Mike Tyson Says You Don't Know Boxing If You Think Floyd Mayweather Is The #1 Boxer To Watch
Options
Comments
-
CashmoneyDux wrote: »Shizlansky wrote: »May can't step to mike soooooo
I dont think any lightweight cant step to any heavyweight
Bruce Lee disagrees with ya.
j/k
That move where Bruce was facing down in pushup position and bent his legs back over his body and kicked Kareem in the head while Kareem was pushing down on his neck/head was some dope ? . And real. Me and a friend simulated it successfully. -
Shizlansky wrote: »May can't step to mike soooooo
They're not even the same weight class, but IDK if Tyson could take Mayweather today when you factor in age and practice
Tyson is a brawler and a puncher and Mayweather is hard to hit
word. on that Undisputed Truth thing, Mike threw like 5 punches on the stage and looked like he just played full court basketball. May would work bruh today but never in his prime tho. -
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
If he says so
-
What's the difference between Mike Tyson and a brawler cuz I'm confused now? 90% of the Tyson fights I've seen ended with his opponent being brutally ko'd. The few times he has actually had to box, he lost. So if Mikes not a brawler, and he's not a boxer, what is he. Serious question.
-
Lol @ comparing May to Tyson. Come on now.
-
[Trillmatic] wrote: »What's the difference between Mike Tyson and a brawler cuz I'm confused now? 90% of the Tyson fights I've seen ended with his opponent being brutally ko'd. The few times he has actually had to box, he lost. So if Mikes not a brawler, and he's not a boxer, what is he. Serious question.
the ? ..
He was a boxer who had dynamite in both fist Hes was boxer puncher at his best.. to quote my white online counterparts "Noob"
And he was one of the best finishers ever..
Notable boxer punchers as of late
You dont think boxers knock ? out.. SRR ,SRL. The Bros, they arent finishers but they are boxer punchers
-
playmaker88 wrote: »[Trillmatic] wrote: »What's the difference between Mike Tyson and a brawler cuz I'm confused now? 90% of the Tyson fights I've seen ended with his opponent being brutally ko'd. The few times he has actually had to box, he lost. So if Mikes not a brawler, and he's not a boxer, what is he. Serious question.
the ? ..
He was a boxer who had dynamite in both fist Hes was boxer puncher at his best.. to quote my white online counterparts "Noob"
And he was one of the best finishers ever..
Notable boxer punchers as of late
You dont think boxers knock ? out.. SRR ,SRL. The Bros, they arent finishers but they are boxer punchers
So what's the difference between a "boxer puncher" and a brawler? This time don't get your panties caught in your ? , just properly articulate the explanation to this "noob". Lol. -
[Trillmatic] wrote: »playmaker88 wrote: »[Trillmatic] wrote: »What's the difference between Mike Tyson and a brawler cuz I'm confused now? 90% of the Tyson fights I've seen ended with his opponent being brutally ko'd. The few times he has actually had to box, he lost. So if Mikes not a brawler, and he's not a boxer, what is he. Serious question.
the ? ..
He was a boxer who had dynamite in both fist Hes was boxer puncher at his best.. to quote my white online counterparts "Noob"
And he was one of the best finishers ever..
Notable boxer punchers as of late
You dont think boxers knock ? out.. SRR ,SRL. The Bros, they arent finishers but they are boxer punchers
So what's the difference between a "boxer puncher" and a brawler? This time don't get your panties caught in your ? , just properly articulate the explanation to this "noob". Lol.
A brawler typically has no rhyme nor reason
a boxer puncher has the ability to be methodical in his approach and can Ko you in the flow of their offense if need be without coming out of character they are heavy handed -
playmaker88 wrote: »[Trillmatic] wrote: »playmaker88 wrote: »[Trillmatic] wrote: »What's the difference between Mike Tyson and a brawler cuz I'm confused now? 90% of the Tyson fights I've seen ended with his opponent being brutally ko'd. The few times he has actually had to box, he lost. So if Mikes not a brawler, and he's not a boxer, what is he. Serious question.
the ? ..
He was a boxer who had dynamite in both fist Hes was boxer puncher at his best.. to quote my white online counterparts "Noob"
And he was one of the best finishers ever..
Notable boxer punchers as of late
You dont think boxers knock ? out.. SRR ,SRL. The Bros, they arent finishers but they are boxer punchers
So what's the difference between a "boxer puncher" and a brawler? This time don't get your panties caught in your ? , just properly articulate the explanation to this "noob". Lol.
A brawler typically has no rhyme nor reason
a boxer puncher has the ability to be methodical in his approach and can Ko you in the flow of their offense if need be without coming out of character they are heavy handed
Thanks that makes sense. See, that's all I wanted the first time around. -
Mike had way too much technique to ever be called a brawler.
People think Mike KO'd everybody because he punched hard. Go back and look at some video of him. Mike KO'd everybody because his punching mechanics were damn near flawless. -
Floyd's anticipation is the best I've ever seen. Cotto fight was the closest I've seen him take punishment (Suga Shane got one punch in then got his ass beat). ? knew what he was doing when he gave Floyd bad hands - cuz Jah knows if he all-time knockout power it'd be even more unfair.
-
Black_Samson wrote: »Black_Samson wrote: »people say the same about a Prime GSP...
even tho his fights are clinics on combat sports.
? you smokin dat ? ?
aint no clinic.....its a keep u on the ground an ? plan.....
i can understand this...
i mean i'd feel the same way if i didnt know what the hell i was looking at...
the style floyd employs is just another facet of this.
a strong defense is just as good as a strong offense.
yall mad cause folk mastered the art of fighting without fighting?
sooooo... what? yall want floyd to stand and bang, eat a whole bunch of shots. AND win?
how'd that work for paq and hatton?
oh thats right... it doesn't...
Didn't work so well for GSP in his last fight -
? dont appreciate Mayweather.
When he finally decides to beat Pacroids ass yall call him the GOAT modern boxing technician of our times n imma show yall the time you said "but he aint even that exciting"...maaaaan calm that ? down. -
? dont appreciate Mayweather.
When he finally decides to beat Pacroids ass yall call him the GOAT modern boxing technician of our times n imma show yall the time you said "but he aint even that exciting"...maaaaan calm that ? down.
The two aren't mutually exclusive. He can lack excitement and still be the best modern boxer. I honestly don't like watching his fights, but I also can't front on his skill. -
Mike Tyson is dead wrong. I understand that casual fans will appreciate a brawl ie. gatti - ward trilogy over a precision boxing utilized by Floyd, Rigo, Hopkins, Ward ect... But a one-sided beat down objectively is must more impressive than giving a beat down while taking one. The people faulting floyd for boxing his opponents are the same ones who praise Pac's last performance even though he boxed Rios the majority of the fight.
I think many people take floyds greatness for granted because they don't understand how difficult it is to employ his style successfully. So as a measuring stick consider the Broner vs Maidana fight that just happened or Berto vs Guerro or Micky Bey vs John Molina, Carlos Monlina vs Ishe Smith etc... Many fighters have attempted to use a defensive style as their foundation, and many have tried to use some adaption of the shell defense but known in modern boxing have come close Floyd's success with it.