His ability to get inside was unbelievable, but that wasn't defense. There was a reason he struggled with highly skilled, multi-tooled boxers. You box a fighter and fight a boxer. He was far from the greatest because his defense sucked. Any "defense" he displayed was mixed in with his attacking at all costs style.
She'll be fine and can do this for another ten years if she likes fighting more than publicity and talking trash. Same thing would have happened to Carano, luckily she was telegenic and congenial enough to get acting and presenting gigs.
Nobody saying he was the greatest or Willie Pep on defense. But he was much more than just a brawler. I don't think his defense sucked and would say its underrated. Let's not forget that Tyson was considered a small HW. The bigger boxers with the longer reach gave him the most trouble. No shame in losing to Lewis or Holyfield (who was overshadowed by the Tyson hype). To compare his boxing to Ronda is not even fair. Ronda doesn't even have the basics down. Tyson wasn't the same after Douglas but he was still a top level fighter.
I was told that Tyson's style was impetuous, that his defense was impregnable, and that his offense was unstoppable. I was also told that he wants to eat your children. Was none of that true?
Interesting. The year off was strategically a strong marketing move, but ultimately failed her physically. And that was that. Still a slight draw, but the aura is gone.
All his defensive efforts put him closer to his opponent. He didn't really have a way to back away from an opponent, so if he couldn't get a big swing going while he was inside, he just took punishment. His footwork was some of the weakest I've seen. Joe Frazier was short and did a lot more with his body. So, Tyson went in, gambled and didn't have a way to get out unless he landed a powerful shot. He was a great fighter, bad boxer. Same as Rousey, great brawler, but not a technical fighter at all. Go back and watch defensive highlights of Tyson, he could avoid punches but he also walked right into them. His only real defense was offense and that worked for a long time, then it didn't. Because he couldn't box. Watch this: Then watch this: Watch where he ends up after his "masterful" defense unfolds.. ever closer to his opponent. Douglas didn't do anything special, he just boxed him. Holyfield boxed him too. That's all you had to do was turn it into a boxing match. There are probably 30-40 boxers in their prime that could outbox Tyson in his prime. His defense looked great because he was fresh all the time. Take him deep and it's a different story. This is like arguing that Michael Jordan was a better defender than Pippen because of the highlights Jordan put up. If Jordan was so great, why did Phil keep assigning Pippen to the best guards? Why did Phil hide Jordan on defense? Jordan was great at gambling on the outside, but Pippen held the opposing team in check. Great defense is for the whole game and in lots of types of situations. Tyson and Jordan didn't have that type of well rounded defense. They were both gamblers that could make themselves look good because their offense was unbelievable.
Ronda was heavily on steroids all that time she dominated. Couldn't even recognize her cause she was so ****ing huge.
Tyson is widely regarded as one of the best boxers in terms of defense, especially head movement. You should rewatch his fights.
I'm guessing her career in the octagon is over, but in the squared circle just beginning. I can see her taking a Brock Lesnar type deal with the WWE.
I can't. When you are the best in the world at something, it is a totally different mindset in perception about how you go out. It would be viewed negatively as though she can't cut it in real combat sports. It would be very similar to what KD did, when he teamed up with warriors, in a weird way. KD's decision to wave the white flag says something about him as a person and the move was perceived negatively. If she had went out on top, then yeah, wwe might be more viable. But the facts are that she is most likely done with combat sports altogether.
Terrible analogy. If you mentioned Kobe and maybe Artest or Steph and Klay then sure. No one argues that MJ was a better defender than Scottie but equally as good sure. Phil didn't hide MJ on defense, MJ rarely shied away from a defensive matchup against another great offensive player but obviously Scottie being the no. 2 option was the better choice to run around chasing a Reggie Miller so MJ wouldn't need to because it's usually a smart idea not to wear out your best offensive player. If you think Jordan defensively did nothing more than gambling then you might need to rematch some old games. Tyson may not have had a well rounded defense and just had enough to supplement his offensive firepower but Jordan was different. If you feel MJ made himself look good defensively because he was a gambler and his offense was unbelievable and that was it alone then I don't know what to tell you except for 9 all nba defensive first team selections and the defensive player of the year award in 88 beg to differ.
Tyson's best defense was intimidation. Anybody that knows boxing knows that. His opponents were beat before they got into the ring. Arguing that Tyson had some stellar defense is missing the forest by a mile. Other boxers were afraid of Tyson, point blank and when he finally got it handed to him, the aura was gone, and Tyson went downhill. Period, the end.
His defensive ability wasn't special in terms of boxing greats like Frazier or Mayweather but it was stellar enough to supplement what he possessed offensively.
Tyson's career went with Cus D'Amoto's death. He was Tyson's father figure, and Mike was never the same without his discipline.
