Don't Make Me Angry, You Wouldn't Like Me When I'm Angry...

Top five fighters who really do shine when they are cheesed off. Active fighters only please.

1. Andre Ward. Doesn't show it but really focuses on breaking his opponent down when feeling annoyed. Froch is the main example.

2. Mayweather. He'll put a clinic on those that rile his ass. Why do they rile him, because HBO 24/7 sometimes give them a few minutes focus. It's enough for PBF to get all worked up.

3. Vlad Drone. The all conquering heavyweight seems to be able to pound that jab a little more when he is aggrieved by his opponent. Haye is a good example, as are a few others.

4. Sergio Martinez. What he'd do to Chavez Jr if they met now would be enough to make Chavez Sr pee pee himself.

5. Adrien Broner. Not seen him super mad yet, but has really looked to hurt the last couple of opponents he's faced, and i know they were beefing due to his antics, but he still seemed more hungry and nailed some good shots on them. In the future i think we'll see him pancake some peeps, brought on by his own self-induced rage when someone calls him out as a bit of an idiot on twitter.

Thoughts?

A prime Vitali Drone would give Haye the cruelest and most beastly beat down of his life, if given the chance.

Morales is kind of a mean SOB in the ring too; although I love him, I still get annoyed at his picture being taken next to someone he just sparked that time, too.

Lewis when motivated was quite scary. I'm sure he said something after his beating of Mike Tyson that he intended it to be brutal.

Great points Seanusarrilius.

Fernando Vargas was brilliant at controlling his rage prior to Trinidad. His fights with Marquez, Quartey and Campas really highlighted someone who could focus their aggression. Sadly for him he met Trinidad who wasn't bad at this too.

Lewis, a great great shout. Really focused when upset about another fighter, did it with class too.

Tito did let it all out against B-Hop though. Prime example of someone blowing their load due to being so annoyed at another fighter. Hatton did the same against Mayweather. Pac couldn't if he wanted to, he's into the big book now.

Lewis certainly could be chilling and ruthless when riled. Mike Tyson was one of the scariest fighters in history but he crossed the line with his comments towards Lewis and attacking him so Lewis really handed him a beating.

When he lost against Rahman in a flukey fight where he was under prepared you could see in the rematch how clinical he was and he really took Rahman apart as punishment!

Battered him!

How about De la Hoya against Vargas

Gordy wrote:Lewis certainly could be chilling and ruthless when riled. Mike Tyson was one of the scariest fighters in history but he crossed the line with his comments towards Lewis and attacking him so Lewis really handed him a beating.

Tyson being shot to smithereens didn't hurt his cause either.

rowley wrote:

Gordy wrote:Lewis certainly could be chilling and ruthless when riled. Mike Tyson was one of the scariest fighters in history but he crossed the line with his comments towards Lewis and attacking him so Lewis really handed him a beating.

Tyson being shot to smithereens didn't hurt his cause either.

Rubbish, the people on Sky told us he was as dangerous opponent as Lewis had ever faced.

Gordy wrote:Lewis certainly could be chilling and ruthless when riled. Mike Tyson was one of the scariest fighters in history but he crossed the line with his comments towards Lewis and attacking him so Lewis really handed him a beating.

When he lost against Rahman in a flukey fight where he was under prepared you could see in the rematch how clinical he was and he really took Rahman apart as punishment!

He certainly was underprepared for that great right hand from Hasim. Hasim prepared himself to land it and he did. Nothing flukey about aiming and landing a right hand to the jaw. Great skill and great KO.

Tyson was more shot that JFK when he fought Lewis. Yes Lewis was still scared witless.

Lewis wasn't scared, Lewis battered him.

Tyson was still pretty good you know. I dislike this "prime Tyson would have beaten him" and trying to take away from Lewis' victory by saying Tyson was "shot"

Just silly.

You may all be right I may be being a bit harsh, he was coming into the fight on the back of a very impressive win over Brian Neilsen and I don't think anyone on here would question Neilsen's credentials.

rowley wrote:You may all be right I may be being a bit harsh, he was coming into the fight on the back of a very impressive win over Brian Neilsen and I don't think anyone on here would question Neilsen's credentials.

Deary me Rowley, you did make me chuckle then.

JabMachineMK2 wrote:Lewis wasn't scared, Lewis battered him.

