Is Mike Tyson the greatest heavyweight of all time?

top 20? whoever says tyson is outside of the top 15 is a ****in dumass..Jack dempsey above tyson is laughable..tyson wud have murdered dempsey faster then spinks..

 

He would have a good shot against a post-exile Ali, but would drop a UD to the 60's version. Lewis was great but to say "he'd own Ali" is wrong.

 

To SKILLED for ALi.....thank you i havent laughed like that in....well a day or two.

To POWERFUL for ALi......thank you, i didnt laugh.

OWNED.....he may have owned the Ali thought fought Holmes when he was like 90, but to think he would have owned the man that made Sonny Liston look like an amatuer he would have barely got near, and when he did your overlooking Ali's chin.




sorry straying off the point, Tyson GOAT....**** its nearly as a bad.

If Tyson had more of a prime career and we saw the best of him for longer than 2-3yrs his place would probably be greatly increased as he had a lot to offer, but we didnt and will never know what his full potential could have been.

Tyson 1988 - Top 10-15.

 

I haven't read the responses yet, but here is my opinion.

1. Not the greatest, but one of the most exciting.

2. Certainly top 10 for me. On a good day, top 6 but that is probably being a bit optimistic. His 9 defences were against good fighters, but he made them look B-grade and that ironically has given the impression that they were bums.
What hurts him is his loss to Douglas and his two losses to Holyfield, particularly the 2nd fight where he plain quit. I think subsequent losses can be explained and not too much should be read into those. He also didn't beat any ATG heavyweight.

3. I don't think anyone has had his blend of speed and power before or since. Some have had one or the other, but probably never both. As a composite puncher, perhaps only Louis ranks higher. Angelo Dundee once said that Tyson used combinations he had never seen before. His explosiveness, instinctive ability to time his punches and accuracy rank among the elite.
Another unique aspect of his game was the aura he had. He had that primal, brooding quality that only guys like Liston or Foreman in his prime had.

 

I would have to say on his day yes.
The problem is his best was only for a short time before it all went wrong. Imo and it is just that Tyson was all a heavy weight should be fast strong hard hitting and mean as hell and was great to watch.
I would be the first to admit I am a bit bias as he is one of my best fighters. But on his day I dont see anybody beating him.

I think in time to come even with Tysons long fall from grace he will receive the respect he should

 

1. No.....Because I believe that Joe Louis was!
2. Top 10 (in his prime)
3. Hand speed + knockout power

 

no he wasn't but he could have been close to being so if he hadn't gone off the rails.his hand speed and power were amazing,he was very strong,fanatically determined and had a good chin.he was right up there with liston and foreman perhaps more so in the intimidation stakes.i defy anyone around at the time to say that around the time he knocked out spinks still just short of his 22nd birthday,that they didn't think he would be a top 5 atg in the heavies.such has been his fall that he is now underrated.head to head i would have him in the top ten.

 

This is true. After the win, I read a piece in either Ring or KO at the time where they had historians matching him up against the all-time greats. Only Liston and Ali were given a chance. The rest they said were too slow, too crude or just not good enough.

20 years on, and the opinion is quite different. As has been said, he is overrated and underrated at the same time.

 

1. Do you think that Mike Tyson is the greatest heavyweight ever and why?

Nowhere near. Not even the greateset heavyweight of his era. He's behind Lewis & Holyfield for me. Comfortably beaten by both - and I don't accept that he was "over the hill" when he fought them as he's younger than both. If an athlete has his prime at 23, that says to me that he's not a great athlete.

If the question is "Do you think that Mike Tyson is the greatest unfulfilled talent at heavyweight ever", then maybe, yes.

 

Head to Head #1 but not invincible
ATG #4 or 5 with Lenox Lewis

 

How can a guy who won the title in 1986 be the same guy in 2002? That's a sixteen year span or close to, considering he won it in November of '86.

Joe Louis won the title in 1937. Was he the same fighter in 1953?
Ali won the title in 1964. Was he the same guy in 1980? I guess he has no excuse losing to Berbick and Holmes then?

Some fighters mature quickly and others mature more slowly. Some reach their primes quicker than others, and drop off more quickly too.

Simply saying he was younger than Lewis is looking at things very simplisticly.

The Holyfield fights...okay, Tyson still looked quite formidable there and retained some of the elements of his heyday, but he was not the same guy as from the 80's.
I'm not sure how anyone can really argue otherwise.

 

How in the world can you rank 25 HW's ahead of him??? Who are they??? I rank him 12th and do not believe (in spite of huggers) that he is top 10 and find top 5 laughable...but 26+ is even more baffeling than top 10.

1 Louis
2 Ali
3 Holmes
4 Marciano
5 Foreman
6 Dempsey
7 Frazier
8 Johnson
9 Lewis
10 Holyfield
11 Liston
12 Tyson
13 Jeffries

Tyson was a beast who could destroy good competition (not great) as good as anyone ever. He brought an aura of invincibility, fear and excitement to the ring that may never be rivaled. his popularity is probably 2nd only to Ali...but popularity does not make rankings. Tyson is an ATG...but 26+ baffles me???

 

The 'best' but not the 'greatest'