Mike Tyson all time heavyweight ranking?

Ali, Louis, Foreman, Marciano, Holmes, Lewis and Holyfield I have ahead of Tyson. Frazier I am 50/50 on.

So somewhere in the 8-10 range.

 

1 Louis
2 Ali
3 Holmes
4 Foreman
5 Liston
6 Frazier
7 Holy
8 TYSON
9 Lewis
10 Dempsey

 

Tyson, at his prime, was truly special. You can´t take this lightly. He was a true ATG ! I don´t care what anybody says, I´m not puting Liston or Tunney above him... top 10. top 13 at least.

 

Loved it. We have similar lists outside of Liston and Holmes placements!!

 

You right and my mistake, it was supposed to be top 3 because Joe and Muhammad are higher but let it be. H2H I rate it higher.

 

Number 5

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/mike-tyson-had-a-better-career-than-larry-holmes.669560/

 

Gotta agree.
After Kinhasa, Ali was widely considered the GOAT, with only Louis being a serious challenger to that title.

 

I agree at some time Tyson had potential to be Top5, even Top3. But then too many things went wrong and his standing suffered.

Unfortunately Tyson became a textbook case of "shoulda, woulda, coulda"; thus althought he was no doubt a fantastic fighter at his peak, he is just fringe Top10 in my opinion.

 

For me Tyson is out of the top 10, I would definitely put him in the top 15 and maybe in the top 12. I think it is right to give him credit for the excellent first phase of his career, the conquest of the world title against Berbick, the unification of the titles and the various defenses. Then there is also the defeat with Douglas at 23 years old, the prison, the second part of his career much inferior to the first. Then in the opponents defeated by Iron Mike there is the reason why I do not put him in the top 10, who are the best names in his record? An old Larry Holmes, who had been out for two years and had 17 more than Tyson. And Michael Spinks, a great champion but in the light heavyweight division. Then Mike has defeated good and very good boxers but a victory over a champion is missing in my opinion (Lewis has Holyfield and Vitali K., objectively something else compared to the Spinks and Holmes defeated by Tyson)

 

this argument is weird.- Spinks was LHW
It often happens that Tyson's dominance over Spinks is a problem because Michael was former LHW but I've never heard of the problem being that Holmes lost to a LHW .

I don't want to get into what every serious trainer/boxer knows - the problem with moving up in weight is not less muscle mass, but less reach. Spinks suddenly had to change his fighting style from a fighter with good reach. For Tyson, it didn't matter at all. Tyson was reach for Welter. Spinks was happy.

I also don't want to get into the fact that the LHW argument NEVER comes up in Dempsey-Carpentier, Louis-Conn, Marciano-Charles, Marciano-Moore, Clay-Jones, Holyfield-Moorer and many others. Tyson dominated Spinks, that was a great victory. Maybe he would be more appreciated if he won on points or got knocked down earlier.

Funny how no one criticizes Hagler who lost his title to a lower weight fighter who has been inactive for 4 years.

 

I think there’s a difference in a light heavyweight who is at the end of his career with shot knees (Spinks of Tyson) and an end-of-career older heavyweight heading into retirement against a much fresher and better light heavyweight (Holmes of Spinks).

I don’t think Tyson of Lewis beats Spinks of Holmes, frankly, and certainly not post-Lewis.

Same with when someone fights Ezzard Charles … he lost to lots of folks past his championship prime, but the version who beat Louis and Walcott was a different animal.

 

HOW is ALI not number one? He beat your 4th,5th & 6th greatest heavyweights of all-time

 

don't you think that the decline of Spinks' career was caused by Tyson destroying him in 90 seconds?

I think you are extremely biased. no offense but just look at the facts:
Archie Moore was 41 when he fought Marciano, Spinks was 32.

Archie Moore had over 170 fights before Rock including 20 defeats, Spinks had 31 fights and no defeats.

Archie Moore fought a fierce fight with Rock, Spinks was DECLASSIFIED!!

Spinks never claimed that he lost to Tyson because of bad knees
.He had bandages on his legs already in the 70s, didn't you know that? that means that bad knees didn't prevent him from winning 31 fights in a row but prevented him from winning the 32nd. at what point did you notice that Spinks had problems moving?? this seems like a pathetic excuse to me. Either Spinks was LHW, or he was scared, or he had bad knees, but how is it possible that he became a coward, weakling and cripple with Tyson???

interestingly, in the Best in Faced series Spinks called Tyson the best he fought. Tubbs, Bruno, Biggs, Ruddock and probably a few others did the same, even though they fought Bowe, Holmes, Lewis.. but they chose Tyson without looking for cheap excuses

 

He's ninth on my list. But that is based on a very short very otherworldly peak.