Tyson was still pretty good you know. I dislike this "prime Tyson would have beaten him" and trying to take away from Lewis' victory by saying Tyson was "shot"

Just silly.

Come of it JM. Tyson was too far gone to make a decent scrap of it. Tyson pre prison would have beaten Lewis easily. If McCall could land a right on prime Lewis, Tyson would have landed 3 before Lewis hit the deck and stayed there.

rowley wrote:You may all be right I may be being a bit harsh, he was coming into the fight on the back of a very impressive win over Brian Neilsen and I don't think anyone on here would question Neilsen's credentials.

Neilson nearly equalled Rocky's record. He even fought and beat opponents of equal calibre.

JM, as you know, I'm a big admirer of Lewis myself. I think he could certainly have beaten any version of Tyson. Could, not would, I'll stress.

But Tyson most definitely did fit any description of the word 'shot' you can think of by 2002. Not Lewis' fault that he had to wait that long to get the fight, of course, but an unfortunate truth all the same.

azania wrote:

rowley wrote:You may all be right I may be being a bit harsh, he was coming into the fight on the back of a very impressive win over Brian Neilsen and I don't think anyone on here would question Neilsen's credentials.

Neilson nearly equalled Rocky's record. He even fought and beat opponents of equal calibre.

Got a win over Larry Holmes, Holmes is a top ten heavy, we may be underestimating big Brian

azania wrote:Come of it JM. Tyson was too far gone to make a decent scrap of it. Tyson pre prison would have beaten Lewis easily. If McCall could land a right on prime Lewis, Tyson would have landed 3 before Lewis hit the deck and stayed there.

I disagree, I think Tyson at the time was still among the top 3 heavyweights around. Bear in mind, Lewis was older than Tyson so we can't use age. We can only go by career, and if it so happened that Tyson was only willing to get in the ring when there was nowhere else to go, its not really up for debate about his ability.

Lewis could beat any version of Tyson you're right Chris, I believe "prime incredible hulk mad max in thunderdome aliens vs predator invincible" Tyson would have given a better account, but I liken Lewis' performance to that of Buster Douglas in that Lewis was just not intimidated at all.

rowley wrote:

azania wrote:

rowley wrote:You may all be right I may be being a bit harsh, he was coming into the fight on the back of a very impressive win over Brian Neilsen and I don't think anyone on here would question Neilsen's credentials.

Neilson nearly equalled Rocky's record. He even fought and beat opponents of equal calibre.

Got a win over Larry Holmes, Holmes is a top ten heavy, we may be underestimating big Brian

Absolutely. The beast that was Tyson was back and a top contender on the back of schooling Neilson who beat a near peak Holmes. He's closer to Rocky than I thought. Heck, even Butterbean is there or thereabouts on the back of beating Holmes.

JabMachineMK2 wrote:

azania wrote:Come of it JM. Tyson was too far gone to make a decent scrap of it. Tyson pre prison would have beaten Lewis easily. If McCall could land a right on prime Lewis, Tyson would have landed 3 before Lewis hit the deck and stayed there.

I disagree, I think Tyson at the time was still among the top 3 heavyweights around. Bear in mind, Lewis was older than Tyson so we can't use age. We can only go by career, and if it so happened that Tyson was only willing to get in the ring when there was nowhere else to go, its not really up for debate about his ability.

Lewis could beat any version of Tyson you're right Chris, I believe "prime incredible hulk mad max in thunderdome aliens vs predator invincible" Tyson would have given a better account, but I liken Lewis' performance to that of Buster Douglas in that Lewis was just not intimidated at all.

We can use being shot as opposed to age. Wilfred Benitez was shot at 24. Age is irrelevant. Tyson was a name Lewis needed to have on his resume. It didn't matter what version of Tyson. Of course the added bonus was the payday Tyson brought.

Tyson was not invincible. But at their best he would have knocked out Lewis. Lewis's jab wasn't good enough as it lacked snap and speed. It was a range finder. Against Tyson you needed a jab with authority to get a result. Lewis didn't have that and never has.

If you think lewis' jab didn't have snap and speed I implore you to watch his fight vs Shannon Briggs.

Victor Ortiz was peed at the media going into the Berto fight and fought like a man possessed!

I dont think Id have Tyson as one of the top 3 heavyweights when Lewis fought him. There are probably quite a few heavyweights that were better than him by then.

