Mike Tyson vs Dokes instead of Douglas, 1990

[ChrisPontius]

I think there was some talk of a Dokes bout. Dokes lost by TKO to Holyfield in 1989 (tenth round), but won his next three fights.

Could Dokes at that point have beaten Tyson or would he have lost to that terrible version of Tyson?

[Rattler]

Tyson wins.

Dokes was too easy to hit, and Tyson's reach is more pronounced in this fight. Plus, Dokes was not emotionally stable at this point. Still talented, but he was a little fucked up in the head. He wouldn't be as focused as Douglas was.

[ChampionsForever]

Tyson wasnt terrible in 1990, he was unprepared yes but whos fault was that?? I watched the fight the other day and man Douglas just had the guys number that night, hes accuracy was amazing considering how hard to hit even the some what faded Tyson was. Hes jab had alot of snap reimaniciant (I know I spelled that wrong) of Larry Holmes, hes combination punching was great and he just fought the fight of hes life exactly when he needed it. A rematch would have been good to see but It was never to be :-(.

Tyson would have beaten Dokes tho and in decent fashion.

[Sonny's jab]

I dont believe that was a "terrible version of Tyson".
Buster Douglas had the right style and refused to be intimidated. He came to fight.

Believe it or not, people, TYSON WAS NEVER INVINCIBLE, no man is invincible. That was all hype.

As for Michael Dokes, it's hard to say how he would have done versus a prime Tyson. Tyson didn't beat many guys as tough as Dokes, but he beat a few, and he was a heck of a puncher, so I'd favour Tyson.
But then I'd have picked Tyson over Douglas in a fantasy match if they had never fought.

[mr. magoo]

How in the hell do people come up with these threads?

[boxbible]

Douglas put in one of the all-time great performances.

He woulda beaten many a great heavyweight that single night.

[fists of fury]

Dokes would have probably lost.

Douglas was just destined to be the man who beat Tyson. He had an unforgettable performance against an unprepared (but not totally rubbish) Tyson, and Douglas never ever looked as good before or since. I honestly believe it was just "meant to be."

[hobgoblin]

He woulda beaten many a great heavyweight that single night.

Joe Frazier would have KO'd him by round 11. Marciano would have KO'd him. Muhammad Ali would have decisioned him. Joe Louis would have gotten the KO within 8 rounds (unless he had a really off day like against Billy Conn). Floyd Patterson would have probably won by KO too. Larry Holmes would have edged out a decision.

I wonder though, how Foreman, Liston, Lennox Lewis, and Riddick Bowe would have done. It is a styles thing. They would have struggled against Tokyo Douglas.

[Jear]

Joe Frazier would have KO'd him by round 11. Marciano would have KO'd him. Muhammad Ali would have decisioned him. Joe Louis would have gotten the KO within 8 rounds (unless he had a really off day like against Billy Conn). Floyd Patterson would have probably won by KO too. Larry Holmes would have edged out a decision.

I wonder though, how Foreman, Liston, Lennox Lewis, and Riddick Bowe would have done. It is a styles thing. They would have struggled against Tokyo Douglas.


I feel the latter stated champs fare better than Frazier, Marciano or Patterson against Douglas that night. Douglas fought superbly with a great jab and combination punching. His uppercut in Tokyo on the back of the jab would have caused major style issues for the shorter inside fighters. The taller guys may have been able to fight on more even terms

[MrSmall]

Christ, get a life, Douglas>Tyson people.

[janitor]

Part of me thinks that Tyson might have lost to Coco the clown that night. He simply didn't turn up.

[Sonny's jab]

Part of me thinks that Tyson might have lost to Coco the clown that night. He simply didn't turn up.

I strongly disagree.

People like to square everything neatly in categories, make things "make sense", and since they already have Tyson as far greater than Douglas, they cannot accept the fact that he could have been anywhere near his best when Douglas punched the shit out of him.

People find it hard to accept the reality because the reality is :
1. Tyson was never as good as people thought, he was never invincible.
2. Douglas was often a lazy and unspectacular fighter but he was capable enough and had the style to beat a prime Tyson.

