Tyson: Why wasn't he as successful as an amateur?

[Sano]

Yeah I thought that perhaps I'm misinterpreting forum sarcasm, but I mean, it's just a question. If it isn't true then so what?

I just googled Couture and saw he was from Washington. So most likely I was duped. Oh well.

No worries. Having a little belief in people is not a bad thing.

 

[SWATCOP]

Because he wasn't as good as some make him out to be.

Aaaaaaaand here we go........

No, sir.....you are wrong. He was every bit as good as advertised. He unified the titles, re-ignited the entire world's interest in boxing, and cleaned out his division. This was an incredible fighter, and I don't know why people hate to admit that. Have you seen a fighter in the heavyweight division like him since?

 

[Lovci]

Aaaaaaaand here we go........

No, sir.....you are wrong. He was every bit as good as advertised. He unified the titles, re-ignited the entire world's interest in boxing, and cleaned out his division. This was an incredible fighter, and I don't know why people hate to admit that. Have you seen a fighter in the heavyweight division like him since?

He was great for a short amount of time. No denying that. But he's no atg or top HW ever.

 

[Sunfish]

I swear this thread was about his amateur career. Oh yeah, right there in the title.

I guess there's no other Tyson threads to argue his pro career in. I can't see any but haven't bothered to use the search function.

 

[Fat Abbot]

He was a really good amateur.

He arguably won the 2nd Tillman fight even though the am rules didn't suit him and Tillman was a gold medalist.

For someone with so few amateur fights he was pretty good.

 

[riddleofsteel]

Probably because he was so young. Going for the 84 Olympics Tillman was 24 and Tyson was still a HS aged kid. When he fought Tillman as a pro he was around 24 himself by that point.

^^ During the 84 trials Tyson was 17 years old, a few months away from turning 18.
And Tillman went on to win an Olympic gold medal.
Tyson had a limited amateur career but calling it not successful is inaccurate and partially draws on countries not being able to qualify more than 1 athlete per boxing weight division in world championships or Olympics (or as the IOC looks at, "events") while many other events allow multiple entries. But that is a problem with every combat sport.

Tyson had his first pro fight in early 1985, so his amateur career pretty much ended at the Olympic trials, he did compete in one more amateur tournament in 1984.

 

[Footwork333]

According to Holyfield he was juiced up in the pro ranks it's difficult to say when precisely he started on the performance enhancers but he might not have been as well acquainted with them as an amateur and hadn't refined his use.

LOL. Where did Holyfield say this?

 

[Jonny Ninja]

Aaaaaaaand here we go........

No, sir.....you are wrong. He was every bit as good as advertised. He unified the titles, re-ignited the entire world's interest in boxing, and cleaned out his division. This was an incredible fighter, and I don't know why people hate to admit that. Have you seen a fighter in the heavyweight division like him since?

He was an incredible fighter and I will always be a fan. Imo though part of the reason he was so unbeatable was fighters were imtimidated by him, and it makes it a whole lot easier to beat a fighter that has that fear and doubt before the bell rings. That changed when Dougleas beat him.
I also dont think the HWs at the time were that great, the likes of whitherspoon, bone crusher smith, an over the hill holmes and Spinks. Better than the HW division today but certyainly no exceptional fighters for Mike to beat and definately not at the level of Holyfield or Lewis

 

[VulgarSnaps]

Aaaaaaaand here we go........

No, sir.....you are wrong. He was every bit as good as advertised. He unified the titles, re-ignited the entire world's interest in boxing, and cleaned out his division. This was an incredible fighter, and I don't know why people hate to admit that. Have you seen a fighter in the heavyweight division like him since?

Agreed. Cus died. Mike went downhill because of lifestyle/training. I've always seen that as obvious.

He's one of the all time greats not for the length of greatness, but by the height of it. Prime Tyson/Cus present : I have real trouble believing any other great heavyweight could handle, as long as rules are properly enforced(clinching/holding/headbutts specifically).

