Can anyone take 88-89 Mike Tyson?

truly be lying to say unification of the world title to undisputed level means beating nobodies.

I would say his work ethic was great, but his longevity was always in jeopardy.

 

Yeah, he showed great work ethic in Tokyo. It's ok your Mike Tyson love has you blind.

 

Buster Douglas (because he did) Evander Holyfield (because he did) Lennox Lewis (because he did). 2 of those 3 I believe beat any version of Tyson. Lewis especially. Add Muhammad Ali (because he was Muhammad Ali)

 

:running

 

Going the distance with B level fighters in his prime. Vulnerable to being tied up on the inside by a taller longer fighter. Mike Tyson is the only fighter I know of who was past prime at the age of 23 being in your prime and not coming into a fight well prepared are 2 different things. He was in his prime just got dominated by the much better fighter that night.

 

Yes he was. Yet when I called him a flash in the pan someone said I make no since, haha. Mike dominated a weak heavyweight division from 85-89. Yet everyone still wants to put him in top 10 ATG status. It baffles me.

 

2004 Vitali beats any version of little Mike

 

A tall heavyweight with a good jab and a strong overhand to follow. Such as a peak Lewis, Bowe or Harrison.

 

It doesn't matter how many fights he had at HW. Any guy who could beat that version of Holmes in two, close fights, was a good HW. The C*oney win was also a decent win. Again, Holmes went on to have a close fight with Evander, and he beat Mercer. So even though Holmes was past his best, he was still a very good HW. How hard is that to understand?

Spinks also wasn't a blown up LHW. According to Mackie Shilstone, he had a natural walking around weight between 187-192 pounds, and he had to work extremely hard to make LHW.

http://www.si.com/vault/1985/10/07/620972/a-champ-with-strange-ideas

Now, are you going to admit that you were exaggerating, when you said that only Bruno would maybe make today's top ten? You're digging your heels in, but it's just silly when I've shown you that Tony Thompson is currently rated at number 9. Holmes and Spinks would both be in today's top ten, without a doubt.

 

Hell, no. None of those heavyweights were real good. What Mike did was impressive I will admit that, but what he did was brief and against a very weak heavyweight division. And you can say it as many ways as you want,Spinks was a blown up LHW, Roy Jones Jr beat John Ruiz who twice beat Evander Holyfield, he also has a walking around weight of nearly 200lbs. Does that make him a good Heavyweight? I'm not gonna keep arguing this with you. You have your opinion, I have mine. Leave it at that.

 

You're a joker.

Again, you can't think much of Wlad then, apart from his great longevity?

What are his biggest wins?

Pulev?

Haye?

 

187-192 is cruiserweight.

 

Great logic.

atsch

 

How is it baffling?

Wlad has dominated a weak HW era yet some people think he's the GOAT.

 

1. Your an*logies are poor.

2. You are being completely ridiculous it you believe that Spinks and Holmes wouldn't be top ten today. I've told you three times that a 43 year old Tony Thompson is at number 9 in the Ring, and Boxrec even has Tarver in theirs. You simply can't argue against that.