Who's greater: Wladimir Klitschko or Mike Tyson?

And yet neither of you can produce one win in Arreola's resume to suggest he can live with any of the fighters I listed. Blame me and call me all the names you want, but you're the thick twat that brought Arreola into the argument in the first place.

 

Tyson and Wladmir are great Hw just in their own different way. Tyson was a murderous pouncher who has quality wins over Spinks, an older Holmes, Tubbs, Ruddock, and Smith.
Tyson fights were a cultural happening and became a part of pop culture. Wlad is a very skilled boxer who doesnt like to take needless risks he has a good resume with wins over a unbeaten Calvin Brock, Eddie Chambers, Sam Peter who at the time was a big time prospect, Haye, Chagvez, so while Tyson Opponents were better is not exactly like they facing Frazier and Ali

 

Wlad is an absolute beast, theres just some people that would
beat him badly: 70s Foreman, Tyson, Lewis, Bowe, Sanders.
With the exception of Sanders thes guys are atgs who have
some combination of chin, power, and speed. Bottom line
they are all agressive and have balls or confidence or whatever
you want to call it. Wlad likes fighters to find his jab overwhelming
and become passive as a result succumbing to a big right hand.
Prime Mike was about as passive as a rabid junkyard dog.
If they were active and in relative primes, Wlad would want
no part of Tyson. Wlad has atg power, but hes not dropping Mike,
not before Mike gets to him. Wlad never faced anyone with
defense or speed like 80s dynamite. Wlad is beat at the staredown

 

Tyson's dominance can't really be overstated. The competition of class between the two, particularly with Wlad having the pressure released from his shoulders by his brother taking on certain fighters. The biggest advantage is Wlad doesn't have to take on the next best guy in the division because that is his brother.

At the same time, the simplest way to figure out which fighter is clearly greater is by looking at their losses. Yeah, even Buster Douglas is a very talented fighter. Watch that Douglas too, he would've beat Purrity, Sanders, and Brewster on the same night (Yeah, hyperbole). Then there's Holyfield, Lewis, and the rest where he was far past his prime.

 

Kinda like Buster Douglas got beat in the staredown???
Buster is a bum compared to Wlad and he beat a prime MT.

Seriously some of you can not separate myth from reality.

And just to set the record straight I like seeing action, but small for their era HWs like Marciano, Frazier, Tyson beat the bigger HWs. But the small HWs almost always have a short shelf life. Tyson was no different.
Tyson's ring achievements can never equal his persona/myth as this gangsta destroyer.

You'd think few ESB posters would be this taken in by hype & myth. It has to be based on nationalistic and/or racial bigotry :-(

 

The Douglas who beat Tyson was a one time guy, the Douglas who fought Holyfield was the norm a good fighter who wasnt great

 

Tyson was not the best of his era; Holyman and Lennox Lewis beat him and Tyson was protected from Riddick Bowe. At least Klitschko fights the best available.

 

Douglas had a lot of talent but he didn't have the self-discipline and drive to be a great fighter. If he had it mentally he could have been one of the greatest heavyweights ever.

 

Tyson is the first and last HW to unify the HW titles in the ring.

Tyson is also still the youngest HW champ of all time.

Tyson >> Klitchko .

 

None of your "reasons" have anything to do with analyzing a h2h between Wlad & MT. All of Tysons biggest wins could be accomplished - some easily - by a mid 30s Wlad.

Tyson had too short of a prime, and was fortunate that prime was before the East Euro HWs started taking their full effect. IOW, Tyson was lucky he came around when he did. Hell blown up CW Holly and skilled big HW Lewis were better than the "baddest man on the planet" Mike :roll:

Of course nobody will ever be better then the mythic Tyson :shock:

 

Yes!

 

I think Holyfield ranks higher than Mike

 

And Holyfield was never as dominant as Wlad. If Wlad fought 90's Holyfield he'd easily keep him at bay for a UD, or do him late as he has others in so many fights.

 

Holyfield faced a better level of competition than Wlad. Outside of Byrd I he doesn't have much

 

Yes I agree, Holyfield was definitely the best of that era. . . Bowe, and Lewis coincided with his era, but they came on a little later.