Did you live the days of prime Mike Tyson ?? What was it like ?

Biggest & best doesn’t enter into it. It’s simply an objective fact that those were his linear defenses, that was his championship reign. Does it necessarily reflect the best performances? Not necessarily, no. But it doesn’t evaporate simply because he looked better at some other point.

 

So when was Liston really champion? 1960? 1959? Are we going to have different people saying certain fighters had varying reigns, based on the observer’s subjective view? We have a championship fight for a reason. Because it means jack how much better you look, or if everyone thinks you’d beat the champion. You have to prove it.

 

With fighters before my time (at least not being cognisant of them) I could only imagine so far the aura and intimidation powers of guys like Louis, Liston and prime Foreman etc.

Saw Mike in real time and he was dead set scary - and it was easy to relate to a good number of fighters being **** scared and beaten even before first bell.

So, for those of us who didn’t live through the Liston. Foreman eras etc, Mike gave us a very good idea about how fans and opponents would’ve truly felt about the aforementioned monsters

Their quality as fighters aside and unless I’m forgetting someone, I don’t think there has been a HW since Mike who has come close to carrying the same powers of intimidation as Mike did during his prime.

Zhang is not at all on Mike’s level but I will say, with his size, relative skill set and power he brings that certain menace and anticipation of him levelling whoever is put in front of him - in all possibility.

Suffice to say, whoever faces Big Bang next, I suspect that they will be quite leery of him, at least in the early rounds.

 

how about Bakole? He looked like a tank armed with a howitzer against Anderson.

 

I’ll have to have a look Champ. Cheers for the heads up.

 

Ney Liked this post…except for the Zhang part

 

Fair enough.

 

In my twenties at the time. I felt then, and still do now, that Mike believed everybody feared him. Most did, but not all. When in front of a boxer with good pugilistic ability he became frustrated and then reckless which was his weakness. Even so he will always be one of the ATGs and remembered forever.

 

Have you misread my post?

To clarify, clearly, the points I was making - 1) Lineage is not subjective and your interpretation is correct; and 2) Lineage isn't the be all and end all when assessing boxers from an historical perspective. Fights that aren't for the lineal title still contribute towards a boxers historical ranking, as evidenced by Ezzard Charles being the consensus GOAT at LHW. Who you beat, when and how you beat then, are far more important.

Sonny Liston became champion in 1962. He was the best HW in the world from (at least) 1958 until he won the title and has a much better win resume during that period than both Patterson and Johansson, which is a contributing factor as to why he ranks higher than both historically.

Tyson became lineal champion in June 1988 when he beat Spinks. He was the best HW in the world from (at least) 1986 until after he beat Spinks. His win resume during this period is vastly better than Spinks HW win resume, which is a contributing factor as to why he ranks much higher than Spinks all time at HW.

 

Those days were pretty good. The weather was definitely more stable than right now. It feels like it's either all rain or choking dust nowadays.

 

But what have I said that indicates I discount anything a boxer does outside of his title reign? That wasn’t mean to be my implication.

 

Floyd Patterson was fighting second and third tier heavyweight while Sonny Liston was cleaning the division out of top contenders. It doesn't change the fact that it was Floyd, not Sonny, who was the champion at the time. The champion isn't always the best fighter in the division. Jim Braddock wasn't the best heavyweight in the world when he held the title. You could argue Joe Louis, a contender, was a better fighter even before they fought. Still, Braddock was the champ.

 

And my post wasn't intended to discredit, or disagree with, yours. You quoted mine, not vice versa.

I agree with you that Tyson wasn't lineal champion until he beat Spinks. That is largely irrelevant to how I rank him all time at HW.

 

What I’m trying to get across & maybe you articulated it better than I did.

 

The first fight of his I saw live was the first against Bruno. His aura of menace was just out of this world. Never seen anything like it.