Frazier & Tyson who is greater?

You're beginning to see the light.

 

:good Anyway, here is my top 10 ATG Heavyweights:

1. Ali
2. Lewis
3. Louis
4. Holy
5. Foreman
6. Frazier
7. Marciano
8. Holmes
9. Tyson
10. Wlad

Criteria: 33.3% Resume (Shot losses irrelevant), 33.3% Peak H2H Ability, 33.3% Special Achievements.

 

A lot of people resent the fact that he drew the color line on his own people as champion. He has the names to hold a top 3 resume, but people are turned off by the particular versions he beat (i.e. Teenager green McVey, middleweight Langford, inactive/out of retirement Jeffries, etc.)

 

11- Schmeling
Wlad - 12 or 13
Liston probably 14-15...

 

A real list of old school fighters like Jeffries, Dempsey and a few others plaguing your top 10.

On the topic of Johnson I'm incredibly well educated on him which is why I have him so highly. He faced incredible amounts of adversity throughout his career and basically said **** you to all who opposed him. A whole nation against him that paid to watch him lose. He knew that at any moments in his fights he could have been shot by a White person in the crowd. He was a straight up G no doubt, did what he wanted when he wanted. He toyed with the majority of his opponents when finally became champion (of what I've seen) and considering he was an alcoholic and was consistently out of shape, yet still schooled many that were supposed to beat him fir the White race. He was a man that could have fought decades past his time and a famous quote read he would beat Joe Louis prime for prime (no source, my apologies) accomplishments rate way above H2H in my rankings and what a fighter could have done, hense why Tyson will always struggle to get in my top 10.

I strongly recommend you watch the documentary on him. It's 3 and a half hours but it's
definitely worth watching. It's called unforgivable blackness the rise and fall of jack Johnson

 

I will, just not now

Curious, I'm only 19!

Dempsey's a tough one for me, I keep him at around about 13, but really not far infront of Vitali.

 

:good I'll take your word for it.

Never realised you were so young. I dont go classic to much but i presumed the majority were much older. I'm only 18 myself.

Dempsey is a tough one to place and I don't think I know enough about him to give him a true rating. However I'd have him above vitali no doubt. Vitali's greatness comes from the idea that he'd be a test for any heavyweight in any era. My ATG rankings are done on achievements , resume and big fights with H2H coming substantially after that. Considering the two best fighters on his resume have Ls coming beside them it's hard for me to rate him above 15.

have an essay due for history tomorrow so I'm going to have to shoot

Pretty sure it was nat fleischer who said johnson would beat Louis prime for prime btw

 

I'm not sure/strong on the head to head part but I certainly rank Frazier higher and I've never been that sure on the H2H against each other. I voted the top anyway.

 

Frazier's legacy is greater on paper due to the FOTC and the bravery shown in TTIM.

I think on further examination tho, Ali fought Frazier only after 2 fights into his comeback (quarry and Bonavena) remarkable on Ali's part but never gets touched upon when discussing Frazier's legacy.
Both fighters were equally shot in manilla, which made for one of the most brutal fights.

Peak Tyson pushes Peak Frazier's doo doo in H2H in any event. Too strong, too fast, bullies Frazier and ko's Joe around the 6th, possibly by uppercut with Joe ripe for Tyson's right hand to body and right uppercut to head (Bolo punch)

Tall and strong with good lateral movement and a snappy broomstick of a jab gives Peak Tyson problems..not a come forward, face fighter like Frazier.

 

Frazier beat Ali and Jimmy Ellis. Frazier was Olympic champ.
I love Mike but his wins over Berbick and Spinks dont compare to Ali and Ellis. Frazier is higher on ATG list but Mike might beat him if they fought.

 

Interesting topic.

Joe Frazier was the Greater Fighter. Id take Tyson head to head though I wouldnt totally count Joe out.

As far as ranking, Tyson was not more dominant. Joe Frazier turned pro in `65 and didnt lose until `73 to an ATG George Foreman.

Tyson was the more spectacular performer but he wasnt the greater fighter. Big difference. Frazier was more workmen like as someone else pointed out.

For example. Joe Frazier mightve took Micheal Spinks 3 or 4 rounds at his peak before he drill him into the cavnas. The Truth Williams mightve lasted 7 or 8 rounds before Joe grinded him into a fine powder. It doesnt matter. A win is a win.

On the other hand I dont think Mike Tyson beats Ali. Not the verison that Joe beat in `71. Ali was a great fighter that night and he hit Joe with shots in that fight that wouldve folded Mike Tyson eventually.

 

Take your rose colored glasses off.

