If Mike Tyson Had Defeated Holyfield Twice And Lewis Once, Where Would He Rank Historically?

I mean you could wonder how many defences WW2 took from Joe Louis. As far as hypotheticals go that would be relatively realistic.

 

He likely would have tired sooner, and the risk of losing to some random opponent would have been greater, too.

Of course, World War II didn't help Louis in a literal sense, but it might have extended his reign; it’s also hard to say whether it didn't stall the careers of fighters who could have posed a genuine threat to him earlier. Ezzard Charles might have been ready as early as '47, and Rock probably lost some time there as well. There may be several talents we don't even know about.

 

I agree but I still think there was more there weighing up everything.

 

What you got to remember is Tyson beating Holyfield would heavily devalue Holyfield as a win. Holyfield was gifted that title shot with Tyson and was seen as being on his way out. If Holyfield loses his career at the top flight is all but done. Holyfields not fighting for world titles in 1999 if he loses those fights much less 2009.

Tyson beating Lennox would devalue Lennox a bit as well. Now Lennox would be seen as someone who couldn't beat big punchers. Also because of reasons stated above Lennox would not have fought Holyfield. Lennox would have been doing something else at that time instead. As it stands Lennox's only wins over top 5 guys of the era are Holyfield and Tyson. We'd be taking away all 3.

Many would have Tyson 1st because of course they would. The average person on the street has him 2nd as it is. But the more impartial types would have him where Lennox is right now. Foreman, Holmes and Bugner's runs would still heavily suggest their generation was better.

Tyson not fighting Bowe or Moorer would become a much more contentious issue. Or maybe Tyson did fight Moorer because Moorer retired after the Holy rematch which doesn't happen.