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

You're mistake is thinking he was wildly successful as a pro. When you actually compare his ammy and pro career they are about the same
 
No responses to the speculation I posted?

It's hardly inconceivable, use of drugs in boxing is as old as the inception of the Marquess of Queensberry rules, John L. Sullivan used alcohol as a painkiller, stimulants were used early in the 20th century.
 
He went pro at 18. When was he supposed to win a big amateur title? With 16?

He almost qualified for the Olympics but lost to henry Tillman and I think it was a controversial decision. So with 17 he beat up grown men and almost went to the olympics but D'Amato's goal was always to break his own record at producing the youngest HW champ and he did.

Obviously he wans't as good as a 16 and 17 year old as he was with 20 years of age.

I don't get why this is even a topic. Also amateur fights have fewer rounds and he wasn't a points fighter. Referees in the amateurs are also stricter and Tyson couldn't rough his opponents up as much with elbows and other tactics
 
djacobox372 said:
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
Click to expand...
This is so true. I don't care how many PEDs or black belts u throw on a 15 year old, the below average adult with no sport experience can one shot kill him... in the most literal sense. we're talking about a child.
 
barmyone45** said:
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.
Click to expand...

Tyson was not juiced up. Holyfield however was. You can see it on his fucking neck and shoulders.
 
Lovci said:
Because he wasn't as good as some make him out to be.
Click to expand...

The Fan Man said:
See for yourself, Tyson was ridiculous as a 17 year old. Even in these two losses.


Click to expand...



Tillman is all the proof that you need about how overrated amateur success can be. Tillman beat Tyson and Holyfield in the amateurs, and they crushed him as pros.
 
Maroli said:
Not only that, he was that weight with mostly muscle having had a s***** diet most of his life
Click to expand...
pretty sure Mike secreted testosterone at a ridiculous rate, also contributing to his wicked temper.
 
I'd also throw mandatory headgear up as a reason; more cushioning against those punches.
 
Phisher said:
Tillman is all the proof that you need about how overrated amateur success can be. Tillman beat Tyson and Holyfield in the amateurs, and they crushed him as pros.
Click to expand...

Tillman was also one of the most "gifted" gold medal winners in Olympic boxing history as well. And by gifted I'm not talking about his talents. He did not beat Mussone in the semi-finals by any means, and while he the decision he got in the gold medal bout wasn't as egregious as the Mussone fight, nor did he truly win that fight against Willie de Wit. Tillman was a gold medal recipient (like a few of the US boxers were that year). Not a gold medal "winner".

"Good Lord! That's the second time in a row!" then later "Okay. The luckiest winner, in my opinion, in history."

- so said the head cheerleader of the US boxing team, Howard Cosell, expressing his surprise at the decision in the final and referencing the previous decision Tillman got against Mussone

10:30;

 
@RR

Drop the dubs on me if I go any further than this one post from above please.
 
Cracky said:
He wasn't as successful because he had less time to get to people... got penalized for dipping to low which was crucial to his style.. had a pro style in a sport that rewards quantity over quality....That said, 24-3 in the ams aint bad... everybody in the ams loses..and most lose a lot... 3 losses aint bad.

and I dont buy Tyson being on peds for a sec.. since he was a kid he was huge and fast... since he was first discovered.. he stayed around the same size and stayed fast.. he simply had better technique as he became more of a professional.
Click to expand...
He was 48-6 as an amateur.
 
Tyson was a physical speciman, Bobby Stewart said he saw Tyson bench 250 lbs 10 times at the age of 13
 
i didn't hear the ten times but i do remember the 250, that's freakish, i probably couldn't press 90 pounds at that age. some dudes just gots gifts, i read that walter payton had walked up to a 350 pound weight and military pressed it 3 times when he'd never done it before. If i tried that i'd end up in the emergency room.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,584
Messages
55,428,656
Members
174,775
Latest member
shawn_bogart

Share this page

Back
Top