35 year-old Mike Tyson vs. a prime Tommy Morrison

Never. Just seeking clarity.

 

yeah, because I'm so famous for that:bs:

I'm saying some fair arguments have been made here to sway me somewhat

gun to my head? gimme Tyson

 

Wait???!!

The great Cdogg187 can be swayed by the ingenious boxing poetry of the sly?

Who said miracles didn't happen? ::

Seriously though...it takes a great man to admit when he could possibly be mistaken. Major props from me.

 

It was my handiwork he's referring to which swayed him. Major props to me, eh CDogg?

 

LMAO, I must admit... I wasn't really doing the math when I intially responded... picturing more of a Botha/Savarese Tyson rather than a Lewis/Nielsen Tyson... In light of that, Morrison's chances improve... though I still would say that Tyson is my pick

 

disagREED. I think the Bentt-Morrison fight is significant here. You can try to dismiss it, I suppose. But it not only demonstrated that Morrison could be hurt by a nothing special fighter, but it also demonstrated that when hurt, he didn't recover well. And I don't see the Ruddock fight as being especially significant because Ruddock was pretty much finished at that point.

Morrison's chin was shaky and he was hurt by lesser punchers than even the past it version of Tyson discussed in this topic. There's every chance that Tyson could hurt and finish him early. IF Morrison could survive the early rounds, he could win...but that is still a big IF against even a depleted Tyson.

 

I think its worth asking here what will happen when Morrison really unloads with a big shot just as much as you guys are considering the reverse.

Tysons resolve was highly suspect by this stage. His will to win was quite diluted, and Morrison could crack enough to test that.

 

Anyone can be hurt when they take a fighter lightly and get hit by a punch they weren't expecting.

With your logic, Lennox Lewis loses every mythical matchup to every puncher in history...even depleted punchers....afterall Hasim Rahman was a "nothing special fighter" yet knocked Lewis out cool cold with one single punch.

You said....

"But it not only demonstrated that Morrison could be hurt by a nothing special fighter, but it also demonstrated that when hurt, he didn't recover well."

Well with this I could say regarding the Lewis-Rahman fight:

"But it not only demonstrated that Lewis could be hurt by a nothing special fighter, but it also demonstrated that when hurt, he didn't recover AT ALL"



So I say again...look at the context of the Bentt fight and then look at it not in isolation.


Lastly you say that Ruddock fight is irrelevant because he was "pretty much finished at that point"...yet you suggest that a "depleted Tyson" would knock him out.

You're making no sense I'm afraid...

 

Nope. As usual...you are off base. If an end of the road and inactive Ruddock, who was no Tyson, could hurt and nearly finish Morrison, it's not remotely a stretch to think Tyson could stop him as well. And to be honest, bringing up Ruddock as an example isn't exactly looking at THAT fight in context, due to Ruddock's status at that time.

But then, you also brought up Ray Mercer as relevant when discussing Wlad and tried to sell Shane Mosley as "slightly past prime" when facing Mayweather while ignoring Mosley's age and inactivity going into the fight. So...you really aren't the best resource for discussing context.

And YOU are the one who trots out "If Barkley could do it" on a regular basis whenever Thomas Hearns is discussed in a MM. And that was a similar situation. Barkley was hurt and looked to be on the way out against Hearns until landing a desperation shot that won the fight for him. And you hold that against Hearns all the time. But since that type of argument doesn't work for you here...you're not using it. No big surprise there.

And...in your haste to disagree with me (which usually trips you up), I didn't necessarily pick Tyson to win. I merely suggest he had a good shot based on Morrison's loss to Bentt.

Yes. I want to say Morrison, but I keep remembering his fight with Michael Bentt and I give even an old Tyson a good chance of ending this one with one shot early on.

So one...I am not saying Tyson WOULD win, but that he has a good chance. Morrison winning wouldn't shock me, and I would probably favor him, but his weaknesses also play right into even an older Tyson's strengths and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if Tyson got him out of there early.

And two...the Bentt fight, no matter how much you try to dismiss it because it doesn't work for you here, showed that Morrison could be hurt against a lesser puncher and didn't recover well when hurt. And Morrison's chin was shown to be a liability in other fights, even some that he didn't lose.

So...to dismiss Tyson's chances out of hand kinda makes you the one who isn't making much sense here. But as usual...I chalk that up to you having to disagree with me no matter what.

 

This post has names like Mercer, Wlad, Barkley, Hearns, Mosley and even Mayweather....all irrelevant distractions which I wont even address...yet not one mention of the Lewis Rahman analogy which was the main focus of my rebuttal.

I guess it's cool.

And no I don't dismiss Tyson's chances completely...but it'll be unlikely that he wins.

 

Agree with the Sly one on this one.

 

depleted Tyson was a sh*t fighter really. Need proof? He steered clear of anybody who could actually fight and went after the softest touches and even then, the soft touches kicked his ass (Williams, McBride). He really handpicked the worst crop of fighters or handpicked fighters at the exact right time (Golota, Etienne, etc) when they were on the down slope of their careers.
Post-prison Tyson was all hype. You know you have no confidence in yourself when you're snarling like a beast and thumping your chest like you did the impossible after beating up Julius Francis and f*cking Lou Savarese(who fell like Seldon from a phantom punch).:laugh11:

 

I agree with you, essentially. The actual trajectory his career took between 1996-05 is never discussed, but it was appallingly under-whelming for a fighter of his once-adored talents.

However, Morrison was duly awful himself.

 

Not really an answer. And I love how you attempted to dodge the Barkley- Hearns references which demonstrates your usual hypocrisy ("If Barkley could do it..." does that sound familiar. Or that Ruddock was well past it when he fought Morrison. Ugh. You really do suck at this.

But I guess it will have to do, considering the source.

The bottom line is Morrison's chin has been proven to be suspect, and Tyson could still punch and was still dangerous early on. Morrison could/should win, but there is a good chance that Tyson could get him early and finish him.

There's no need for any more hair splitting or disagreeing just for the Hell of it....but it's not likely you will stop because that is not your M.O. You have belabored this to death nearly enough yet in the strange belief that the number or posts/words typed adds to the credibility of whatever notion you come up with.

 

Again....

You haven't addressed the Lewis-Rahman analogy but instead fill your post with a whole bunch of nothing.

"Hypocrisy", "Barkley-Hearns","Ugh", "hair splitting", "number or posts/words typed ", "You really do suck at this."...are all just silly distractions for you to get away from my counterpoint.

Nevermind....

 

Meaningless chatter from the King of smoke screens, distractions, double talk and half truths.

Spin away, Stafford, spin away.

 

::

sad.

 

Don't be sad. It's only a boxing message board discussion.