Just finished watching Mike Tyson vs James "Quick" Tillis and I saw many
features decried by some to be non-existent before Tyson's loss to Douglas.

At the time it is fair to say that Tillis was basically the gatekeeper to
the top 10. The fight went to a close decision win to Tyson but it was damn
close and excluding an off-balance knockdown of Tillis (he was fine) in the
4th round one could say it was a dead even fight. Tyson showed at age 19
(amazing) the features prevalent later on...lack of head movement, depending
too much on trying to land the big shot. He also showed the stamina and
ability to take punches which was also prevalent later (that some also
underestimated).

Now of course this was only one fight (I am going to watch Tyson vs Mitch
Green next) and one could say it was an anomaly but I think that Tyson's
career gets somewhat romanticized between 1985-1989 and understandably so to
an extent. After all, many boxing fans want a heavyweight messiah that
doesn't outbox his opponents but destroys them.

My question is, if Tyson would have died lets say the day before the Buster
Douglas fight how would you have veiwed him in a historical context? I think
the general public would have extrapolated upon his previous accomplishments
and stated him to have been (or would have been) the greatest heavyweight of
all time. But would that have been true? Would he have been regarded as
excellent or simply very good?

On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 10:00:08 -0600, Dan L <HeyHey... at (no spam) charter.net
wrote:





On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:18:28 -0700, "Vanman" <Vancan... at (no spam) shaw.ca
wrote:

Just finished watching Mike Tyson vs James "Quick" Tillis and I saw many
features decried by some to be non-existent before Tyson's loss to Douglas.

At the time it is fair to say that Tillis was basically the gatekeeper to
the top 10. The fight went to a close decision win to Tyson but it was damn
close and excluding an off-balance knockdown of Tillis (he was fine) in the
4th round one could say it was a dead even fight. Tyson showed at age 19
(amazing) the features prevalent later on...lack of head movement, depending
too much on trying to land the big shot. He also showed the stamina and
ability to take punches which was also prevalent later (that some also
underestimated).

Now of course this was only one fight (I am going to watch Tyson vs Mitch
Green next) and one could say it was an anomaly but I think that Tyson's
career gets somewhat romanticized between 1985-1989 and understandably so to
an extent. After all, many boxing fans want a heavyweight messiah that
doesn't outbox his opponents but destroys them.

My question is, if Tyson would have died lets say the day before the Buster
Douglas fight how would you have veiwed him in a historical context? I think
the general public would have extrapolated upon his previous accomplishments
and stated him to have been (or would have been) the greatest heavyweight of
all time. But would that have been true?  Would he have been regarded as
excellent or simply very good?

Had the fight with Holyfield taken place when it was supposed too, he
would have been exposed long before Douglas.

Evander Holyfield was in Mike Tyson's head ever since the pre-Olympic
training camp in Colorado. Holyfield could not be bluffed, Tyson knew
it, and Holyfield owned him from that point foward.

DCI- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:18:28 -0700, "Vanman" <Vancanste at (no spam) shaw.ca
wrote:

Just finished watching Mike Tyson vs James "Quick" Tillis and I saw many
features decried by some to be non-existent before Tyson's loss to Douglas.

At the time it is fair to say that Tillis was basically the gatekeeper to
the top 10. The fight went to a close decision win to Tyson but it was damn
close and excluding an off-balance knockdown of Tillis (he was fine) in the
4th round one could say it was a dead even fight. Tyson showed at age 19
(amazing) the features prevalent later on...lack of head movement, depending
too much on trying to land the big shot. He also showed the stamina and
ability to take punches which was also prevalent later (that some also
underestimated).

Now of course this was only one fight (I am going to watch Tyson vs Mitch
Green next) and one could say it was an anomaly but I think that Tyson's
career gets somewhat romanticized between 1985-1989 and understandably so to
an extent. After all, many boxing fans want a heavyweight messiah that
doesn't outbox his opponents but destroys them.

My question is, if Tyson would have died lets say the day before the Buster
Douglas fight how would you have veiwed him in a historical context? I think
the general public would have extrapolated upon his previous accomplishments
and stated him to have been (or would have been) the greatest heavyweight of
all time. But would that have been true? Would he have been regarded as
excellent or simply very good?



Had the fight with Holyfield taken place when it was supposed too, he
would have been exposed long before Douglas.