Would Holyfield have beaten the Tyson of 1988?

Would Evander, at his best, have beaten the Tyson who defeated Biggs, Holmes, Tubbs and Spinks?

I think it would have been very close with Tyson escaping with a Split Decision.

What do you think? opcorn:

 

Which Holyfield are we talking about here? The one of '91 or the one from 96?

 

Holy beats ANY Tyson

 

true. I was just asking to know how to describe the beating accurately

 

WHich ever Holyfield that you feel was the one at his best.

 

No version of Holyfield beats a pre-1992 Tyson.

 

tyson wasn't the same in 91-92. holyfield would've beaten his ass.

 

I've always maintained that Holyfield's fights with Bowe and Foreman prepared him for the Tyson fights in the sense that he'd grown used to fighting bigger and stronger guys.

The most important aspect of Holyfield's gameplan against Tyson was to get leverage and push Tyson back. Without those previous fights, I don't think Holyfield handles Tyson.

Tyson of 1995-1996 was nowhere near the Tyson of 1991. In 1991 he still had his handspeed and that would have made all the difference in the world in a match against Holyfield. Tyson's reflexes and handspeed were never the same after the prison stint.

 

It's a tragedy this fight never happened when Tyson went to jail.

 

The fight was scheduled for the Fall of 1991 after Tyson had been indicted but was cancelled due to a rib injury to Tyson. To this day I wonder if the injury was legit.

 

well imo, holyfield beats the version of tyson who struggled vs. ruddock. not sure if holyfield can beat the young 86-88 version of tyson, but i can't see tyson knocking holyfield out that and tyson wasn't that impressive after the 6th round and on. holyfield is no tony tucker, he would've taken advantage of the later rounds unlike tucker and smith who merely tried to survive.

 

Holyfield also learned to be more controlled after the Bowe fights. Holyfield was so often happy to brawl, but against Tyson he was controlled and held Tyson a lot.

Holyfield would later say that the stoppage loss to Bowe made him realize that he should pick his spots more and not be too reckless.

Holyfield adapted a lot better as he aged than Tyson did.

 

I'm not 100% sure i would say i can't see Tyson knocking Holy out but i agree with your post.

 

I believe Tyson raped Washington to bail out of this fight

 

::

 

Tyson struggled with Rudduck? Apparently they fought a third, untelevised match because Rudduck got his ass whupped in both fights. The only controversy related to the first fight because Rudduck wasn't on his back when Steele stepped in. Rudduck took an incredible ass kicking in the rematch as well. The "onliest" reason the scorecards look as they do is because of the point deductions Tyson got. The only thing the Rudduck fights proved is Tyson had a damn good chin.

I don't know if Tyson knocks out Holyfield, but I have no doubts he beats him.

Holyfield and the guys you mentioned stylistically have nothing in common so any comparison to those guys is irrelevant. Also, in those years the reason Tyson didn't have many late round KO's is strictly due to guys simply looking to hug him into submission.

I'm not a Tyson-lover, but damn...guys live in the present too much when talking about how good he was as a fighter. Tyson would have given almost all of the greats problems when he was at his best.

People talk about Tyson not blowing away guys like Bonecrusher etc, but that's what happens to almost every great fighter (with the exception of Foreman) when they face significantly better opposition. The KO ratios declines.

I mentioned Foreman as an exception because he KO'd guys at every level at an equal rate.

 

Tyson would have won a close decision. Holyfield would have won in 91 though.

 

tyson knocked ruddock down twice, but he also took a lot of leather and lost points for fouling. it was a dirty fight overall, but hardly a lopsided beatdown as you mentioned.

 

bottom line - two great fighters tyson fought were not at their peak. stinks was a light heavy turned inactive heavyweight and holmes was coming off a 2/3 year layoff.

when tyson fought a decent (rather mediocre) heavyweight who actually fought back, he got his ass kicked.

i like tyson and always have, but let's face it, he never beat a guy who actually stood a chance of beating him.

suppose he was washup in 96 (which he wasn't. he wasn't at his peak, but he was still a top heavy at the time), he still got his ass kicked by a guy who was supposed to be dead.

