Best I ever saw when at his best. Lightning quick, tremendous head movement, great chin, devastating power & could do it for 10/12 rounds when at his peak. His best wins were Larry Holmes & Michael Spinks. Both were HoFer's themselves so to say he didn't beat names when at his best is nonsense. He was only mediocre when past his best though. Which was from the first Frank Bruno fight (in 1989) onwards. He still achieved plenty from then mind you, but it wasn't the same guy who tore the division to shreds like no-one ever has from 1985 to 1988.
Top 10 for sure, during the 80s he was sensational. 90s much less so, but still an excellent fighter. 1. Ali 2. Louis 3. Holmes 4. Holyfield 5. Foreman 6. Lewis 7. Marciano 8. Frazier 9. Tyson 10. Wlad 11. Liston
He could give any heavyweight in history trouble, the only ones that would kick his ass no problem would be Vitali, grandpa Foreman and Liston though.
Some excellent points here which is why I wanted to read some of your thoughts on the subject……for me his run up to and concluding with Spinks was impressive . I agree with Oddone and would rate him anywhere from 12-15 on the atg hvy list.
Roy Jones level physical gifts at HW, and the right people around him for a minute there. Head to head at his peak he’s up there against anyone. So many good posts on here saying it better inside the ring, but I’ll add my 14-year-old kid who knows nothing about boxing knows who Mike Tyson is
Very few fighters have historical ATG casual fan following. The guy still gets remembered with the same fan fare, hype, adulation and love as if he is still the same young 19-20 year old Tyson from 1985-86
I'd only see prime Ali, Holmes, and Jersey Joe beating '87 Tyson. Lennox and Vitali would be pick 'em.
This is so hard and I am a complete hypocrite when it comes to Tyson. I criticise people who say GGG is the best middle weight ever because I do not think his record backs it up, albeit in his prime he was a beast. Yet with Tyson, I lean the other way because it is Tyson. I always think of him as in the top 5 as he was the boxer that got me into boxing and I was obsessed with the bloke. The reality is he is lower down the list if you go off his record. Potential or ‘what ifs’ shouldn’t impact a ranking, but what a fighter actually achieves in the ring should be the measure imo. If there was a poll for the best in their prime that is a different matter. He would be in my top 15 for his record, top 3 for prime for prime for me.
High but should be higher, as incredible as the heights he achieved he led a destructive lifestyle most of his career and if he had say someone like Patterson's dedication, would of had a much better legacy. Its amazing he did as well as he did while partying and his outside distractions. His late 80s run is impressive considering what was going on at the time in the division.
6 of his losses 5 were by TKO struggled against the Bigger fighters with good Chins.....Top 20 for Me.