Greatest Aura of Invincibility

Tyson. He was considered so unstoppable by most that when people even slightly shook him up (Tucker and Bruno) it was practically sports headline news in itself. People were seriously suggesting in early 1990 that he'd KO Holyfield in a round.

Louis and Ali spent their careers hearing people talking about how "So and so" would knock them out, and why they only won "because challenger x didn't do y". Yet they dominated the division for years on end, while Tyson got beaten by a nobody in only his third title defense. George Foreman was supposed to be invincible in 1974, but three years later had been beaten twice and was out of the sport.

Auras are made to be done away with; it's boxers who have their heads screwed on well that dominate.

 

Sonny Liston clearly. Liston was the most feared athlete in sports history. He knocked out a dominant heavyweight champion in one round twice when he himself was past his prime. No other fighter can claim that.:good

 

................First time I've read Patterson described as a "dominant champion."

 

My mistake. I didn't read the choices.

I'll go with Foreman.

 

Well, he didn't clean out the division or anything, but he was fairly dominant for his time. Six title defenses and champion for five years is pretty solid to me.

 

...........I have to respectfully disagree. Patterson was a real good fighter and an even better man, but being knocked down by the likes of Pete Rademacher and defending against people like Roy Harris are hardly high-water marks in heavyweight history. He was actually very, very protected as champion.

 

Agree with post 100%..

He was destined for true greatness.Maybe even retire undefeated undisputed heavyweight champ.

But due to his mental shortfalls and stupid behaviours we will never know.

Still shatters me to be honest..

 

I cannot choose between Tyson, Liston and Foreman.

 

One name worth mentioning is Terry McGovern

He was the first champion who regularly demolished world class oponents in the early rounds and nobody had quite seen anything like it before. He was perhaps the prototype for the aura of invincibility.

 

Then there was Tony Ayala. He was punching holes in everybody he came across, and had not lost a fight since age 8. Too bad he had to test this aura on a defenseless woman.

 

Don't forget his sensational drubbing of Cuevas when he was 14, makes Tyson, Foreman, Liston, Manson and co pale in comparison.

 

I nominate this for quote of the week.

 

I can only speak personally about this, and I wasn't alive when Liston and Foreman were in their pomp, so I would have to say Tyson.

Bruno became a hero here for hurting him...not actually winning the fight or anything, but being able to hit and hurt him. Just goes to show how feared and invulnerable Tyson was seen as, outside the States as well.

Everyone thought he'd blow right past 49-0 no problems.

 

Jeff Lacy.

Recently it is Tyson, at least in the eyes of Americans.

There were hundreds of millions to be made on Iron Mike. For that reason the American boxing media and even the mainstream media built him up to unseen height. Whilst any semi-clued up European could see he was beatable, even in his very prime, Americans thought he was unbeatable even after several victories and even a few going into his fights with Europeans Lennox Lewis and Danny Williams.


What I think is more relevant is, who had that aura in the eyes of the most knowledgable fans? Joe Calzaghe (2000-2006) had that aura even in the eyes of his opponents. Why else would he have fought so few mandatories? People simply don't want to waste their time fighting him, losing, being destroyed in the process. Knowledgable fans can appreciate no fighter in hois era can beat him at 168.

Do you know who else knew that? Bernard Hopkins knew.

 

I fear i'm getting a bad rep here.

I wouldn't say Lewis. Although he was avoided more than most champions, that had much to do with most boxing people deep inside knowing he was very good and dangerous, but him being very low rated by the public. In other words, he was a high risk/low reward fighter, not the ones you want to face. And needless to say, any auru was impossible after the McCall loss.


I have to agree 100% with what The Kurgan said.

A boxing type of fighter, no matter how good and skilled, will never have the aura of invincibility that a puncher has. That's why i think Ali should not be on the list, even if in the eyes of us boxing experts he looked pretty invincible in '67. On top of that, i don't think Ali was all that popular back then.


An underrated pick here may be Joe Louis. No poster here was around to fully remember his entire reign so that has its influence, although i think racism prevented him to be recognised by the entire public as invincible, the way Tyson was. The way Tyson was hyped, especially in his comeback from prison, was insane. Tyson vs McNeely was bigger in terms of money than Bowe vs Holyfield III?