Simply put, you put two heavyweights in there who can fight, and who aren't afraid of the other one, and regardless of their reputation and of the opinions of others we simply dont know who beats who until the fight takes place.
That's the beauty of boxing.

[janitor]

I strongly disagree.

People like to square everything neatly in categories, make things "make sense", and since they already have Tyson as far greater than Douglas, they cannot accept the fact that he could have been anywhere near his best when Douglas punched the shit out of him.

People find it hard to accept the reality because the reality is :
1. Tyson was never as good as people thought, he was never invincible.
2. Douglas was often a lazy and unspectacular fighter but he was capable enough and had the style to beat a prime Tyson.

Simply put, you put two heavyweights in there who can fight, and who aren't afraid of the other one, and regardless of their reputation and of the opinions of others we simply dont know who beats who until the fight takes place.
That's the beauty of boxing.

I have to say that looking at Tyson in the early rounds against Douglas he was not displaying his usual agression. You could argue that he had twelve rounds to turn the situation around.

You are right about one thing though. Every all time great has had nights like Tyson had in Tokyo against guys of a similar calibre to Douglas.

What set's the Louis's and Ali's of this world apart from the pack is that they always found away to snatch the title back from Douglas within the length of the fight.

[JohnThomas1]

Part of me thinks that Tyson might have lost to Coco the clown that night. He simply didn't turn up.

Good one hahaha

[Sonny's jab]

I have to say that looking at Tyson in the early rounds against Douglas he was not displaying his usual agression. You could argue that he had twelve rounds to turn the situation around.

It's hard to display your usual aggression when you are getting the shit punched out of you, and getting your socks boxed off. That's a fact.

Guys like Pinklon Thomas, Tyrell Biggs, Tony Tubbs, Trevor Berbick never got to show their full repetoires against Tyson, because Tyson did his thing. I could argue that those guys didn't turn up, but that's robbing Tyson of his due credit.

But I'm even-handed in acknowledging that Douglas did to Tyson what Tyson was expected to do to him. That's boxing. You aint gonna look at your best when the other guy is beating the crap out of you. That's life.



You are right about one thing though. Every all time great has had nights like Tyson had in Tokyo against guys of a similar calibre to Douglas.

What set's the Louis's and Ali's of this world apart from the pack is that they always found away to snatch the title back from Douglas within the length of the fight.


To be fair to Tyson, Joe Louis got beat up and KO'd by Max Schmeling, who was also a massive underdog.

[NickHudson]

yeah, i fully agree with this. i think a bit of a myth has built up that Tyson was terrible in 1990. I have rewatched the Tyson-Douglas fight a number of times. Tyson was very good (albeit not his best), and very determined. Douglas was quite superb.

Dokes would have suffered against 1990 Tyson.

Tyson wasnt terrible in 1990, he was unprepared yes but whos fault was that?? I watched the fight the other day and man Douglas just had the guys number that night, hes accuracy was amazing considering how hard to hit even the some what faded Tyson was. Hes jab had alot of snap reimaniciant (I know I spelled that wrong) of Larry Holmes, hes combination punching was great and he just fought the fight of hes life exactly when he needed it. A rematch would have been good to see but It was never to be :-(.

Tyson would have beaten Dokes tho and in decent fashion.

[Titan1]

Dokes would have gotten owned by Tyson in 1990.Prime Dokes may have had a shot, but that's highly debatable.

[rekcutnevets]

I have always compared Mike Tyson with Hector Camacho when it comes to heart. I don't think either one will lay down on you, but they sometimes just start going through the motions when the going gets tough.

For most of Mike's career, whenever he just went through the motions it was enough. Against Douglas, he appeared to be doing this from the opening bell. He did not even wait for it to get tough. That is why I don't think he was mentally prepared for this fight. He didn't attack the same way at the opening bell that I have seen him do every other time. He won the first rounds against Holyfield I, Lewis, Williams, and McBride.

Mike was still throwing hard punches against Douglas. That was a hard uppercut that dropped Douglas in the 8th round of their fight. I think that Dokes would have eaten too many of Tyson's punches, even if Mike had simply been going through the motions.

Tyson ko Dokes.

