¿Why does the public underestimate Mike Tyson's resume so much?

They were giving out belts like participation trophies. This is less than meaningful.

 

H2h they were still better than most pre Liston champions.

 

That’s pretty sad & you should’ve gotten better treatment. As I say, it’s ingrained in the culture to just see celebrities, heroes. These are in reality much more than that, they are given a free pass for almost anything by large sections of the community, upto & including ****. It’s sad. You’re not a decent Human Being worthy of respect just because you’re a celebrity.

 

Well that’s your highly contentious opinion. But my point was to say he beat X number of “world champions” (what a joke) is very, very misleading.

 

I think I know why. Because Tyson had a record of 37-0 in the 1980s, 8-3 in the 1990s and 4-3 in the 00s, but almost everyone judges him for the last few years plus the fact that no other boxer had such a ****ed up relationship with publicists like Tyson and they are the ones who often create opinions about him - see Bert Sugar or Teddy Atlas. Realistically, Tyson is greatly underrated today, although there is a group of psychofans who overestimate him but are not very important.

 

Honestly, I get the opposite vibe more often - people hone in on 85-88/89 & paper over the other 75% of his career.

 

do 1988 roku osiągnął praktycznie wszystko, co można było osiągnąć. Problem z nim jest taki, że miał kilka etapów w swojej karierze. Jeśli decydujący dla Twojej oceny okaże się ostatni etap, ocenisz go niżej niż Danny'ego Williamsa, którego nawet nie umieściłbyś w pierwszej setce HW. Ale prawda jest taka, że jeśli wejdziesz na Mount Everest z rekordem prędkości, a potem potknąłeś się wspinając się na McKinleya, Góry Skaliste nie staną się nagle wyższe od Himalajów, choć dla wielu osób tak to będzie wyglądało

 

What?

 

Przepraszam, może mój język jest niezrozumiały, bo nie mówię po angielsku i korzystam z tłumacza.

 

The post is translated as - "by 1988 he had achieved virtually everything that could be achieved. The problem with him is that he has had several stages in his career. If the final stage is decisive for your assessment, you will rate him lower than Danny Williams, whom you wouldn't even put in the top 100 HW. But the truth is, if you climb Mount Everest at a speed record and then trip while climbing McKinley, the Rocky Mountains won't suddenly become taller than the Himalayas, although for many people it will seem that way"

 

I often wonder how Tyson would have fared if he fought between 1970-1980. As good as he was I think Ali (pre Manila), Foreman, and Frazier (of FOTC vintage) would beat him. I also think Larry Holmes (circa 1980) beats him as well.

 

Is that Polish he’s speaking?

 

Yup, I'm Polish and can confirm.

 

Sure is

 

But what does he expect me to do with it?