Why do people think Tyson is a top ten Heavyweights?

Mike Tyson is a lock for a Top 10 heavyweight.

The better poll question should be "Is Sonny Liston a Top 10 heavyweight?", which I would say mmmmmm...no.

 

Good points....BUT..Douglas....could of KO Max Schmellimg on a good day; AND LOUIS TOO YOU WOULD THINK!
Idk. Tyson "funny" in that if you was to take STOCK in the man for short measure of time, he WAS Fabulous! [MS lost just at THOUGHT of fighting him!].
These a.t. great lists -I THINK- are "impossible" to do and GOD "bends time" for a reason!
I like to do "picks". Seperates the men from the boys! PICK 1-2-3: LYLE-NORTON-SHAVERS a.t.

 

Nice way to backtrack from which top ten heavy weight lost to a sub par fighter, the fact that people oversell his rematch victories one of which McCall was hardly convincing where he was scared to go anywhere near a stationary, crying McCall, as if he was rematching a Joe frazier, George Foreman and that who those one big shots to China face were flukes as if they unfairly sucker punched him and then chinny girls statement "this is the heavy weight division, anyone can get knocked out with one punch" when the likes of holyfield, tyson, ali, Foreman, frazier will just laugh at that statement, tells you everything really.

If you really want to get really technical and honest, the whole world saw Tyson take jab after jab, left hook after left hook, right hand after right hand, upper cut after upper cut to the face for ten whole rounds and still be able to deliver an upper cut out of no where which won him the douglas fight if it hadn't been for the long count of 14 which has been corroborated by the ref himself as to how determined he was to help douglas get up as if he was his son. Tyson didn't even lose that fight, honestly speaking.

 

It's why most people rank Tyson above Liston. :deal

Tyson accomplished far more than Liston did, even after their title losses. Liston did jack shat after losing to Ali. Tyson still had a decent career after the Douglas loss. Even after losing to Holyfield.

 

Douglas had to get off the mat to beat a lethargic, one-punch-at-a-time-and-minimal-head-movement version of Tyson in Tokyo. Hard to see him having as much success against young, hungry Tyson of the mid/late 80s.

I try to avoid calling fights flukes but the second McCall fight seemed way, way flukier than the first...

 

This is an exaggeration.

 

I don't think so.

I watched Tyson a lot leading up to Tokyo, that night Tyson's energy was far less than the few years prior.

believe it or not :deal

 

People think Tyson is top 10 pound-for-pound, nevermind heavyweights.
Why? Because they've heard of him. And his image in popular culture and media.

At heavyweight, lower end of top 10 can be well reasoned.
Buster Douglas in the top 25 or 30 is reasonable too.

I'd expect to see Tyson anywhere from #7 to#16 on a reasonable list from a reasonable and knowledgeable person.

I'd probably have him around #9 to #13, and I've been accused of being an extreme "HATER" (from a severely biased pro-Tyson postor, mind).

Some of it depends on what we do with old-timers Johnson, Jeffries etc. It's sometimes difficult to rate them accurately. Some of the more modern HWs could arguably be pushed down if we rate the old-timers generously, and Tyson would fall into the handful of those at risk.

 

on a list for achievement I have him out of the top 10 but I rank him top 5 or 6 h2h prime for prime just because I think at his best he would be a tough nut to crack for most.

 

Do you mean "pastor"? Because I do preach the truth.

 

I probably meant pasta.

 

Right, because he didn't fight Tim Witherspoon, Oliver McCall, Francesco Damiani, Gerry C00ney, James Broad, Greg Page, Mark Wills, Michael Dokes, Anders Eklund, Adilson Rodrigues, Johnny Duplooy, Gerrie Coetzee, Bert Cooper or a two good hands Tony Tucker.

 

Pasta and Sangria go together like cheese and fine wine. Or is it tuna fish and lamb?