Mike Tyson:Overhyped?

Pre-prison Tyson had 41-1 record - not bad for "a fighter who burned too fast."

Lewis retired with the record 41-2-1 for example.

 

Amen.

I don't necessarily reward a fighter's legacy just because he knows when to hang up the gloves... a la Marciano. And I further don't reward inactivity due to banging starlets and living the good life, at least not in the context of boxing.

And though I love Dempsey and Marciano, I can't rank either above Iron Mike. They simply did not accomplish as much as he did, nor against as formidable foes.

 

I'm not sure how certain I am about who faced more formidable opposition but that's irrelevant imo. As you say, he achieved more than both of them.

Rocky has a good argument but iron gets the edge by looking better on film.

 

over hyped in 1995 till 2005..............ONE OF THE GREATEST FROM 1985 TILL 1991...NOT THE GREATEST....BUT DEFINETLY A TOP 10

 

Good point.

If Tyson had done ten years and never came back, would his legacy be greater? He'd of retired with a 41-1 (36 KO) record, the same title reign he accomplished - and the last we know of him, he'd earned and put himself back in position to regain the Heavyweight title.

 

I give Tyson credit for having faced real heavyweights (size-wise) with top-notch skills, great amateur pedigree and fully bankrolled training.

 

Yes, it would have been considerably greater.

 

Jack Johnson.

 

If you were a woman, I would try to impregnate you, right now.


Edit: I mean...with consent, of course. And probably a pill.

 

OT:

Seamus,

What's your take on Sonny Liston? As far as standing, dominance, ability, level of opposition and how he looks on film? He seems to escape much of your wrath for the most part.

 

Probably not, but who pays them any attention? It makes sense if you understand and see what makes Tyson an appealing fighter to begin with, and at it's core it based on undeniable talent and skill.

Among actual boxing fans, Johnson/Dempsey/Marciano make a comparable trio for petulant, short sighted stubborness.

 

Tyson fought in one of if not the worst era of heavyweight boxing history. He has a few good wins but once the competition started getting better Tyson lost or just ducked the top guys. He was great, if not the greatest at beating up tomato cans in devastating fashion, but against real top fighters more often then not he was unimpressive.

That being said, Tyson is still probably a top 25 ATG heavy.

 

Do you have a rough top 10 out of interest?

 

As the many who have followed my illustrious career as an internet boxing poster on a forum of nerds (myself included) will note...

I have flip-flopped on Liston. With the release of that crappy Nick Tosches book and some subsequent docu's the Liston myth was getting blown way out of proportion. He didn't fight in the strongest era. Hell, it was quite crappy for heavies. And he had a horrible reign, losing the title to a very green Clay who was coming off a couple shaky performances.

That said, he was a physical beast whose tremendous assets actually translated into the ring. Though he wasn't the tallest heavy, his reach more than compensated for it. And he was immensely powerful. In this regard he was a prototype to the real modern heavy. On record, he cleaned out the division and annihilated the reigning champ.

So, he's a great, right on the cusp of the top ten for me. But moreso even than most greats, he's a bit of a mixed bag.