G. Ward!!!!!
More than happy I saw him fight Froch live and I was even on TV for that fight.
Everybody who has ever went to a fight that was broadcast live on TV. How many times have yall been on TV.
I've been on TV 4 times from the fights I've been at. -
playmaker88 wrote: »like i aid the only thing disagreed with was the bolded
My bad. I misread what you were saying. I thought you saying that it was hard to compare them from a fighting standpoint because of how different they were. You're finding fault with the argument about the ease they were able to KO people. That's fair. It probably is a weak point. I was trying to illustrate something with it, but I don't think I did a good job. -
HAPPY RETIREMENT Andre S.O.G. Ward!!!!!
More than happy I saw him fight Froch live and I was even on TV for that fight.
Everybody who has ever went to a fight that was broadcast live on TV. How many times have yall been on TV.
I've been on TV 4 times from the fights I've been at.
post em -
playmaker88 wrote: »HAPPY RETIREMENT Andre S.O.G. Ward!!!!!
More than happy I saw him fight Froch live and I was even on TV for that fight.
Everybody who has ever went to a fight that was broadcast live on TV. How many times have yall been on TV.
I've been on TV 4 times from the fights I've been at.
post em
Ward vs Froch
Broner vs DeMarco
ESPN Friday fights at Club Ibiza in DC
can't think of last fight right now. -
When someone ask for receipts they aint talkin about the names of the stores b
-
Nope foreman will mike hoppin round the ring like joe frazier with them uppercuts... folk wipl crying bout cuz dmato ringside -
http://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/20763775/david-haye-tony-bellew-set-rematch-london
@playmaker88
We gettin the rematch in December. I think Haye gonna KO him if his achilles is right. Then again, never know how someone will look after an injury like that. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »
Again I agree not saying it's not a factor , it is . All i am saying the final result is what matters. Of course the player/coach/trainer is crucial. But there are also other sides. LeBron never had a great coach , Peyton was successful without dungy. But again as i said i agree ,however with all that said Tyson is the 3rd best HW of his era imo.
You kinda arguing a different point though. It seems you're saying that from a career standpoint, Mike wasn't one of the alltime greats. There is validity to that and I have no problem with people downing Mike from that standpoint. Where my problem comes in is where people ignore his skill set. If you watched Mike fight, you have to admit, there is probably no other HW in boxing history that had his combination of footwork, head movement, power, and technique. Sure, he didn't fight great fighters, but let's be real, most boxers have at most 3-5 really good opponents over their careers and the rest range from cans to gatekeepers.
The difference between Tyson and others is that the gaps between him and his opponents were clear. Ali fought ? and sometimes took five, six, seven+ rounds to finish them. Tyson fought bums and they barely made it halfway through the first round. The majority of the fighters in that video with Foreman weren't great. Compare what it took for him to knock them out to what it took for Tyson to knock the guys in his video out. Let's say we all agree that Foreman had the heavier hands. Why is it that he had throw 5-10+ punches to get the KO when Tyson routinely got the same result in 1 or 2 punches. Tyson was a hell of a lot more skilled. That's the difference.
I am arguing the career . The end result is what matters to me. Respect . Tyson is overrated to me -
Also Douglass and Lewis were straight forward fighters and Tyson struggles with them. Tyson struggled with ? also. Bone Crusher Smith and Mitch Green being 2
-
SOG just announced his retirement.
-
DoubleShotHelix wrote: »SOG just announced his retirement.
? you late dena ? !!! -
DoubleShotHelix wrote: »SOG just announced his retirement.
Really? -
-
DoubleShotHelix wrote: »SOG just announced his retirement.
? you late dena ? !!!
After I said it I noticed it had already been posted but instead deleting my ? like I coward I'm standing here waiting on my ridicule like vegeta
