Who Ranks Higher As ATG Michael Spinks Or Mike Tyson?

There really isn't any reason for this discussion. All time great status depends on what a fighter did in the ring. It is not a popularity contest, or a debate of iconic status. Micheal Spinks was an Olympic Gold Medalist who beat Murray Sutherland and Yaqui Lopez within his first 3 years as a pro. He went on to beat Eddie Mustafa Muhhamed and win the WBA title in his 17th pro fight.

Spinks fought Qawi and unified the division in his 23rd pro fight. After just 4 more title defenses, he moved up to heavyweight and beat the undefeated heavyweight champion of the world TWICE.

In Tyson's 17th pro fight he fought 14-9 Mike Jameson. In his 23rd pro fight he fought 12-3 William Hosea. Spinks fought better fighters on his way up than Tyson did, and got to the top faster than Tyson did.

Spinks fought at 175 during a very good era. Tyson reigned over a relatively weak era.

Micheals wife was killed in a car wreck leaving Micheal Spinks with two young children to care for, and Spinks became relatively inactive. When he fought Tyson he had not been in the ring for over a year, and had only fought 3 times in the previous two years. After the Tyson fight he retired so he could take care of his kids full time.

In the annals of boxing history Micheal Spinks stands head and shoulders above Mike Tyson.

 

Well put. Like I said earlier, separates those who know their **** from those that don't.

 

Tyson was a bum.

 

A lot of people don't solely consider records to compile an atg status. also when comparing early careers you have to factor in that tyson was what 18 or 19 in his first fights and was fighting good comp while still 20 or less. many of those fights you mentioned for spinks were when he was 24 or 25 or so. plus tyson fought the likes of jess ferguson and quick tillis at 15-20 fights or so. not too shabby. tyson was the youngest hw titleist ever so obviously he came up quick. i'm sure in a vaccuum spinks' lhw comp may be better than mikes hw reign comp but doubt it's hands down and you have to consider how fights were won (in tyson's fashion he was destroying challengers of various degrees of merit). plus if you wanna talk accomplishments and records then how do you gloss over tyson's utter destruction of spinks?

 

You consider Tyson to be a greater fighter because more people have heard of him? Come on now, that's silly talk.

Michael Spinks has the better body of work in my opinion, and moving up to Heavyweight to dethrone then undefeated Larry Holmes was an astonishing achievement. The likes of Qawi would have given most if not all LHWs in history a very tough nights work, and I'd favor him to beat Jones at 175lbs, so for Spinks to completely outbox him over 15 was particularly impressive to me. I don't pick too many to defeat a prime Spinks at Light Heavyweight, his reign there along with his success at Heavyweight give him the nod over Tyson.

 

Nobody does.It's been mentioned here a few times.Ali beat Foster.Marciano beat Charles and Moore.Louis beat Conn.The list goes on and on.When was the last time a great lightheavyweight beat a great heavyweight near or close to their primes?

 

Dude, Michael Spinks was beating the **** out of the likes of Yaqui Lopez and Murray Sutherland in only his 14th professional fight. Age has nothing to do with it. Spinks' experience as a professional Boxer was still practically non-existant and he was still defeating solid opposition. Marvin Johnson would soon fall, and once Spinks had his clutches on the division, there was no letting go until he willingly moved up to Heavyweight. He was a dominant champion.

 

i assume you mean 'nobody' solely looks at win/loss record. obviously. I said that in response to the poster i quoted who seemed to be saying that is all that matters

 

Duh,we already addressed that Tyson beat Spinks.That's not the issue.You still didn't answer the question.Who did Tyson beat that puts him ahead of Spinks in ATG status?

 

Donovan Ruddock, obviously.

 

I wasn't talking about just record.I was referring to Tyson's destroying Spinks.Nobody denies that.

 

don't know his am experience (and admittedly much of spinks reign is before my time and beyond my knowledge), but most athletes improve from 18 to 24. i'm not knocking what spinks did. my point was that the dude i quoted was being a little one sided as to what tyson did at young age and experience level

plus spinks may have been a dominant champ no doubt and the title comp may have been better but he didn't dominate like tyson did

 

:goodNice

 

What name did I call you?

 

Fair enough.

I think that's the key point in all of his this. Spinks beat better opposition overall.