Who ranks higher as a heavyweight, Joe Frazier or Mike Tyson?

For trying to get you this time:

You´re telling me that for the question of "how it happened", it doesn´t matter for you if James Douglas stopped Mike Tyson in two rounds ?

Or if Fury stopped Wilder in two rounds? Same defeat than what actually happened?

Because a fight was dominant in one way, 11 rounds of Fury-Wilder could have basically ended in two rounds for you ? (glad I´m watched 11 rounds of this )

 

Yeah, im saying it doesn't matter how many rounds it took a 42-1 UNDERDOG TUNE-UP-GONE-WRONG TO WHOOP YOUR ASS.

Whether it's 2, 4, or 44 rounds, Tyson had no business losing to Douglas.

He's the only champion in the history of boxing whose fans defend such an egregious upset loss by focusing on how he took a sustained beating as if that makes it any better. He only lasted as long as he did because he just happened to be blessed with a good chin and Douglas lacked true knockout power. Credit to him for going out on his shield but he never should have gone out in the first place!

By all means continue to gloss over Tyson's highs and lows if that's what it takes to prove his resume is better than Frazier's. I don't even have a problem with someone who believes that, there is a case for it. But you can't just ignore Tyson's losses are far worse and the fact Frazier has the better signature win. Those will always be major factors when assessing their careers.

 

Eh this is a good point ... Because the bottom line is that Mike Tyson is the one who allowed for this upset loss to happen .... We can all say Douglas got a long count and that Tyson got a faster count and that Tyson didn't train and was out of shape didn't care versus Douglas who was in the best condition of his life and was at the height of his motivation ... But this is Tysons own doing and he lost that night ... Joe Frazier was never at the end of the biggest upset in sports history, it was Mike Tyson at the receiving end of that ...

Mike has other losses on his resume too .... Sure he was on drugs, didn't care, was shot to pieces ... but they are still on his resume ... Everything counts and has to be evaluated

 

Yup. Tyson essentially did it to himself. Douglas got his ass in shape and fought the fight of his life. Tyson should have done the same.

If we're comparing h2h, I'd favor Tyson 7/10 both at their peaks.

Skills, I'd definitely favor Tyson overall although Frazier does a few things better.

Prime vs prime dominance, I'd favor Tyson.

But if we're talking about overall historical ranking, looking at their entire careers stacked side by side, you cannot gloss over any losses no matter what the circumstances. That's the only way you can compare careers, period.

 

The Mike Tyson story itself is centered around the fact that his career never measured up to his talent and potential ... Sure other people did play a huge part in his downfall but the fact is that you cannot erase what happened .... Frazier had the better career I'd say if you look at everything and weigh everything proportionately ...

I also heard that the Vegas odds were actually made up at the end or something and it was even worst than 42-1 lol

 

Now that we have some distance from It putting Tyson's career in perspective is little clearer for me. All that chaos, nonsense that went on a longtime. It eclipsed the amazing success he had when he first hit the scene.
He could have done more but he did plenty good for boxing. Tyson set the world on fire.

 

He said he didn't care about boxing around 1990 ...

I actually can't think of anyone who was as mismanaged as Mike Tyson in any sport

And for casuals and those who don't know about the sport, after Ali it's Tyson ... Hell it may be that WITH Ali it's Tyson ....

 

Douglas was a 42-1 underdog because Tyson looked soooo good he was viewed as unbeatable.
Historically speaking it’s a good argument and cases can be made for both sides H2h I would favor Tyson.
Tyson for me career ended when he went to prison. So that means he was 42-1 in my book with very good wins if no great signature win.
His post prison career was a joke and he was not the same fighter. Just a media creation because he was so marketable. Just look at his post prison run -
Peter Mcneely- total joke of a fight total waste of a PPV
Buster Mathis Jr- a fighter that couldn’t crack an egg but did make Tyson look bad as his timing was off terribly (also I rarely complain about “counts” but in this instance I always felt Mathis got shorted with a quick count)
Frank Bruno - looked like he was crapping his pants harder than Joe Biden this past weekend
Bruce Seldon- ditto and looked like he took a dive
Then Evander first guy that fought back and make no mistake he was viewed as washed up - he looked like pure garbage against Bobby Czyz and looked totally worn out against Bowe in fight before that.
Rematch - Dq’d
Frans Botha - a c level fighter that took every round off Mike until Mike landed a bomb to get him out - Mike also nearly got Dq’d again for trying to break Botha’s arm.

I’m not going to go any further as by the time he fought Botha it was visually evident that Tyson was a totally shot fighter nothing more than 3 round slugger at best with none of the defense or speed that made him a force in the 80s.

 

The Foreman loss did not tarnish Frazier's career at all, Foreman was ranked #2 and also dispatched Norton in 2 rounds, who had beaten Ali handily. Joe kept getting up after each knockdown and you can argue that George is the only man who stopped him in his career. The irony is that Joe did better in his rematch against George compared to Tyson's DQ in the Holyfield rematch.

Douglas wasn't necessarily a journeyman, he was a ranked contender with a 6 win streak over names like Berbick and McCall and had fought for a vacant title against Tony Tucker 3 years earlier. He was ahead of Tucker before gassing out, but his reputation as a quitter combined with Mike's aura of invincibility just made that loss all that devastating. Tucker went the distance against Prime Mike so Douglas had a chance, just nobody believed in it. Only Mirage Casino put up odds and the owner kept on raising them until it was 42-1 by the time of the fight.

The only Tyson loss he had where he was not expected to win was against Lewis. Pre-prison Tyson might have the best career out of any HW. But yeah, post-prison tarnishes Tyson's career whereas Joe retired at an ideal time. (The best would have been right after FOTC of course)

 

Tyson's losses when he wasn't prepared, was shot, drugged etc - are IRRELEVANT and they don't matter one bit.

 

You need to have another look at that one GCC.

 

Tyson KDs Douglas (round-8); Douglas KOs Tyson the round after next (round-10)?

 

Yup.

 

Using the round certain fights finished in, as a currency, in these types of debate is not all that useful.

Foreman W TKO2 Frazier
Douglas W KO10 Tyson

What are the numbers, in isolation, really telling anyone here?

They don't really tell us the history of the fighters involved; their style and approach to fights; the perceived scale of the challenge for each of the challengers; how the losing fighters handled their adverse circumstances; what the winners went on to achieve, etc etc.

Other than providing a result and a rough timestamp, they tell us very little at all.

 

Is it just me who's drawing a blank here?

Surely it makes a difference whether a fight goes two rounds or eleven. In the one case, I can put my beer aside and turn off the screen after 5 minutes.

If Wilder had lost after 2 rounds, that would have been an absolute embarrassment for him.
How in the world is that not going to make a difference?

Luckily it didn't and we got to see a long fight.

And of course it would have been a disgrace for Tyson as well. The perception is different in retrospect.