Jack Johnson was a pimp, had the morals of a pimp, the lifestyle of a pimp and the attitude of a pimp. He could not care less if you were white , red or black, he only cared what was good for him, one of the earliest manipulators of the race card and so called "victim" of the establishment.

He was in bed with the mob and did not give a rats ass about his own race, lol, a white guy would shot him in the ring , lol, the ones who he got paid from ? You are a fool if you believe that BS.

He knew how to market himself. Did he live in a different time , sure, but he ate cake flushed down with Moet while his "people" he was supposed to uplift ate chicken inards....GTFO with that phoney liberal "Unbearable Blackness" history re writing, the man was a selfish POS all the way thru, talented fighter of his generation, absolutely, but as a fellow man a total fail.

 

That's a very good assessment.

I think Frazier is seldom given any credit around here for clearing out the division. While Frazier's win over Ali tops Tyson's best win; Mike simply has far more depth in his resume than Joe. They both reigned for 4 years and achieved the same amount of title defenses but Tyson achieved more after losing his title and has better longevity.

Head to Head I also give the advantage to Tyson.

Overall this leads me to rank Tyson ahead by a few spots.

Agreed.

I think an argument can be made that the quality of the Frazier win is likely as significant if not more than Frazier over Ali or Schmeling over Louis but it's a tough sell if you look at it in hindsight.

I think his longevity and his achievements after losing the title gives him the edge. The thing about Mike Tyson is that he was meant to be his generation's Muhammad Ali; when you look at Ali's 60s and Tyson's 80s I think a strong case can be made for Tyson having the better decade.

Ali's success in the talent laden 70s is greater than Tyson's success in the equally talent laden 90s. And that is where Tyson's legacy falls short. The high expectations and subsequent short comings of Mike Tyson as it pertains to his post prison career have often put him on a different platform when comparing him to other fighters. Arguments that are made against Mike's legacy are often positioned different from his contemporaries. For instance, people whether subconsciously or not look at the Tyson-Holyfield fights as Tyson losing them as opposed to Holyfield winning them. Tyson's failures has often created a narrative of contempt that has been riddled with hyperbole in what is quite possibly the most over scrutinized career for any Heavyweight Champion.

Tyson didn't just have the public convinced, he had just about every boxing expert, sports writer, trainer convinced that he was the guy that would overtake Joe Louis and Muhammad Ali and break Rocky Marciano's undefeated record. His inability to replicate his successful run of the 80s into the following decade prompted a plethora of pundits and sports writers to recalibrate his legacy with a new narrative that in an era of centralized media (before the internet age and era of boxing forums) shaped our opinions of him for years.

Tyson's stamina was never questioned pre-prison until after the 2nd Holyfield fight. In fact, during the first fight with Holyfield it was expected that Tyson would catch up with him in the later rounds. It was Holyfield that was expected to tire out not Tyson. Yet ever since I started posting in boxing forums back in 2001/02 on a regular basis mythical match-ups that involved Mike Tyson included his "poor stamina" as a potential weakness in a hypothetical bout.

Tyson's out of the ring exploits hurt his public persona so much that there was a british sports writer who didn't think Tyson should be a first ballot HOFer. I look at Joe Frazier and wonder where he'd be rated if he had become boxing's pariah; would people appraise his career as a letdown highlighting that his record is 1-4 against the best fighters he's faced?

Objectively speaking they both had 9 consecutive title defenses over a 4 year period. They both met an undefeated fighter with a legitimate claim to the title and captured a signature victory.

Let's look at their resumes:

Frazier's Resume:
Ali
Quarry 2X
Ellis 2X
Bonevena 2X
Bugner
Chuvalo
Stander
T. Daniels
Mathis
Machen

Tyson's Resume:
Holmes
Spinks
Ruddock 2x
Bruno 2x
Tucker
Thomas
Tubbs
Biggs
Berbick
Smith
Golota

How do you feel they stack up?

I think that seems to be the consensus.

 

Let's compare their positions on everyone's Peak H2H lists...

Here's my latest:

1. Lennox Lewis ('97 McCall II to '00 Tua)

2. Muhammad Ali ('65 Patterson to '67 Folley)

This content is protected

4. Evander Holyfield ('90 Buster to '93 Bowe II)

5. Riddick Bowe ('92 Holy to '93 Holy II)

6. Wlad Klitschko ('06 Byrd II to '11 Haye) *Perhaps still Peak, but unable to tell from Mormeck fight.

7. George Foreman ('73 Frazier I to '74 Ali)

8. Vitali Klitschko ('01 Purrity to '04 Williams)

9. Larry Holmes ('78 Shavers I to '82 Cobb)

This content is protected

Note: Based on overall perceived performance against the others.