If heavyweight champions didn't age...

Ok. I'd like to see a thread defending that point of view as well, to be honest.

 

Ah, yes. I don't even remember him being a troll; just quarrelsome. Which shows how skilled he must have been.

SuzieQ used to go berserk over some of these guys, IIRC. Wonder what ever happened to him. Demolishing Fitzsimmons monuments worldwide one by one, I should imagine.

 

I honestly wasn't sure. Heavyweight lists are subjective enough that in theory, I could see somebody with very nonstandard criteria making a case for Tyson as GOAT.

But if WhiteBomber thinks he's the best head to head, then I want to see that defended in a thread.

 

Most people do not rate Tyson as #1 head to head, though. Overwhelmingly so in this forum. So I believe that an engagement with prevailing opinion on this point would be productive.

 

What I mean is this:

Asserting that people who rate Tyson low H2H don't know boxing is not going to convince anybody. Arguing and explaining WHY you believe Tyson is obviously the H2H #1 heavyweight ever will probably convince a lot more people. Assuming your arguments are good.

That's why I suggest doing a separate thread, and trying to convince others that you're right about Tyson. That's much more likely to succeed than simply stating Tyson's superiority with confidence. And it will give everyone a chance to learn something.

 

Well, I assume you have reasons for believing that Tyson would beat other fighters, right? You're not just looking at the guy and picking him on intuition.

As to egos, the people directly arguing with you might not be convinced. But the people watching the argument unfold, or sitting on the fence, may change their minds.

 

Also, you probably wouldn't need to compare him to every fighter. You could probably narrow it down to three or four of the usual suspects that many people rate above Tyson head to head. Ali, Louis, Lennox, maybe one of the Klitschkos, maybe Holmes, maybe Liston or Foreman.