Was prime "Iron" Mike Tyson the greatest heavyweight of all time?

People often underestimate the depth of Tyson's resume, because his prime was so short, but he got a hell of a lot done in a very short time.

The number of ranked contenders that he beat, compares favorably to other all time greats.

He is well behind Louis, and Ali, and Holmes in this regard, as every other great heavyweight is.

Outside of that trio, he stacks up pretty well against anybody else.

Most of those wins would have happened before his 23rd birthday.

In other words by his 23rd birthday, he has matched or surpassed some all time greats, at the point when they retired.

As I have said previously, he really just needed to produce more of the same.

His legacy would essentially have been built by the time that Holyfield and Bowe came along.

 

Agree on Ali and Foreman.

Disagree that 24 is the cutoff for everyone if we’re comparing primes to primes. Just because Tyson’s prime ended there doesn’t mean every other fighter’s did. Not everyone is on the same curve.

Not that I pick Mike Weaver to beat Tyson, but he hit his stride later. Walcott too. Heck, do we even know if Sonny Liston had turned pro by 24?

 

I'm using the age of 24 because that's when Mike's prime ended for purposes of this thread:

"Was prime "Iron" Mike Tyson the greatest heavyweight of all time?"


Certainly the greatest fighter of all time doesn't get KTFO in his prime by Buster Douglas.

 

No, but, at his best, he would be the favorite to win over the vast majority of the other Lineal Heavyweight Champions in history.

 

Foreman hadn't even fought Frazier at the time he turned 24 let alone Norton.

 

My bad I glossed over that while looking at the records.

It's pretty ridiculous to force every other champion to cut their prime to the age of 24 to make a case for Tyson. Some boxers like Lewis and Holmes didn't have elite wins until their late 20's. Not everyone develops at the same rate, depends on the style and matchmaking.

 

All good mate. I agree, you can make comparisons but at the end of the day it's only a small segment.

As you say boxers are all different via age and it would also smear things more as time goes because many guys are performing at a higher level at a later age nowadays.

 

We have to cut every other heavyweight champion's prime to 23 years old because that's how old Tyson was when he was stopped by Buster Douglas.

 

Yes this is true.

Spinks Lineal champion

Berbick ranked 6th

Bonecrusher ranked 2nd

Thomas ranked 5th

Tucker ranked 3rd

Williams ranked 2nd

Even Douglas was ranked 7th when Tyson fought him.

Overall Tyson won 10 world title fights in a 4 year period, and literally unified and cleaned out the division in just a few short years. Tyson may get overrated at times by his fans, but what he achieved in the 80s can't be dismissed.

 

Completely agree. The time screamed for someone exciting to come along, who would make the best fights, unify the titles and be active. Tyson did just that and rejuvenated boxing as a whole. Biggest thing since Ali. What he did in three years, truth be told, was incredible.

 

Yes. Why not?

 

I think that makes Tokyo Douglas, with his one-night prime, the greatest heavyweight of all time.

Bow down to Bus!!!

 

He was a human wrecking ball of two-fisted power, hand speed, arsenal, and Peek-a-boo. He might very well have been the best, but alas, we will never know, because he threw it all away and had perhaps the shortest prime of any heavyweight great.

 

Holmes was still 38.

 

Not really-HW primes & primes in general seldom vary that much.
Any way you slice it, say not counting Tillis nor Douglas, Tyson broke 3 years of a prime.
Now he is Fully Responsible for his own decline.

But 3-4 years is a typical prime.
Try to find certainly HW guys that had 5 full years as their prime-it is hard.
And the number of prime fights he had was not at all low.
Tillis-Williams, 18 fights.
How many fights you have is perhaps a better measurement of what you accomplished then.
Also ALL HWs & most every fighter ever can be critiqued re: how good his opponents were-but Tyson's competition, & certainly their records, were comparatively good.

How many prime fights can you give say Ali? Holmes? Wlad? More recent HWs, who fight even less often?

Again I am onboard with blaming Tyson for his decline-& leaving his prime.
But he had a very impressive prime indeed.