whilst it is true it was his last fight, he had the title. It is a logical fight, not a cherrypick. When tyson fights someone 34 its a cherrypick but whn your heroes Klitshckos face a string of post 35 year olds with no title they are good defences? come on. another thing, dont call me dude when you are getting hammered by everyone here, I'm not giving you a hand up against them. I treat you like a pal whatever the circumstances.
Wouldn't agree that all those eight were better. As you well know, Morrisson beat a shell of Ruddock, for example. But, sure, they'd all make interesting opponents, but Mike lost about half the decade to prison and suspension and he only held titles very briefly so he had little obligations to defend. If we go through the years: 1990: The best challenge out there was Holy and he was scheduled to face him, but the Douglas loss derailed it. Instead he had a decent comeback, beating Stewart who gave both Holy and Foreman tough fights. 1991: Was again scheduled to face Holy after two fights against the feared top contender Ruddock, but was sent to prison. 1995: Two meaningless tune up fights. My thinking at the time was that he could have faced better opponents but that he was still just shaking off rust and would soon step up in competition. Turned out to be true. 1996: Won two of the main titles. Can't really argue with that. Holy was seen as a gimme at the time, though, but he was a contender and meant big money. Bowe was the fight everyone wanted going into the year, but Golota soon made him irrelevant. And Lewis held no major title at the time. So two title holders and Holy have to be seen as a good year all in all. 1997: Holy was the natural fight to make and after that he was suspended for the rest of the year. 1999: Two pretty non-descript opponents. Botha was near the top 10, I suppose. So he faced a good level of competition every year he was active except 1995 and 1999, when he was coming back from lay-offs. There really isn't much room to pencil in the guys you mention above.
Morrison was only ranked in 92 and 93,[at 9 both years. ]Tyson was in prison then. Sanders was unranked throughout the 90's. Ibeabuchi was only ranked in 97,98 and 99,Tyson had his licence revoked for most of that time and did not fight. Vitali did not become ranked until the end of 99. Briggs was only ranked at the end of 97 When Tyson did not have a licence to fight after the June 97 fight with Holyfield Tua was ranked 96,97,98,99 of that decade, Tyson could only have fought him in 96 and up to June 97, then his licence was revoked. Instead of fighting no 8 Tua he fought the WBA Bruno[no7,] and WBC Seldon,[no6,] champions and the number 5 and number one contender ,[Holyfield,] in that time scale.
No he did not clean out the division. Not even close. What he cleaned out was soft touches with a sloppy defense made to order for him. Go ahead and think of the 2 90's title holders you would want Mike to meet with say a 95% chance of defeating. The rest of the guys were DKP setups that Showtime bought. How long did that policy with showtime last? They sure did tighten their belts after losing that money. And then guys like Buster Mathis. Did you really believe that guy had a legitimate chance to win? Nobody I knew did. Same with another godzilla---Julius Francis. Just who wanted that crap? Julius wasn't even close to being the best UK fighter at the time. Lou Saverese. Another one---you know anyone picking Lou for the win? The argument that other guys were fighting soft opposition means nothing. The sport has been most profit/least risk for a long long time. Almost all the other heavies that decade were pulling the same crap. So just because everyone else was doing the same as the Tyson camp does not exonerate him, it convicts him. And we the fans are the one's that suffered for it then and continue to suffer from it now.
Right. Have Don King line up a very flawed Bruce Seldon and match him vs an older and washed up Tony Tucker for the vacant WBA title. That would be a bad title fight, even today!!! Then match Tyson vs the winner and all homage to him, he won a title belt when Seldon quickly folded like a law chair. This fight if you want to call it a fight looked very fishy. Did I miss anything?
You hit the nail on the head so hard it went completely through the 2x4 wooden board. Wether the nay sayers can accept the facts is another topic. What we have here are Tyson fans in denial about not fighting the best ( save Holy who demolished him ) and acting like the belts he won set up Don king vs the very flawed or old heavyweights meant something.
You’d probably agree at least 6 of the 8 were the best around not named Holyfield. And Tyson as a contender or champion fought none of them. You might also agree with me that this group was far more dangerous than Bruce Seldon or an older Bruno on his last fight. Not to put words in your mouth. You can agree or disagree. I’ll read it.
so..don king set lewis up to get koed by Mcall so that Bruno could take his title SO THAT tyson could get that title next? hahahaha.
