Was Mike Tyson a cherry picker in the 1990's?

Thanks that wasn't so hard now was it? You listed 13 names + Tyson As I thought the Tyson fans would say Ruddock and Bruno, but neither really rank as the top ten in the decade. I could pull out other names who beat better in the 1990's, including Buster Doguals.

My picks for top ten in the decade:

1. Lewis - Clearly
2. Bowe - You could argue Holyfield, no issues
3. Holyfield - You could argue Bowe, no issues
4. Tua - Beat Rahman, Ruiz, Maskeav, Izon
5. McCall - beat Lewis, Maskev, and Holmes
6. Ibeabuchi - beat Tua and Byrd Undefeated
7. Moorer - Beat Holyfield and Schultz
8. Morrison - Beat Ruddock and Foreman
9. Tyson - Beat Ruddock and Bruno on his last fight
10. Foreman - Beat Moorer, Schultz

Bruno doesn't belong and based on who he beat in the decade, and losing quite often, neither does Ruddock. It seems like your are fine being wrong or can't admit that Tyson failed to beat a single man in the top ten for the decade.

I say he beat zero in the 1990's. Three? Are y ou joking?! I can create a thread on who beat the best ranked contenders in the 1990's. Bruno and Ruddock's name would not be on it. Bruno one of the best 10 in the 1990's for beating who, Seldon? Come on. Do you want to come across as objective?

My next reply will tell you who he could have faced aside from the 4 cherry picked fights. Read it.

Mercer was still good, better than Botha, Norris, and Mathis Jr, wouldn't you agree? I'll answer for you. YES.

Pre HIV Morrison vs. Tyson was talked about.

Did not really matter as Moorer beat Holyfield. Moorer vs Tyson would have been interesting. I'm not sure how Tyson would look vs a Southpaw with a good jab.

This was a vancant title fight. McCall vs an older Bruno who many felt should have retired. He defeated a listless Mcall on that night, not looking very good and King moved in.

Foreman has better wins ( and losses ) than Tyson in the 1990's. Foreman vs Tyson would have made a lot of $$$ Yes, the fight was talked about in the media.

Not in the early 1990's. This fight had a buzz about it two. A Brooklyn war. Didn't happen. Rock Newman wanted this fight, as he correctly felt Tyson was tailor made for Bowe. Notice how many of the big Tyson fight did not happen?

A reason why Tyson cherry picked in the early 2000's, wouldn't you say? Lewis waited for Tyson to age but the fight wasn't not close. Tyson had to be talked out of quitting during the match, then asked for a re-match, losing all 30 second segments after the first round.

Tyson vs Lewis could have happened in the mid 90's. Notice all these fights that could have happened for Tyson but didn't and who he fought? Hence he cherry picked.

Agreed. And there was not chance of Tyson facing a young up and coming undefeated bull like ike. That is 100% certain.

Tyson had no intention of facing Tua. If you don't like the term cherry picking, how about he picked some low hanging fruits?

 

A poster asked who should have Tyson fought in the 1990's.

My reply:

Tyson in the 1990's failed to beat the best ten of the decade as defined by people who beat top ten opposition. He was the beneficiary of a WBA vacant title set up between Burce Seldon and old Tony Tucker, neither of whom were ranked. While you can't blame Tyson letting Don King set him up with a very easy patch to win a belt vs. Seldon ( the winner of Seldon vs Tucker vs the vacant WBA belt ), he did take 4 cherry pick fights in the 1990's and even more in the early 2000's

For the 1990's the cherry picks were:

McNeeley
Mathis Jr
Botha
Norris

If asked who he should have fought instead I'd reply as follows:

McNeeley was a fraud, not even ranked in the top 100. He would not even qualify as a sparring partner for Tyson. Tyson needed to go rounds vs. a solid journeyman type, so why not Ross Puriity? Ross would be a test to where Tyson was.

Mathis was short, fat and with the punch of a welterweight. I think he only had 6 KO'd in 20+ fights, which is unheard of at heavyweight. This was a joke of a fight. After the warm-up with McNelly, A top 15-25 opponent makes sense. Why not Corrie Sanders? Sanders name was often used in the press for a possible next opponent.

Botha was not in the top ten, and this late in the decade any top ten opponent would have been an acceptable choice to get back into the mix after losing to Holyfield 2x. Pick anyone in the top ten.

Norris was a cruiserweight who added some fat. He had no business at all in the ring with Tyson. Once again, a top ten opponent was needed.

 

Wrong it would have been one of Valuev's biggest pay days. He did not want the fight, even when he had no belt. Haye did not want Vitali either. He backed out of the opportunity too. Charr was Vitlai's last fight, and he's didn't exactly go away after many years so in hindsight it was not a terrible pick.

 

I guess my facts don't count? Thanks, even though I gave an equal amount of information.

 

Mathis was not very good. There were much better to choose from, but like you said he gave Tyson a pretty good go. That’s why team Tyson picked him and not the better fighters . A.K.A cherry picking a weak puncher who was short and easy to hit.