How can you say that I'm a Tyson fanboy because I rightfully pointed out that he was past prime in 2003?? Is this true or false? Also, wasn't aware that Tony Tucker, Razor Rudduck, Tillis, Thomas, Williams, Bruno, Spinks, and Biggs weren't good fighters.
I'm saying that Tyson's style was never going to have a lot of longevity. By the way obviously Toney is a greater fighter but that's not the point. nobody is claiming that toney was ever at his prime as a HW
So basically it's all ****e that Kevin Rooney and fellow Tyson ass lickers talk when they talk about Tyson going undefeated and being the GOAT If he'd had stayed with him... Glad we agree on something.
Another Tyson apologist move. Shift the goalposts when challenged. You wrote Tyson was 15 years past his prime in 2003. Where I come from that means his so called prime was 88 or earlier. So now we can discount Bruno, Williams, and Rudduck because by your own criteria they came later. That leaves Tucker ( drugs and booze ) Tillis ( drugs ) Thomas ( drugs ) Spinks ( gutless on the night ) and Biggs ( drugs and booze.)
James Toney However Tyson could get the KO, but I doubt it. He certainly aint winning this on points.
looks like this fight might happen lol! http://www.ibtimes.com.au/boxing-ne...james-lights-out-toney-fight-almost-done-deal
Didn't James win "Fighter of the year" in 2003? Smart money is on James, but Mike would have his moments.
He has over 11,300 posts, the 13 hundred are about anyone and everyone else the 10,000 are apologist posts for his over rated hero.:rofl:rofl
Toney beats Tyson in 2003, just watch Tyson vs Nielsen, Lewis and Williams and compare to 2003 Toney, then pick the winner.