But more importantly, he was far far removed from his best whereas Lewis was not far off his peak.

JabMachineMK2 wrote:If you think lewis' jab didn't have snap and speed I implore you to watch his fight vs Shannon Briggs.

I've seen it and whilst it looked decent, Briggs was never as good as Tyson at slipping jabs making Lewis' jab look even better.

I think a young Tyson would have stopped Lewis quickly and easily. Their actual fight is irrelevant. Tyson was finished at that point. Lewis was always a slow starter with a questionable chin and Tyson was an exceptionally fast starter with one punch KO power in either hand.

Over four rounds I would pick Tyson over pretty much any heavyweight in history (obviously usually on points). To beat him you need to have a hard fast jab, lateral movement and an excellent chin. Later in the fight his head movement deteriorates as does his speed and power. I don't think Lewis ever had the tools to make it to that point.

I'd give an on song Bowe and a prime Holyfield a much better chance of beating a mid 80's Tyson.

Tyson in his prime delivered up punches like he was serving food. But he wouldn't have KO'd Lewis early, a prime Lewis takes Tyson.

This prime Tyson.....

I hear that the San Fransisco earthquake wasn't the shifting of tectonic plates - Mike Tyson in his prime decided to go all out on a punchbag and well....we all know what happened.

God, its like those Chuck Norris jokes.

azania wrote:Heck, even Butterbean is there or thereabouts on the back of beating Holmes.

Butterbean lost to Holmes. Or was this another 'robbery'?

JabMachineMK2 wrote:This prime Tyson.....

I hear that the San Fransisco earthquake wasn't the shifting of tectonic plates - Mike Tyson in his prime decided to go all out on a punchbag and well....we all know what happened.

God, its like those Chuck Norris jokes.

If only Tubbs, Holmes, Spinks, Biggs, Ruddock, Tucker, Thomas, Smith and Williams had known that all you needed to beat him was a smug superior attitude combined with regular chanting of "PRIME TYSON LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL !!! when was that 9.00 am to 9.25 am Feb 17th 1987 ?"

I'm not saying he wasn't good, but do we ever say "prime Ali would wipe the floor with x" or "prime Foreman" or "Prime Klitschko"

No, we just evaluate them on their career.

For some reason Tyson is afforded this whole debacle where we pick one period in his career and assume he was this snarling 7ft monster that punched holes in trees.

Tyson relied on speed and endurance because of his swarming busy style as soon as he started to lose those attributes he became a far less effective fighter. No way can a 5' ll'' 220lb heavyweight be effective against today's monsters without the explosive power and head movement a PRIME Tyson possessed.

Lewis did not really have a prime. His physical prime was not necessarily when he was at his most effective. He relied on smarts, his size, power and experience.

Tyson's prime was 1987 - 1988. For two years he was a truly great heavyweight that would have been a nightmare for anyone in history. He lacked the longevity, heart and mental strength of the top 5 heavies, but on his night he would have been a nightmare for any of them - especially Ali.

Ali would have struggled early but took a wide UD. I can't really be bothered going into a big massive post as to why but I still don't get why we evaluate PRIME TYSON based on a two year tenure. Its like saying that David Tua for a year was one of the GOAT's or Golota from 94 to 96 because he was a knockout machine.

Ali would have mentally destroyed him in the build up.

JabMachineMK2 wrote:Ali would have struggled early but took a wide UD. I can't really be bothered going into a big massive post as to why but I still don't get why we evaluate PRIME TYSON based on a two year tenure. Its like saying that David Tua for a year was one of the GOAT's or Golota from 94 to 96 because he was a knockout machine.

No it's not neither of them held the title or beat anyone of note. You are just talking rubbish. Tyson beat everyone the division had to offer from the mid to late 80's.

Rather rude.

Ok, well along those lines what about ODLH? Held titles, beat people of note yet when mentioning welterweight/middleweight GOATs he's never mentioned as the person by which they are to be measured. Why?

It always seems that whenever a heavyweight is mentioned, in any form all of a sudden people like you come out and claim PRIME TYSON. Well what about PRIME DE LA HOYA beating the likes of Greb? Armstrong? Hagler?

"I think that the 96' 99 version of ODLH beats them because he beat everyone in his division and held the titles."

No - ODLH would have lost.

