**tyson,,one of the best heavyweights??**

Just makes the top 10. He's one of those borderline top 10's from the general classic fans here.

 

I do. He is one of the most talented fighters ever to lace them up. His accomplishments as being the youngest heavyweight champion and the last to unify all three titles separetely cannot be overlooked, but his full potential was never realized.

 

Yeah, any were from ten to 12 about. At worse 15 perhaps lol.

But I have Tyson in my top 12 though.

 

His fast start and quick powerful punching give him a chance vs the best and he was on a roll leading to Spinks...Had he retired then we would have wondered if 1) he could get off the floor to win 2) Could he stop a man after 8 rds( he did this once) 3) what would he do when a man took his best and stood with him.....later we found out that he did not not answer those questions well...I still think he just makes 10 because of his great early start in his career and the way he dominated a division and fought the best leading up to his downfall (King's influance)

 

Yes He is top tn for me.

 

Yes.

 

Just outside top ten for me. I have Liston tenth and Tyson eleventh.

 

No, because as talented as people( his fans) might believe he was................ATG status is exclusively for fighters who were great not because they could of been great.

Its all about the resume when all said and done, its who you beat not who you might have beaten and ifs and buts.

 

He is just outside the top 10 for me, but definitely included in my top 15 Heavyweights of all time. He was a very exciting fighter and I enjoyed watching him fight immensely. He brought me to my feet more than once!

 

Your right someone who becomes a hw champion at 20 is the first and last hw to unify every legit title in his era. Has 9 title defenses . Damn near clears out every viable contender in his era does not deserve to be called great and has a poor resume :roll::roll::roll::roll:

 

From the film of him,he seemed a decent fighter.
Yeah.Why not?

 

With due respect, these things at times are overplayed. For instance, Lennox Lewis, a fighter many if not most rank ahead of Tyson...

a) Never got up off the floor to win
b) Never stopped a man after 8 rounds

I'm just making a point; obviously there is a lot more to greatness or whatever you want to call it than just that.

Yes, I think Tyson deserves the 'greatness' tag, although he falls considerably short of the likes of Ali and Louis.

Let's forget for a second what he accomplished....Evander Holyfield I think would struggle for ATG status if not for his wins over Tyson, Tony Tucker and Razor Ruddock enhaced their status considerably in losing efforts to Tyson and Lewis needed the win to cement his place among the greats. (Although for me he had already achieved that, but the win was the last big T to cross for him)

His impact in the sport cannot be denied. That, combined with what he did achieve, cements it in my eyes. Certainly for me, if he is not a great, then the likes of Dempsey and Frazier are not either, for (imo) Tyson was at least on a par with these guys overall.

 

Not an ATG no.

What difference does it make how old he was when he won it, the bottom line is, who have you beaten and if you have not beaten perceived great competition (Holmes) then you can at least have longevity as your claim to being an ATG. Even with that Larry still had a better resume than Tyson.

No one said he had a poor resume, its just it does not stand up when you try and make him an ATG.


Tyson fans :roll:

 

Top ten for me.