wing chung and boxing

Discussion in 'Boxing' started by pseudo, Mar 25, 2014.

  1. Saved_in_Blood

    Saved_in_Blood Valued Member

    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.
  2. m1k3jobs

    m1k3jobs Dudeist Priest

    Yes, but in your previous post you implied that he lost because of his style and size.

    Tyson lost but not because of his style.
  3. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    It's easy to fight a "perfect fight" against someone not in fighting condition - Douglas still nearly lost and it took the best Buster and the worst Tyson for that win to happen.....that is not a stylistic difference so it is a personal one

    There were others on Tyson's victim list that were far better boxers than Douglas and tried
    identical game plans that failed
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2014
  4. Dave76

    Dave76 Valued Member

    Found this video last week and thought it was pretty funny. Especialy since he has about the same level of understanding of Wing Chun as most Wing Chun guys in the videos seem to have about boxing. This seemed to be the appropriate thread to share it in. :)
    [ame=""]Boxing beats Wing Chun.mp4 - YouTube[/ame]
  5. El Medico

    El Medico Valued Member

    That's exactly it.The decent but consistently inconsistent Douglas bore down and trained properly as regards both conditioning and fight plan/strategy.

    Tyson did neither.

    Yeah,Douglas fought a good fight but one would be hard pressed to find many in the boxing world who feel the result would have been the same if Tyson had actually had a trainer and trained properly.
  6. Saved_in_Blood

    Saved_in_Blood Valued Member

    You are missing the point that it really doesn't matter. I think that Juan Manuel Marquez beat Manny at least 2 of the 3 disputed decisions, but the record books still say that Manny won. I don't think Bradley beat Manny, but the records say he did. Douglas not only beat Tyson, but he KO'd him. Tyson couldn't even hang on to a decision vs. a 42-1 underdog and got knocked out. Saying that "in better shape he would have won" is all speculation and has nothing to do with the actual outcome of the fight.
  7. Saved_in_Blood

    Saved_in_Blood Valued Member

    Yes, the style of Douglas, coupled with him being 6'3.5 and having a 12" reach advantage over Tyson is what I would call being a problem for a guy.
  8. Saved_in_Blood

    Saved_in_Blood Valued Member

    Did you all happen to forget that Douglas' mother died about a month before the fight? Giving all of these excuses to an undertrained Tyson and not bringing this up is quite unfair to Douglas' win.
  9. m1k3jobs

    m1k3jobs Dudeist Priest

    For him, yes, not for his style. The man failed, not the style of boxing. :bang:

    Admit that and this whole argument is over.
  10. MaxSmith

    MaxSmith Valued Member

    It's not really about fair or unfair. Just that most of us look at Tyson's performance and notice how it did not compare favorably to past performances against arguably better boxers.

    Yes, Douglas fought a great fight. Yes Douglas won the fight in an undisputed manner. Nobody is arguing otherwise.

    But objectively watching the fight- to many of us- Tyson's lack of defensive skill, and inability to close the distance (something he was known for at the time) when compared to his earlier performances against arguably better fights of the same size as Douglas are factors attributable to his lack of training.

    You're saying Douglas made Tyson look bad.

    The rest of us are saying Tyson made Tyson look bad. The Tyson that night would have looked equally bad against some of the former competition that he steamrolled earlier in his career.
  11. Saved_in_Blood

    Saved_in_Blood Valued Member

    I'll go along with that... but how about vs. Holyfield or others that he got beaten against?
  12. Saved_in_Blood

    Saved_in_Blood Valued Member

    Tyson won fights by intimidation, by his own admission he would stare at his opponent and if he looked away, he knew he had him. He wasn't going to stare Douglas into fear... not that night, he certainly wasn't going to do it to Holyfield or any of the other elite HW's. I'd be willing to bet that the James Toney that beat Holyfield would have absolutely decimated Tyson actually.
  13. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    Holyfield out brawled him - Evander is my personal FOAT, certainly at heavy

    Tyson did not psych out Bruno in their first match...he just knocked him out instead. Same with pretty much everyone else until he went well off the rails
  14. Wooden Hare

    Wooden Hare Banned Banned

  15. MaxSmith

    MaxSmith Valued Member

    Holyfield out worked him plus IIRC (it's been awhile since I've watched those fights) he did a great job defensively of covering in the pocket to weather the Tyson storm then returning his own shots. So he out game planned him as well.

    I think a large part of Tyson's early greatness was Cus D'mato, and when he passed, so did Tyson's chance at true greatness.
  16. Saved_in_Blood

    Saved_in_Blood Valued Member

    I cannot agree or totally disagree on that last statement since we'll never know. I personally don't think that he would have beaten the top tier of the HW division at the time. Maybe Moorer and Morrison, but at no time do I think he would have beaten Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield (even though he did beat him), I don't know that he would have beaten even the old Foreman ... certainly not the prime one, but that's just me.
  17. MaxSmith

    MaxSmith Valued Member

    I personally think Tyson had the physical talent to beat anyone in the division, but just wasn't strong enough mentally. But like you said we'll never really know.
  18. aaradia

    aaradia Choy Li Fut and Yang Tai Chi Chuan Student Moderator Supporter

    I don't understand why people separate those two things. They are both critical and both closely intwined in what makes a great athlete just that.

    Pretty much the greatest athletes have both. If you don't have one, you don't have what it takes to reach that super elite level. Period.
  19. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    Tyson had both in terms of his boxing, but his external circumstances intruded too much...he was an anomaly in that regard
  20. m1k3jobs

    m1k3jobs Dudeist Priest

    IMO Big George would have demolished Mike

    Remember what George did to Frazier, twice. Foreman was slower when he came back but as he said he never was fast. He was also bigger and stronger and had the perfect style to fight Mike. He wanted his opponents to move in so he could land that big right hand. Also remember George went the distance with Holyfield, something Mike never did, and almost took him out in the 7th.

    I will admit that I am a Big George fanboy as well since we are almost the same age as his comeback was an inspiration to geezers everywhere. :love:

Share This Page