2008 Hall of fame class

Congrats to Holmes.... and Bill :good

 

Exactly, he is in my opinion, responsible for the rise of ANOTHER sanctioning body known as the WBO. His fights just sit in the UK defending this belt.

 

Tyson rates # 4 on my all time heavyweight list. not only does he rate extremely high h2h, but he has the accomplishments and his title reign was as flawless and dominatiing as any HW champ who ever lived.

 

OK...:nut

 

I wouldn't put Tyson in top 4 but top 10 certainly.

The man was simply brutal in his heyday, not only have I never seen any other heavyweights throw combinations like him but I haven't seen many fighters in lower weight classes throw combo's like him. I've seen a few but the way he threw was so picture perfect, so fluid it was insane, he was so fast and he put his body into every punch. The way he put them all together was so very impressive. H2H I'd put him against every other HW ever, he was that good.

The guy was ridiculous. He'll be inducted within 3 years, guarantee it.

 

I'll always say Tyson could've been one of the greats. The only trouble is he ruined that for himself. You can't ignore all the other stuff, and failures when Tyson is being considered.

He'll creep into the HOF, but I don't think he is top 10 ATG HW material.

 

You know, he did certainly have his failures but Ok, the loss to Buster was embarrasing and should not have happened.
Losing to Evander was no shame he's a HOF'er as well. Also take into account that Tyson took that fight fairly shortly after coming out of a 4 year prison stint with no boxing training at all. He was bound to be rusty as hell. Obviously he did training for the few fights before Evander and for the Holyfield fight but he wasn't as finely tuned and sharp if he had been training during that time and was fighting regularly.
Tyson was never the same after jail, that much is obvious.

Lewis is an ATG as well but Tyson was WAY WAY past his prime at that point it's not even funny. His two other loses are not even worth adressing.

Tyson is the youngest heavyweight champion ever, 9 title defenses, was ridiculously dominant in each defence and had no peer for about 4 years.
If you look at the reigns of HW champions only a few are more impressive, Louis,Lewis, Ali and Holmes and possibly Marciano but I think Tyson fought better fighters than Rocky in his championship rule (and out of it as well)

So......hell, writing about it, I could put Tyson top 5! His title reign was incredibly impressive and long. And very dominant. Lets not forget he won two of the titles back after coming out of prison.

 

It's still a could've, would've, should've thing with Tyson. Reputation means something, even in boxing. Tyson was dominant for a short period against fighters who thought they would lose to him.

Tyson's legacy is of his own making. He'll never be a top ten; as much due to his reputation as anything else. Some may rate him as a top ten now, but that'll quickly fade.

I've my doubts debate will still be taking place regarding Tyson 10 or 15 years from now...

 

coulda woulda shoulda, he accomplished more during his title run than dempsey and frazier did. He beat more ranked fighters than liston, who are you kidding?

 

I doubt that mate, as time goes on I seriously think people will look back on him and start to rate him higher.
His ranking and reputation was/is seriously tarnished after all his antics in the past couple of years that people consider him a farce and don't think highly of him as a fighter, he's just a freakshow.

As time goes on, I feel history will start to judge him kindly.

Also your:

Comment was interesting to me, I feel that many people feel he could've or should've become the GOAT HW and then penalize him for not becoming it, they look back and instead of looking at what he did do, look back at what he could've done but failed to do.
They judge him on what he didn't do as opposed to what he did.

I believe his dominant performances and dominant title reign will stand the test of time and will speak for themselves in the years to come.

 

It's still a matter of considering ALL of Tyson. I'm the first to say he was GREAT, for a short period, during the 80s. Beyond that, his own demons ruined his legacy, and that is what he'll be remembered for most - not his great boxing skill.

 

hes a top 10, name ur list and i can take one fighter out and replace tyson with him. Jack Dempsey was also great for a short time, the difference is that dempsey fought once a year.

 

That qualifies my last statement, when you say "Ruined his legacy" You mean he could've become the GOAT if his personal problems hadn't hindered his career?
You are judging him on what he could've done instead of what he did do.

His demons did ruin his chances at becoming the greatest but that by no means takes away his accomplishments as the champion.
If people are judging his career on his demons instead of what he achieved in the ring then they are not judging a fighters career correctly.

 

Out of 9 title defences, 2 were linear. He's not the only guy to dominate in his prime. Some even dominated later (Holmes, Louis, Foreman at times) its nothing new for a great champion to domatinate. Tyson lost in what should have been his prime. Not to mention his biggest wins are over a faded Berbick, an old, out of shape, rusty Holmes, and a rusty shell of Michael Spinks. Not very good IMO.