[Danny]

Fact is, it was Douglas who went in against Tyson, and he gave Tyson a beating. Don't think for one minute I'm a Tyson hater, because Mike Tyson is my favourite fighter of all time. At his peak, he was a formidable fighter, one of the best of all time in my view.

Now, strongly feel Tyson never showed up mentally at the Douglas fight. You can tell by he's not focused by his body language during the introductions that something's not quite there with Mike. Mike appeared not all that interested to be honest.

Physically, Tyson was nowhere near prepared. People say his weight was only 220lbs so he must have been, but what the scales read don't mean shit. Tyson himself has amditted that he was more interested in japenese women than doing training. I believe Mike only did certain amounts of training when the media wanted an openm workout etc.

Tyson, King, the whole team were way too confident, it was as if they felt Douglas was a a complete bum. I do think that was more to do with King than Tyson, but hey, Mike should have known better than to listen to Don.

It's hypothetical, but I think it's fair to say if Douglas fought a well-trained, conditioned Tyson, then Mike would have taken care of business, but it didn't tunr out like that.

[TBooze]

Dokes lost what was left of his once excellent potential in the Holyfield war...

Tyson would of won easily

But actually Tyson was pencilled in to give Ribalta a rematch in Japan. But Jose looked so bad on the undercard of Tyson/Williams against Jeff Sims, that Douglas (who beat a journeyman by the name of Oliver McCall on the same bill) got to play the supposed next Tyson victim.

What could of been potentially intresting was a proposed Tyson/Ruddock fight in Canada in November 89...

[Titan1]

Dokes lost what was left of his once excellent potential in the Holyfield war...

Tyson would of won easily

But actually Tyson was pencilled in to give Ribalta a rematch in Japan. But Jose looked so bad on the undercard of Tyson/Williams against Jeff Sims, that Douglas (who beat a journeyman by the name over Oliver McCall on the same bill) got to play the supposed next Tyson victim.

What could of been potentially intresting was a proposed Tyson/Ruddock fight in Canada in November 89...

Dokes probably lost it lying down on the Canvas high as a kite vs Coetzee.

[TBooze]

Dokes probably lost it lying down on the Canvas high as a kite vs Coetzee.

But he did seem to redeem himself for one night, and one night only, against Holyfield.

[Bokaj]

Joe Frazier would have KO'd him by round 11. Marciano would have KO'd him. Muhammad Ali would have decisioned him. Joe Louis would have gotten the KO within 8 rounds (unless he had a really off day like against Billy Conn). Floyd Patterson would have probably won by KO too. Larry Holmes would have edged out a decision.

I wonder though, how Foreman, Liston, Lennox Lewis, and Riddick Bowe would have done. It is a styles thing. They would have struggled against Tokyo Douglas.

I think that version of Douglas would have had a good shot against all these fighters if they had an off night. None, with the possible exceptions of Bowe and Foreman, would have been outclassed like that, though. Patterson might have been KO'd, but not beat up in that systematic fashion.

[janitor]

[quote=Sonny's jab;4779]It's hard to display your usual aggression when you are getting the shit punched out of you, and getting your socks boxed off. That's a fact.


I saw it in his eyes at the opening bell.

He wasnt going to surge forward like he usualy did, he was going to fight lazy and headhunt and he picked the wrong day for it.


Guys like Pinklon Thomas, Tyrell Biggs, Tony Tubbs, Trevor Berbick never got to show their full repetoires against Tyson, because Tyson did his thing. I could argue that those guys didn't turn up, but that's robbing Tyson of his due credit.


True but unlike Douglas Tyson's reputation dosnt rest on a single impresive performence.

That makes me question whether the critical factor was Douglas or Tyson.

Having said that if I had been in a coma for 10 years and the first thing you had shown me was that fight I would have thought that I was looking at a great fighter.


To be fair to Tyson, Joe Louis got beat up and KO'd by Max Schmeling, who was also a massive underdog.


To be fair to Louis he got the crap beaten out of him by sombody who was recognised as one of the elite heavyweights of the era going into the fight.

At least with Schmeling we can look at a prior body of work that makes the outcome seem plausible in hindsight.

