This is what I said "I don't care much for Tyson, but while on the subject... look at Douglass when he beat him, he fought a near perfect fight against him. Using a stiff jab, more movement, longer reach, etc. Tyson was always going to be at a disadvantage against many HW's because his weight was HW, but his height and reach really weren't. When you are a little guy with a little reach, you work on getting in close and staying there... not standing at a distance and getting picked apart." At no point did I say he would lose to every person taller than him. I said that getting in close and staying there was what would help a guy like him vs. taller fighters. Many of the fighters he did beat were shot, past prime, just old, or overrated, and while we can pick anyone's resume apart. The height thing was not the only thing I said, so hanging on to that one thing that I said is getting you nowhere. Did you miss the point I made about Douglas fighting the near perfect fight against him and why I said that? Do you not agree that getting popped with a hard jab over and over wasn't causing him a whole lot of problems? Perhaps the mentioned opponents above didn't seem to be able to keep the smaller Tyson at a distance... or maybe because of their size they assumed they would just win or have little issues... who knows what they were thinking.