Tougher opponents throughout there career. Tyson or Marciano

Marciano fought a longer list of great "names" while Tyson beat a younger and more able bodied group of men. Depends on what you place more stock in..

 

-Well, Tyson was my favorite fighter back then and I followed his entire career as it happened. Not sure what "Flawed Knowledge" is supposed to mean.

-Mathis was a fringe contender but hardly someone you pick to look good against, he had just made Bowe look like a fool and by rights should have had a DQ win over him.

-They happened to be the belt holders when Tyson got out of jail, you don't handpick the Champions.

-I disagree and those are not the facts, they are your opinion. In my opinion I think this guy looks terrific, and not far removed from the monster who ruled the late 80s. [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxFW6gcz1s4[/url]

-Can you break down what is lacking in this performance? Tyson's hand speed still looks elite. He shows great head movement and slips Bruno's jab frequently, he bobs and weaves without ever getting hit with anything serious, he jabs his way inside and notice the improved Tyson right hand. The finishing combination is also beautiful with the hooks to the body leading to that triple uppercut. I actually think this is one of Mike's most impressive performances. Bruno is game too, he's doing the right things, holding on the inside, looking for the uppercut, Tyson is just a beast in this though.

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJL93S64Lfs[/url]

-Fairly identical but Tyson is more reckless, taking wider and wilder swings, leading to him get tagged more and even hurt, the straight right he added in 96 is a huge difference. Here he tries bombing with more hooks and misses a lot.

-I'm not sure what you are talking about here, there was nothing hostile or attacking in my post.

 

I liked to think that I was Rocky Marciano, but I was more like Rocky Balboa!

George Galloway

 

Not really, of their notable top 10 wins:

Holmes: 38
Bruno II: 34
Bonecrusher: 33
Spinks: 32
Berbick: 32
Golota: 32
Thomas: 29
Tucker: 29
Ruddock: 27, 27
Biggs: 27

Walcott: 38, 39
Moore: 38
Louis: 37
Charles: 32, 33
LaStarza: 22, 26
****ell: 26
Matthews: 29
Layne: 23

And I would question what you mean by "names?" If Charles, Moore, Louis, and Walcott are only a names because they fall in the 32-38 range, what do we make of Tyson's resume? His under 30 scalps are not noticeably better than Rocky's.

 

I never said anything about them being better.

If you take the best five opponents that Tyson beat and compare them to the best five opponents that Marciano beat, the age comparison looks like this.

TYSON

- Spinks (31)
- Tucker ( 28)
- Berbick (32)
- Thomas (29)
- Ruddock (27)

MARCIANO

- Walcott ( 37)
- Louis ( 37 )
- Charles (32)
- Moore (38
- Lastarza (26)

Average age of Tyson's opponents - 29.4

Average age of Marciano's - 34.

Note I didn't count Lastarza's first meeting with the rock at age 22, but I also didn't count rocky's second meetings with Charles and Walcott when they were 33 and 38. I also picked who I believed to be their top five wins, but that's subjective as some might have rated other's higher. But I think top five gives us a pretty good look, especially given that these were the men they fought when prime. I left Holmes out of Tyson's list because given his inactivity, I didn't think he was one of his best.

P.S. Tony Tucker was 28 and Spinks was 31, though both were close to their birthdays. You also listed Tyson's second meeting with Bruno when he was 34, but not the first meeting when he was 27. But since I did similar things, we'll just let that slip. Point being, Tyson's opponents on average were a little younger, didn't have as much wear and tear, and were usually larger men with established amateur backgrounds.. This doesn't mean they were better. But as I said initially, it depends on your criteria..

 

One thing here is everybody is listed for Marciano, but not for Tyson, as he lost to two of his older opponents, who were older than he was.

Top five names fought

Tyson

Holmes (thirty-eight)

Lewis (36 almost 37)=lost

Holyfield (33 almost 34)=lost

Spinks (31 almost 32)

Bruno (34)


Marciano

Walcott (thirty-eight)

Moore (thirty-eight)

Louis (37)

Charles (32 almost 33)

Layne (23)


But if Marciano didn't defeat a couple of these men, you would add the twenty something LaStarza or Matthews to his list.

 

You seemed to imply they were better with the "great names" comment. As in they were greats in name only.

I don't think zeroing in on 5 particular opponents one feels were the best is telling, especially with Tyson who had so many scalps that were on the level, you could sub in 3 or 4 completely different fighters and make a convincing case for it.

By doing a near complete listing of their rated opponents, it paints a broader picture. Tyson's victory resume is built with much more older opponents than I think people realize. Your comment didn't specify top 5 wins but seemed to be speaking in terms of their entire career which was not the case.