[leverage]

tyson by ko inside of 4. dokes possessed great fighting heart and great hand speed but lacked the defense and power needed to beat tyson. He also tended to slug too much, which would play right into tysons hands.

[red cobra]

Douglas was a pheomena that night, and not enough credit is given him. I used to argue all the time with a friend who was just sure that "it wasn't Tyson" that night, and he would have lost to anyone and that if they had a rematch, that he would have "killed" Buster. I completely disagreed with that...Douglas was special that night, and there were other guys who would have folded like a cheap lawn chair against Tyson that night in Tokyo. Of course Buster wasn't able to maintain that level of excellence for even one defense of the title, but on that night against Tyson, Buster Douglas was for real, and perhaps had his head been on a bit straighter, he could have replicated his form of 2/11/90, or come close enough to beat the other guys around at the time, including Holyfield. Oh, and IMO, Tyson, even a sub-par Tyson would have ko'd Dokes in 7 or 8.

[Bigcat]

Would have been game, but gone down several times before the referee made it clear to Mike he was out of his depth with Tyson..

[mr. magoo]

I have to say that looking at Tyson in the early rounds against Douglas he was not displaying his usual agression.


Bingo,

Of course, I realize that you wrote this response some 8 months ago or whatever, but I agree with it nonetheless. While we can't reverse the outcome nor take the win away from Douglas, the fact doesn't change that Tyson was clearly not his usual self that evening, and no I will not by the argument that " he was facing someone who took him out of his fight game. " I miss Sonny's jab and wish the man would return to ESB, but I have never agreed, and still don't concur with him on his views regarding Tyson vs Douglas.

As for Dokes vs Tyson in February of 1990? Dokes gained a lot of weight following his match with Holyfield and seemed to have been a tad tainted from that beating. Ruddock easily dispatched Dokes in the spring of 1990, shortly after Tyson had lost his title. Dokes had also recently been floored enroute to a victory over a journeyman named Lionel Washington. I think that for stylistic reasons combined with Dokes severe decline, even a jaded Tyson probably would have beaten him on that evening. However, had the Dokes of the Holyfield fight shown up, it might have changed things, and Douglas was not the only fighter that I would have picked in 1990 to beat a sinking Tyson.

[TBooze]

Douglas was not the only fighter that I would have picked in 1990 to beat a sinking Tyson.


With hindsight, or are you the multi millionare that got the 42-1 odds spot on?;)

[The Wanderer]

Time and styles would have been against Dokes. Dokes used up his last great fight against Holyfield, and he had nothing left in the tank afterward. The couple of wins he had between the Holyfield fight and getting smashed by Ruddock were all against nobodies with lousy records. As soon as he started running into live fighters again he was getting knocked out hard.

And style wise, Dokes would have been standing in front of Tyson and trading, (as he did with Holyfield) unlike Douglas who could use his movement and long stiff jab. Not a good matchup for Dokes.

[ripcity]

Douglas put in one of the all-time great performances.

He woulda beaten many a great heavyweight that single night.

Agreed. He had one of those nights where he was focused and had everything going his way except for the knockdown in the 8th. He did however get up from that and knocked Tyson out 2 rounds latter.

[Silver]

well, tyson was still in his physcial prime but tyson no longer utilized his skills that made him great. he had no business losing to buster douglas. thats why he dosent rank that high.

[sauhund II]

Well, waking up in a whorehouse at fight night, lackluster training, no focus, bored with boxing and a bunch of yes man blowing smoke up your ass.........yeah, it stands to reason that Tyson was not at his best against Douglas.

Even Larry Merchant, not exactly a Tyson fan, commented that something was missing in Mike while the fighters were introduced.

Douglas had some major jitters from the beginning but Mike did not respond or put pressure on him. He simply followed him around waiting for the ONE big shot to land. Classic case of letting your opponent get brave and brave Buster got.

No headmovement, strictly headhunting, no combos or setting up a attack, no jab or bodywork, not a lot of energy and poor stamina spelled disaster that night for Tyson. Plus a absolute clueless corner .

Only pure talent kept him going almost to the end and he almost pulled it out.

The funny thing is that McCall who was good friends with Mike warned him not to take Buster to lightly after his loss to him. Must have went in one ear and out the other one.

