The Future Is Now for Tyson

Do two bites equal two years?

Eleven days after Mike Tyson’s teeth tore out a piece of boxing’s soul, the Nevada State Athletic Commission’s formal disciplinary hearing this morning is expected to be quick, to the point, and to have ramifications extending far beyond the Las Vegas City Council chamber walls.

With heavy pressure being exerted on the commission from both sides, people close to the process say Tyson will probably be banned for at least 18 months but no more than two years.

Additionally, Tyson, who was disqualified after biting both of Evander Holyfield’s ears during their World Boxing Assn. heavyweight title fight June 28 at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, almost certainly will be fined the maximum--$3 million, or 10% of his $30-million purse.

“Tomorrow is a very big day,” Dr. Elias Ghanem, chairman of the five-man commission, said Tuesday from his medical office. “I want to do what’s best for boxing.

“I want to make sure something like this never happens again.”

Assuming, as Tyson and his local attorney, Eckley “Marty” Keach have promised, Tyson does not dispute the facts of the complaint as compiled by the state attorney general’s office, commission sources say the hearing could be over in 30-45 minutes.

Keach has not said whether Tyson will appear at the hearing. Tyson did not attend a preliminary hearing before the commission last week, although he publicly apologized for his actions and said he expected “severe punishment” by the commission.

If Tyson does attend and appeal for leniency, he will be open to potentially tough questioning by two commissioners who are viewed as hard-liners. Jim Nave and Lorenzo Fertitta aggressively grilled Tyson’s co-manager, John Horne, at an emergency hearing days before the fight when Horne objected to Mitch Halpern’s being named as referee.

The commission voted unanimously to keep Halpern as the referee, but he later stepped aside, saying he did not want to be the focus of attention.

Ghanem, who acknowledged there is no way for the commission to mandate attendance by the controversial fighter, said the only way for the commission to understand Tyson’s side is to hear him personally explain why he did what he did.

“That’s right,” Ghanem said. “If he wants to appear in front of the commission, that’s fine. He’s entitled to have his day in court.

“But I don’t know if he is going to be there. That’s the whole thing. I asked the attorney general’s office yesterday, and they don’t know. Are they going to fight it? Accept what we’re going to do? I don’t know yet.

“I only hope it will be a quick and swift hearing.”

Ghanem and everybody else involved in this process agree that, given the voluminous media attention and thunderous public outcry, this hearing may be one of the most significant actions any state commission has undertaken.

The commission has gone to the unusual step of issuing press credentials for the hearing.

“I think the scrutiny of the sporting world will be upon us,” said Marc Ratner, who, as executive director of the commission does not have a vote but plays a major role in all administrative procedures. “I know the lawyers in the attorney general’s office have been in the law library studying all the technicalities.”

Beyond the technicalities are the realities of this tense tug of war, and the fine line the commission must walk between a proper punishment and the dollars Tyson fights generate for the Nevada economy.

On one side are the Nevada politicians--especially the governor, who appoints the commissioners--who oversee the commission. The politicians do not want the state viewed as being soft on Tyson, who fights only once or twice a year and who, many believe, should receive far harsher punishment than Oliver McCall’s pending one-year ban for refusing to defend himself last February in a bout against Lennox Lewis.

On the other side are those in the vastly influential casino industry, who have made countless millions off Tyson’s Nevada fights and want very badly for him to fight again in Nevada relatively soon.

If Tyson is given a long suspension--anything more than two years would mean he couldn’t fight again in Nevada until after he turned 33--many believe he and his promoter, Don King, will be tempted to try to fight internationally, where a Nevada ban would not be recognized. Tyson already has gone through a four-year layoff during his trial, conviction and three-year jail sentence for rape.

When asked if his commission would respond harshly to a suspended fighter’s fighting in an another country, Ghanem said he cared only what happened in Nevada.

But many sources assume that if Tyson eluded the ban, he probably would never be given back his Nevada license, which means, because of federal law and agreements from state to state, he would probably never fight in America again.

“I sure don’t envy Nevada’s position at this time,” said Larry Hazzard, chairman of the New Jersey boxing commission. “Everyone recognizes the role that the gambling industry plays in Nevada.

“I’m sure that the commission there is feeling the pressure from the gambling industry because they have invested millions in Mike Tyson. And of course, there’s the overall pressure of the millions of people that viewed what Mike did. There’s all kinds of pressures on them.”

Promoter Bob Arum, King’s main rival, said Tyson’s profitability should not affect the decision.

“If 70 or 80% of motion picture revenue is derived from pictures made by Steven Spielberg, and he commits a crime and goes to jail and therefore you don’t have Steven Spielberg movies, that’s the price you pay,” Arum said.

“You don’t give Tyson special treatment because he accounts for a substantial amount of revenue. Too damn bad.”

Ghanem said he felt only the pressure of responsibility to do what is best for the sport and the state of Nevada.

“I don’t have any pressure at all from anybody,” Ghanem said. “We’ll look at all the evidence, everything that happened in the ring and then we’ll have to decide. There is no pressure.”

Bill Cayton, Tyson’s former manager, said he hopes the commission finds some room for sympathy--that Tyson has been driven to frustration and bizarre activity by King and by a boxing career in which he has not fulfilled his vast potential.

“Whatever they decide, I guess his actions were sufficiently horrendous to justify it,” Cayton said. “But hopefully, it’ll be something less than two years, for Mike’s sake and the good of boxing.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Tyson Penalty Survey

Following is a list of responses by U.S. boxing commissioners to a poll asking how long Mike Tyson should be suspended for biting Evander Holyfield:

* Arizona: Between one and two years.

* California: Two years.

* Connecticut: Permanent suspension; could reapply.

* Delaware: Lifetime ban.

* Florida: Between one and two years.

* Georgia: Between one and two years.

* Hawaii: Around two years.

* Idaho: Two years.

* Illinois: One year.

* Indiana: 18 months.

* Iowa: Two years.

* Kansas: Lifetime ban.

* Kentucky: Lifetime ban.

* Louisiana: Between one and two years.

* Maryland: Declined to comment.

* Maine: Lifetime ban.

* Massachusetts: 18 months.

* Michigan: Declined to comment.

* Minnesota: 18 to 24 months.

* Mississippi: Lifetime ban.

* Missouri: Six to nine months.

* Montana: Between one and two years.

* Nebraska: One year.

* Nevada: Holding hearing.

* New Hampshire: 18 months.

* New Jersey: Two years.

* New Mexico: Two years.

* New York: Possible lifetime ban.

* North Carolina: Lifetime ban.

* North Dakota: More than two years.

* Ohio: Revoke license; can reapply.

* Oklahoma: Two years.

* Oregon: Less than lifetime ban, wouldn’t be specific.

* Pennsylvania: Declined to comment.

* Rhode Island: Less than lifetime ban, would not specify.

* Tennessee: Between one and two years.

* Texas: Between one and two years.

* Utah: Declined to comment.

* Vermont: Six months to a year.

* Washington, D.C.: Between one and two years.

* Washington: Declined to comment.

* Wisconsin: Declined to comment.

Source: Bloomberg News Service