Another way of looking at it is the age discrepancy is much larger between Tyson and his opponents. Marciano was in his 30s himself against Charles and Moore, and was actually 4-5 years older than two of his top wins in Layne and LaStarza. People are quick to say Marciano benefited from an older crop of shopworn fighters but did Kid Dyanmite ever beat multiple top 10 fighters younger than himself? Seldon is the only one I can think of.

I think Marciano beat the better older opponents without question and his younger scalps like Layne and LaStarza are on the level with Tyson's best.

Bruno was not top 10 in the first fight, for the rematch he was a rated belt holder coming off the McCall win. No motive for leaving him off beyond that.

 

Not sure of that, he missed alot of years post prision with the suspensions. Holyfield and Lewis certainly stand out as the best he ever stepped in the ring with though. Botha, Savarese, Golota, Bruno II, Mathis Jr, Seldon, and Norris are certainly a solid group of opponents for the late 90s/early 00s. Better run than what the supposed top prospects of the time Tua, Izon, Rahman, and Grant were doing.

 

Interestingly (and a bit off-subject) but most of the historical greats have their biggest wins over men in their thirties or men who were not heavyweights even by the standards of their own day. Here are the ages. * means not heavyweight by the standards of the day. (I am going by year of birth to year of fight for age and not looking up birthdays)

Jeffries-----Fitz (36, 39), Corbett (34, 37), Jackson (37)

Johnson-----Jeffries (35), Fitz (44), Langford*, Ketchel*

Dempsey-----Willard (37), Gibbons*(32)

Tunney-----Dempsey (31,32), Greb*, Gibbons (34)

Louis-----Schmeling (33), Walcott (34), Conn*

Holmes-----Ali (38), Shavers (33), Norton (prob 35)

Tyson-----Holmes (38), Spinks (32)

Lewis-----Holyfield (37), Tyson (36), Klitschko (31)

 

Okay. Now I've had some coffee and some time to think about this a little.
I said this: "Marciano fought a longer list of great "names" while Tyson beat a younger and more able bodied group of men. Depends on what you place more stock in.."
Marciano beat more guys who were hall of fame bound, had more name recognition and probably more experience. Tyson beat on average men who were younger, bigger, indigenous to the heavyweight division, and had established amateur careers. Whatever you think was better then go with it.

I picked the wins that took place when both men were prime. If you really want to include prospect showings, one might point out that a lot of people felt Marciano LOST in his first meetings with Lastarza and Lowry. So its actually to his benefit that we don't. I could also go back to Tyson's earlier days in an effort to dig up some younger numbers, ie, Marvis Frazier, Mitch Green, Jose Ribalta, etc.. Those were fights that he won decisively.

Not really sure what you're trying to say here. But if listing guys like Golata, Seldon, Norris, Botha etc, is what you want to do to drive averages up or down, you might at least acknowledge that Tyson was past it for those fights.

Being 20-22 years old the way that Tyson was for a lot of his better wins and facing guys who were between 27-31, actually benefits the older guy under those circumstances. Being 28-32 years old and facing men who are 33-38 is beneficial to the younger guy. The point is, that majority of Tyson's BEST wins were against guys who were either prime or near prime.. The majority of Marciano's best opponents weren't.

That's speculative.. For me the best fighter Rocky ever beat was Jersey Joe Walcott. He was 37 to 38 years old for both meetings, coming off a taxing career with a lot of ups and downs, and had some 70 fights of mileage behind him, plus was in the last couple bouts of his career.. Holmes is not someone I consider as one of Tyson's best due to his inactivity.. But he was a top five all time great. Walcott wasn't.. He made a comeback later and showed that he something left.. Walcott didn't.. Again, this is taking one of Tyson's lesser wins and comparing to Marciano's best

Sounds to me like you're looking at ring magazine's ANNUAL ratings.. Good website. But this does not reflect what Frank was ranked in February of 1989.. It only shows a snapshot of what Ring ranked them for the entire year of 1989, which Bruno was basically inactive for most of after getting sparked by Tyson. It also doesn't show the ratings of the governing bodies. I don't have my old issues of ring magazine anymore, but I think its rather bold to say that he was completely unranked by everybody. In either case he was 27 years of age and better than he was at 34. You also failed to mention Carl Williams who was 29 when Tyson fought him, ranked #1 by the IBF and in the rings top five.

 

I think Layne 34-1-1 at the time Marciano fought him may have been a better challenge than LaStarza, I think Layne was the favorite going in....the Marciano fight ruined Layne who basically beat every man he faced and had some solid wins on his resume...post Marciano Layne was a different fighter because of the nature of the one punch teeth severing KO loss