Hell, King could not sell the fight in the US so he had to pimp it out to Japan.

BTW, Douglas's handlers were not confident at all that lightning would strike twice and after initial negotiations pulled out of a rematch and opted for the "easier" Holyfield and coned Wynn into a megapurse.

Dejavu hit again, as Douglas, similar to Tyson , did not train and while not pusuing chicks he prefered to order mega pizza orders come fight night.........

[JohnThomas1]

Well, waking up in a whorehouse at fight night

Reputable source please?

[punchy]

[QUOTE]
At least with Schmeling we can look at a prior body of work that makes the outcome seem plausible in hindsight.

If you look at Douglas's record it was not one of a bum, I believe he had been misjudged on the Tucker fight as someone one with no heart, but it is no disgrace to lose to Tucker in a close one and there are some other good wins there as well.

Douglas's record is good not brilliant but solid.

[p.Townend]

I think Mike would probably have taken care of Dokes fairly quickly.Douglas turned up to put in the profomance of his life and even if he had been counted out when he was put down it would still have been a hell of a good showing.Dokes would have sterted training with good intentions but found a way to get distracted,he would have turned up under prepared and fallen inside 3 rounds.

[KOTF]

Tyson does the same thing Bowe accomplished against him; takes him out early

[Hookie]

I think there was some talk of a Dokes bout. Dokes lost by TKO to Holyfield in 1989 (tenth round), but won his next three fights.

Could Dokes at that point have beaten Tyson or would he have lost to that terrible version of Tyson?

Dokes would do pretty well but come up short. Tyson would knock him out inside of 9 rounds. Dokes might be ahead on points prior to the KO. I see it being a true KO (down for 10)!

[Hookie]

I have always compared Mike Tyson with Hector Camacho when it comes to heart. I don't think either one will lay down on you, but they sometimes just start going through the motions when the going gets tough.

For most of Mike's career, whenever he just went through the motions it was enough. Against Douglas, he appeared to be doing this from the opening bell. He did not even wait for it to get tough. That is why I don't think he was mentally prepared for this fight. He didn't attack the same way at the opening bell that I have seen him do every other time. He won the first rounds against Holyfield I, Lewis, Williams, and McBride.

Mike was still throwing hard punches against Douglas. That was a hard uppercut that dropped Douglas in the 8th round of their fight. I think that Dokes would have eaten too many of Tyson's punches, even if Mike had simply been going through the motions.

Tyson ko Dokes.

Except for Camacho has never been stopped despite fighting guys like Chavez, Trinidad, and DeLaHoya.

[Bokaj]

But I'm even-handed in acknowledging that Douglas did to Tyson what Tyson was expected to do to him. That's boxing. You aint gonna look at your best when the other guy is beating the crap out of you. That's life.

Very true. But it's unbelievable how hard this simple fact is to digest on this forum. Even many of the really good posters have a fundamental flaw concerning their reasoning on this subject.

[lefthook31]

I strongly disagree.

People like to square everything neatly in categories, make things "make sense", and since they already have Tyson as far greater than Douglas, they cannot accept the fact that he could have been anywhere near his best when Douglas punched the shit out of him.

People find it hard to accept the reality because the reality is :
1. Tyson was never as good as people thought, he was never invincible.
2. Douglas was often a lazy and unspectacular fighter but he was capable enough and had the style to beat a prime Tyson.

Simply put, you put two heavyweights in there who can fight, and who aren't afraid of the other one, and regardless of their reputation and of the opinions of others we simply dont know who beats who until the fight takes place.
That's the beauty of boxing.
Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas.

[mr. magoo]

Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas.


You're not likely to get a reply from Sonny.. He hasn't posted here in over two years.

[Bonecrusher]

I don't see Dokes on the outside blasting away at Mike with a great Jab and great combos the way Douglas did on that night. I also don't see Dokes muscling Tyson all over the ring and really just manhandling Mike the way Buster did. Douglas always had the tools just never put it all together. The way Dokes fought Holyfield that night toe to toe would not work against the heavier punching Tyson. I see Dokes coming to fight early but being over matched and knocked cold around the 6th round