For christ sakes he was Joe Frazier over 9000, but probably without the heart, but that's what Cus was for.

 

[Nal**]

He's one of the all time greats not for the length of greatness, but by the height of it. Prime Tyson/Cus present : I have real trouble believing any other great heavyweight could handle, as long as rules are properly enforced(clinching/holding/headbutts specifically).

I don't believe we need to go back to prime Tyson. In 1996 Holyfield would've been in big trouble if he wouldn't have been allowed to hold.

And you overrate Cus D'Amato. Mike's prime was from 1986-1988.
Him and Rooney were a fantastic team. Rooney understood how important Mike's head movement was, how important it was for him to be in top shape. He was more of drill instructor than a trainer, but that's was Mike needed.

 

[PUO3]

Because he wasn't as good as some make him out to be.

He is one of the most terrifying talents of all time and anyone that says otherwise is foolish.

"Wasn't as good as. . . " was never the issue with Tyson.

 

[SWATCOP]

As far as those who say Tyson was reign of terror didn't last very long, or how fast he burnt out, or whatever, remember: This guy was basically already on top of the world before he was 20! He was already a mainstream star, and on all the magazine covers. That's a very early peak for a heavyweight, isn't it?

And, just IMO, I'd prefer "greatness" for a short period rather than "goodness" over the long haul. But that's just me.

There is a reason that people are still captivated by him after all these years. Some even still want to see him fight! Name another fighter like that.

 

[ZroC]

Hey guys, I've been wondering this for a long time. I know he won the National Golden Gloves so before anyone says "He was successful as an amateur' and he was, but he wasn't as successful as he was in the pro ranks. As a pro he stormed through everyone so why didn't he have this kind of success as an amateur? In the amateurs he still had D'Mato with him. What stood out to me is that Tyson lost to Henry Tillman twice as an amateur but he clobbered him in one round in their rematch in the pro's...

I don't remember Tyson storming through everyone in the pros either.

 

[riddleofsteel]

From what I remember Teddy stated Mike was 190lbs around 16-17 years old in his book.

Yeah, he competed in the heavyweight division in the Junior Olympics, until the mid 1980s that weight division was 178lbs & up.

 

[The Fan Man]

See for yourself, Tyson was ridiculous as a 17 year old. Even in these two losses.

 

[djacobox372]

I don't understand this thread, Tyson did fantastic as an amateur when you consider how little time he spent there and how young he was.

So as a 15-16yo he dropped a few decisions to future gold medal winners who where in their twenties. WTF do you expect? A 15yo to go undefeated to olympic gold? LOL

 

[mozfonky]

if the rules weren't like that, he would have won. He wasn't the only kid on the team Meldrick Taylor was 17 himself but he was a boxer. Mike's style made the ammies a waste of time but as I've said, I would have loved to see him with more boxing skills, people find it hard to believe but I think he could have been a helluva boxer with his natural gifts and it would all have made him more versatile which would have been better in the long run. I really thought he won the tillman fight at the time but the rules are what they are and going by that criteria Tillman got it. tyson was a bully even at that time and even with the other olympians, Holyfield said that Mike would bully the rest of them but not him. They actually got in trouble when a sparring session got out of hand between the two. And Tillm

 

[riddleofsteel]

I don't understand this thread, Tyson did fantastic as an amateur when you consider how little time he spent there and how young he was.

So as a 15-16yo he dropped a few decisions to future gold medal winners who where in their twenties. WTF do you expect? A 15yo to go undefeated to olympic gold? LOL

Apparently that is what was supposed to happen.

 

[MeGaMaNx18]

Tyson on peds is laughable..he was a huge 13 year old and was benching 225..genetically he was just a freak

 

[bad seed]

Tyson on peds is laughable..he was a huge 13 year old and was benching 225..genetically he was just a freak

No, genetically is he what a human male should be. It is the rest of us who are genetic freaks by being so inferior.