Tyson Above Holyfield - Can It Be Justified?

How can you say that? It amazes me how people ignore Tyson's prison stint and the fact that even after he got fights after prison, they were close to useless. Holyfield had been in with the best for years and was ready for war.

 

Because most everyone else on the planet did as well.

The fights re-established him as a titleholder and a force in the division - hardly "useless." They were more than enough to prepare him for a fight with an older and badly shopworn ex-champ with obvious stamina problems. The only question now was whether or not Tyson was really ever better than Holy to begin with.

No he wasn't, he was older and more deteriorated than Tyson, and had been forced to retire earlier because of health issues. A war was the last thing he looked ready for.

 

Ali came back after 3 years and pulled off some massive wins. Thats exactly why Tyson ain't among the top tier heavyweights of all-time. Nobody is ignoring Tyson's stint in jail. When he came back and fought tomato cans before taking on Holyfield, who himself was thought to be easy pickings for Tyson, it never served him well. Holyfield had been in with the best for years and was ready for a war, true. But he was also written off by everyone apart from himself before the first bell rang.

It seems to me that Tyson fans seem to ignore his mediocre wins and his defeats after he came out of jail. Thats part of the reason why he aint great. And I'm not talking baloney at all. Getting knocked down and getting back up to win, having stints in prison, going into retirement and making a comeback and generally pulling off great wins when your percieved to be past your prime. Thats what makes greatness.

 

Good point.

 

Sugar Ray Robinson came out of retirement in his mid-30's and won the middleweight title 5 times when he was past his prime. He rebounded from setbacks.

Ali won the heavyweight title twice after a 3 year lay off. He beat Norton, Frazier and a prime Foreman.

Tyson wasn't 'shot' as many claim post prison. Tyson was a great ontop fighter. When the confidence was sapped out him by the likes of Douglas and Holyfield he was never the same again, unless he was in with a stiff.

 

I'm not gonna waste my time with you because just from your posts I can tell your bias.

 

You are too, and I've argued with you in the past about this before and I hate redundancy.

 

Holyfield would always have handed Tyson his ass. Too much heart, toughness and a brilliant skillset to match. Holyfield would never have folded if a prime Tyson had 2-3 good rounds against him. The same cannot be said for Tyson. And trust me, Holyfield is on a different level from Berbick, Spinks, Tucker and Ruddock.

 

That's because people were so enamored by Tyson that they simply ignored the facts...

Tyson isn't Ali but that has no bearing on this thread.

 

I'am too what? It happens to be my opinion. You're only seeing the bias because you happen to disagree with me. Typical Tyson fan it seems. Always a pain to get into a debate with. Can't handle the truth.

 

Yeah, McNeeley, Seldon, Mathis, and Bruno really prepared him for a fight against Holyfield

I don't think that you even believe this stuff.

 

Tyson also wasn't allowed to train, Ali was in his absence. And Ali also had more hunger and didn't abuse his body with the fast livin lifestyle the way mike did in his comeback, WHICH HAS A LOT TO DO WITH EVERYTHING.

 

Holyfield over Tyson for the same reasons Vitali wont rank as high as he potentially could have on an all time list. Judge based on wins and actual achievements, not just how good they could have been.

Let's not forget Holyfield beat Valuev at 44 or something, not a bad achievement for an old guy

 

Record says he didn't, so as far i'm concerned he still loss. And Valuev is a bum.

 

Tyson's reign at the top was brief. Around 3 years and 4 months to be precise. Not exactly a lenghty reign. However, it's not all about the length of a reign, it's the quality within it. Berbick, Holmes, Spinks, Thomas and Tucker. Probably his best wins while at his best. But Holmes was well on the downside at that stage of his career after a 2 year lay off. He was at least 6 years past his prime. Spinks was a natural light-heavyweight, although unbeaten and generally percieved as a slick operator with decent power at the weight. Thomas and Tucker were simply very good contenders with some talent about them. Douglas? A 42-1 underdog who wasn't given a prayer.

Tyson again holds two wins over Ruddock just before prison. Very good wins, it must be said.

Bruno was average and was made for Tyson. Credit to Tyson though for claiming the title back.

Holyfield was the choice for Tyson instead of Lewis, who took Tyson and the WBC to court trying to get a title shot. Tyson took the easier fight on paper against Holyfield for more dollars and it came back to bite him in the ass.

Now, if Tyson had beaten Holyfield in the rematch and then ripped Lewis' head off around 97-98 then he'd be looked upon differently by myself.

The fact of the matter is after Douglas, Tyson proved next to nothing. Mathias, Seldon, Botha, Francis, Ettienne, Neilson, etc. Get outta here. :good