On a small point of pedantry DLH prime or otherwise never did jack to suggest he could compete with any kind of decent middleweight, his record at the weight being losing to Hopkins and getting a gift against Sturm in total throughout his career. Despite that do generally agree that the prime thing does seem to get applied to Tyson and virtually no other fighter.

I rate Tyson about 10th in the division (same as Lewis), based on the usual mix of achievements and ability. However head to head I would have him higher and I think he is all wrong for Lewis.

ODLH was no great welter / middle, but was a monster from super featherweight to junior welterweight. His prime was not short so it makes no sense to pick out a particular segment of his career on which to base comparisons.

Some fighters have a consistent level others shine brightly for a short period of time:

-> The Witherspoon who fought Holmes
-> The Douglas that beat Tyson
-> The Bowe from the first Holyfield fight
-> The Foreman from the first Frazier fight

On those nights those fighters were ATG's in the head to head sense (of course Foreman is a bona fide ATG). They would have been a handful for anyone. Not enough for the first 3 to be all time greats, but I defy anyone to truly believe they would have been an easy night's work for anyone.

Gotta admit, the whole 'prime' trip is rather annoying.

It's about what a fighter achieved in his whole career for me. 'Prime' is usually associated to victories and wins are had post and pre 'prime', so it is hard to define IMO.

Also, the moves a fighter makes in overtime (the latter end of their career), in those moments when age, fatigue and pain have taken over. Those moves can be devastating. stunning to witness, and as rare as an honest decision in boxing, lol.

PRIME TYSON GIVES ANY HEAVYWEIGHT IN HISTORY FITS

No......he was a great boxer during his early career - but thats all we can rate him on, his career. Otherwise if we're choosing times when fighters are at their very very tip top best, we'd never actually rate their early or late career.

JabMachineMK2 wrote:PRIME TYSON GIVES ANY HEAVYWEIGHT IN HISTORY FITS

No......he was a great boxer during his early career - but thats all we can rate him on, his career. Otherwise if we're choosing times when fighters are at their very very tip top best, we'd never actually rate their early or late career.

Fair enough. Should we also rate Ali on the whole career or do we simply discount the beating Berbick gave him when he was off his prime by a distance? Several factors should be taken into consideration. Add to that RJJ career. Do we include the last 5 years or look at him when he was at his absolute best and judge him on that?

Its different. This "prime" lasted 2 years. I believe if you pick any "elite" boxer in this "prime" then you have an argument for anyone against anyone else.

Its just we don't seem to pick anyone except Tyson that would be this GOAT who whips everyone in history.

Tyson's prime lasted 4 years. Up until the first Bruno fight imo. As soon as l=he left Rooney, he was finished. In that period he defended his title 9 times. Not bad at all.

I have never been one of these fan bots who claims boxer A whips everyone. I've disagreed with many as I have said Holmes beats him in a match up whilst both in their primes.

I'm not saying its you Az, I'm sure you've seen the people who do claim that PRIME TYSON is a hard nights work for the world.

Prime is a dirty word. Life isn't about prime, neither should boxing be. We do judge RJJ for the last 5 years, otherwise we wouldn't mention it. Also, JC was prime the night he fought Lacey or Kessler, but we don't solely look at those nights, otherwise he'd be a different fighter to us all.

davidemore wrote:Prime is a dirty word. Life isn't about prime, neither should boxing be. We do judge RJJ for the last 5 years, otherwise we wouldn't mention it. Also, JC was prime the night he fought Lacey or Kessler, but we don't solely look at those nights, otherwise he'd be a different fighter to us all.

Fair enough. I suppose the same applies to Ali, Holmes, Louis, Robinson, Leonard and all other boxers who continued way past their best, losing to opponents they would have swatted aside a few years earlier.

Good call Davide

I always thought getting Wladimir angry was the best way to beat him.

Sadly it does Azania. As much as prime should not define a fighters career, neither should the shell versions of fighters. But it is about balance, boxing is not a snapshot of a career, it IS a career. The build up from prospect to contender to champion is what we love about the sport, as is the post champion fall from grace, sadly. It's all part of it: the good, the bad and the pastings.

Fighters like Foreman won years and years past their prime, so the beatings although more common, are often defied by the odd late miracle win. Mayweather is past his prime but we aren't going to forget the great fight he had with Cotto, and won. His biggest test to date IMO.

Cheers on the call front.