 

If that's your take on the Rudduck rematch then I seriously question how you view fights.

Rudduck left the ring with cracked rib and a badly swollen jaw which was possibly broken on top of getting knocked down twice. Tyson didn't have a scratch on him. Rudduck landed a few good shots but Tyson was never in trouble at any moment of that fight.

"However"

I understand why you've taken the position you have. You believe it helps your Holyfield scenario, but it doesn't because your version of the Rudduck rematch vs what actually happened aren't compatible.

Don't forget, your initial statement is that Tyson "struggled" with Rudduck.

 

when was the last time u watched this fight? The first time I watched it, i was in elementry school. last time i watched it was about 2 years ago. i thought tyson looked one dimensional. ruddock wasn't that good which is why tyson was able to win. in my opinion, if it was holyfield in there, tyson would've been in deep shit.

i dont like holyfield and i've always liked tyson. i just happened to think that holyfield beats the post-douglas version of tyson. not sure if a younger tyson can beat holyfield, but i certainly wouldnt be comfortable in picking tyson.

 

gotta agree with joony on this one. Tyson DID STRUGGLE with Ruddock in the rematch. In fact the last time I watched it I could have sworn I remember Mike looking for a way out in the 11th with fouls. Regardless, by the time you factor in the point deductions I think I had it to Tyson by 1, maybe 2 and thats after him winning the 12th. Tough fight....Tyson had gone way down hill by then, IMO.

 

The first time I watched it I was a grown man who watched the PPV card live, therefore my opinion isn't prone to factor in everything which has taken place in Tyson's life since then. I've also watched the fight several times since then, but unlike others, I'm not prone to looking for things that weren't there.

With that said, suppose Holyfield would have been in with Tyson instead of Bert Cooper that night...do you think he would have made it out of the round?

if you think Holyfield would have beaten Tyson...I have no issue with that. My only issue is the classification of the Rudduck rematch. Tyson CLEARLY won that fight, he didn't "struggle." Jones "struggled" with Tarver in their first fight. This was nowhere NEAR that.

 

The reason why this is probably no is that in the time Tyson was in jail Holyfield put on some 20+lbs of muscle that he used to his advantage in being physical with Tyson.

So no, he wouldn't beat Tyson in 88, and not because of some grand difference in skill between the tyson's (although there is some truth to that) but rather because of what Holyfield gained in that time

 

ok that's great pal. the post right after mine says that i'm not alone in thinking that tyson struggled.

 

so basically what you're saying is...tyson > holyfield minus roids and holyfield with roids > tyson.

 

Take solace in knowing you're not alone in being wrong. It goes back to revisionist history and how fights are reconstructed when they're not seen in their historical context. Now you've got a guy talking about seeing the fight recently and thinking that Tyson was about to quit a fight he was clearly winning. That's precisely the kind of garbage I'm talking about when I mention revisionist history. Tyson was "way down hill" and it was just a year removed from when he was champion.

 

i thought tyson won clearly as an he won at least 7 rounds for sure, but he still struggled in the process. ruddock hit him w/ some flush shots towards the end and tyson was visibly frustrated.

also, ruddock fought dirty too and held a lot.

tyson might have 'kicked his ass' in terms of physically ruining and inflictcing heavy damage to ruddock's body, but that doesnt mean that tyson didn't struggle. that's all i'm saying.

i'm not saying you're wrong, and i dont think we saw a different fight. i guess my definition of 'struggling' differs from yours.

 

ya...after reviewing the tape I think you have a point there. I was seeing things that weren't there, quite possibly because I was drunk at the time(I watch most my boxing before heading out at the weekend...explains a few things, eh? ::). Still the fight WAS relativly close and Tyson WAS a diminshed fighter as compared with the 88 version.

 

i forget if it was that fight or after lewis/ruddock, but merchant commented that tyson was no longer the same fighter by the time he had fought ruddock.