Mike Tyson's P4P Greatness Overlooked ?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Dynamicpuncher, Oct 21, 2025 at 9:23 AM.


  1. Dynamicpuncher

    Dynamicpuncher Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,704
    32,859
    Jan 14, 2022
    I know people today like to use P4P argument for fighters beating other fighters who are much taller than them with a longer reach but I often don't see this mentioned for Tyson ?

    The amount of notable Heavyweights Tyson beat with a major height and reach disadvantage was actually very impressive considering he was only 5'10 with a 71 inch reach.

    I'll give a few examples.

    Jose Ribalta - 6'6, 80 inch reach = Tyson had a disadvantage of 8 inches in height and 9 inches in reach.

    Bonecrusher Smith - 6'4, 82 inch reach = Tyson had a disadvantage of 6 inches in height and 11 inches in reach.

    Tony Tucker - 6'5, 82 inch reach = Tyson had a disadvantage of 7 inches in height and 11 inches in reach.

    Tyrell Biggs - 6'5, 80 inch reach = Tyson had a disadvantage of 7 inches in height and 9 inches in reach.

    Larry Holmes - 6'3, 81 inch reach = Tyson had a disadvantage of 5 inches in height and 10 inches in reach.

    Frank Bruno - 6'3, 82 inch reach = Tyson had a disadvantage of 5 inches in height and 11 inches in reach.

    Carl Williams - 6'5, 85 inch reach = Tyson had a disadvantage of 7 inches in height and 14 inches in reach .

    Razor Ruddock - 6'3, 82 inch reach = Tyson had a disadvantage of 5 inches in height and 11 inches in reach .

    Andrew Golota - 6'4, 79 inch reach = Tyson had a disadvantage of 6 inches in height and 8 inches in reach.
     
  2. OddR

    OddR Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,986
    2,102
    Jan 8, 2025
    Also very impressive how few rounds he lost in the 1980s especially for someone who had a type of style that burns that much energy.
     
  3. Serge

    Serge Ginger Dracula Staff Member

    80,747
    132,604
    Jul 21, 2009
    Whilst Mike was amazing, I think it's different when it comes to fireplugs like him. They're very thick-set and extremely powerful for their size which enables them to hit with the kind of force and absorb the kind of force of much bigger men. That's a huge advantage for them which most other much smaller fighters don't have when facing much bigger opponents

    It's akin to a pitbull or a staff vs much larger but less powerful breeds of dog

    The same applies to someone like Manny
     
  4. HistoryZero26

    HistoryZero26 Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,916
    4,285
    Jan 6, 2024
    Yeah because Tyson critics aren't going to bring it up and Tyson fans aren't going to bring it up because it contradicts their image of him as death destroyer of worlds.
     
  5. Bofo24

    Bofo24 hobbyist Full Member

    487
    416
    Mar 21, 2019
  6. LoveThis

    LoveThis Sweet Science Full Member

    365
    473
    Feb 20, 2025
    Or from a different perspective: he made such an impression on everyone, that putting him into a category of disadvantaged fighters just doesn't occur to anyone.

    Credit to him and how good he was for a while.

    Because while Serge is right, I think with his dimensions noone else ever (no matter how thick-set) came close to being the fighter Tyson was. His technique was a great part of his success and who else had a hall of fame trainer who drilled that into him and where he lived and adapted to him as his surrogate father...
     
  7. TNSNO1878

    TNSNO1878 Active Member Full Member

    654
    1,217
    May 5, 2025
    Tyson is in a weird grey area; he's overrated by casuals and underrated by many hardcore fans. His P4P greatness is definitely overlooked. He was P4P number 1 for over two years and was the last truly enormous global crossover star the sport has had. He could've gone on to achieve remarkable things if he had stayed focused.
     
  8. JackSilver

    JackSilver Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,117
    4,943
    Jun 24, 2017
    Yeah there ain’t been many recognised top p4p heavyweights ever since that term was invented in the 40s or 50s. Tyson was number 1 when Hagler lost to Leonard an he was number 1 until he lost to Douglas an Chavez took over. Since then only Usyk has been the only heavyweight to be in the argument to be the p4p number 1
     
    Serge and TNSNO1878 like this.
  9. Arch Stanton

    Arch Stanton When you have to shoot, shoot!, don't talk...... Full Member

    10,655
    18,801
    Dec 24, 2022
    Mike was a predator. He saw his opponents as prey.

    Bruno described him quite well as being a harbour shark....
     
    Fergy and Serge like this.
  10. northpaw

    northpaw Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    17,274
    10,842
    Jun 5, 2010
    He's overrated by the general public but underrated by "some" boxing aficionados :facepalm:
     
  11. UniversalPart

    UniversalPart Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,656
    11,842
    Jul 1, 2010
    Arguably even bigger than Muhammad Ali.

    If Tyson was around today he would be making $100m paydays with insane regularity.
     
    Fergy, Serge and Ph33rknot like this.
  12. Babality

    Babality KTFO!!!!!!! Full Member

    29,329
    15,187
    Dec 6, 2008
    Mike Tyson was the most exciting fighter ever. It's not even close. Also one of the most talented. To be able to fight with that ferocity while maintaining great technique and defense was very impressive. It's easier to do it when you are moving around fighting defensively waiting on your opponent to throw first, but to do it while going balls to wall is a different story.
     
  13. Nigel_Benn

    Nigel_Benn Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,073
    222
    Apr 11, 2005
    I think i read somewhere that he was ranked either number 1 P4P in somewhere in the top 5 and the end of 1989, which for a heavyweight, is rare i believe.