James Tillis stopped 11 times.

I must admit I really dont know. It wouldn't surprised me either way.
You must know the odds, so please provide me with this information.

:good

 

There comes a time in a debate when the other poster is just not getting it, then its time to hang it up. I am simply wasting my time here and is not making any progress with the subject. I wont bother to waste my time on biased imbecils who wont hear me out even if the facts is right there in front of thier face.atsch

In conclusion, the overall fact is that Whitaker, Mayweather, Holmes, and Trinidad beat the better line of fighters than Tyson did, Tyson is not great. Good fighter in his prime no doubt and definatley had the potential to be great. He got his recognition from blowing out bums, beating paper champions, and defending his title against lesser oposition. The above mentioned fighters had heart, were not overrated, accomplished alot more, stayed focused, and defended thier title against top 10 opponents.

There is nothing more to say, im done with this debate.:tong

 

Embarrassment finally won out. I feel like SRL vs Duran II or Clay - Sonny 1!!!

This content is protected

Cya in General

:good


P.S. Sonny

8-5 Holmes

 

If someone said "You're an idiot, ''you're lying'', or ''im right and you're wrong" after everything you said, and you eventually just decided to let it go, did they win the debate, or are you just not wasting your time? Also, its funny how you made up those odds. Provide the link. I was wacthing legendary nights last week and again, Holmes was the underdog. I wish this site had videos like the other boxing site, then i would prove you wrong, like i have been doing over and over again

 

Well i think you're just on here for a gee up to be honest, nobody (except Rooster) posts the rot you do while some how pretending to be serious.

Provide a link? I've got about 4 major publications bought personally in the lead up to the fight with the odds in good old black and white i don't need no little link. Excuses don't cut the mustard with me sorry.

Anyway, you said you won't be wasting time debating biased imbecils who can't follow your amazing facts and utterings so feel free to shuffle along, i've had my amusement for now. Such gems as Reid, Campas and co being great fighters, Cooney being fave over Holmes and Holmes being prime 15 years before he fought Tyson will sate my need for comedic relaxation for weeks.

For that i thank you

:good

 

8-5 Holmes, thanks JT :good

They really built up Cooney's chances. I suppose he was undefeated, and he could hit.

8-5 is kind of close. Maybe a late surge swung the line to favour Cooney ? I doubt it though.

 

I think you are the one who is biased, too call Tyson a good fighter and not a great fighter suggests maybe your personal bias against Mike Tyson has clouded your judgement, because no objective poster can sit there deny his greatness.

You sit there can give Sonny Liston leeway because he quit against Ali twice yet you fail to acknowledge Ali (then Clay) was a 6-1 underdog and was not even considered a threat to Liston. Nobody would have ever picked him to beat Sonny and it was expected that Liston would KO Ali rather desicively considering that Ali was vunerable to 1 punch KD's. Meanwhile that Tyson gets beat from pillar to post and manages to almost pull a come from behind win over Douglas and there's no leeway, he has no heart....right?

You give Holmes all the credit in the world for getting off the floor to win yet you fail to realize that in all fights in which he came off the floor to win he was already winning the fight. If Tyson had a lesser chin and was more vunerable to flash KDs there is a chance that he would have been dropped in the Ruddock and Bruno fights only to get up and win in the same manner.

Tillis was a 28 year old seasoned vet fighting an up and coming 19 year old prospect. Name any other HW Champion in history who you feel would have, at the age of 19, beaten Tillis more decisively.

Next where do you have Tyson your top 10 lists? Who do you have ahead of him?

For some perspective, take Tyson's 10 best wins and compare them to:

George Foreman's 10 best wins
Holyfield's
Frazier's
Liston's
Norton's
Louis's
Dempsey's
Marciano's
Holmes's
Lewis's

Identify the wins then compare the quality of opponent at the time they were beaten. Then for the dealbreaker compare the title reigns of your top 10 HW Champions to Tyson.

IF you can show me at least 20 people that rank ahead then I'll concede that he probably wasnt a great fighter.

 

tyson in a top 10 list...LOL...more likely 12-13!

 

So who do you have infront of Mike?

And for each name please indicate, briefly, why they are ahead.

 

1. Ali (Hate to say it but he is the best!)
2. Holmes
3. louis
4. Marciano
5. Foreman
6. Dempsey
7. Frazier
8. Lewis
9. Liston
10. Holyfield
11. Johnson
12. Tyson
13. Bowe
14. Patterson
15. Jeffries

I struggle to put him ahead of Bowe...instead of telling you why...tell me why not!

 

Slick might be getting mixed up with the odd "expert" poll where experts somehow picked Cooney overall. The odds were on Holmes in real betting.

 

For one thing Tyson UNIFIED the titles Bowe broke them up.

Tyson had 9 title fights Bowe had three before losing To holyfield in thier second fight

Tyson damn near cleared out the contenders of his first reign Bowe laft some big questions open.

Bowe obviously and clearly ducked Louis and ducked nearly every big puncher in his era ther is no clear instance of Tyson ducking anyone during his first reign.

Bowe was a vastly bigger waste of talent then Tyson ever was.

Bowe loses the Holyfield Trilogy and we would not be talking about him today.

 

Tyson did not attempt to clean up his division..hold... every time I deal with a hugger their is the tendancy to go overboard...It comes acroos that i hate him..i do not..No WAY is he top 5 and unlikely top 10...he has loses to Douglas and 2 to Holy that are worse than anything bowe has as well. I find them to be 2 very similar guys in that both had POTENTIAL to be top 5..but potential and reality are 2 different things...also Tyson ducked foreman...made ruddock wait LONg for his shot..and ducked Holy who should have had his shot right after Dokes..c'mon then he pulled out when he finally did...

 

Tyson fought anyone who wanted a fight and unlike Foreman never clearly ducked anyone.

There is no proof of Tyson Ducking Foreman and Tyson did fight Ruddock and gave him a beating twice.

The only thing Bowe has is barely winning the Holyfield trilogy beyond that he did'nt do a damn thing in his era.

Winning a title at 20 being the first and ONLY man to unify all the important titles of his era (which where broken up when one guy shamefully threw one belt in the thrashcan :yep )

Hell Tyson beat Golota in two rounds (Some other guy was beaten across the ring twice by the same Golota only to ''win'' by divine DQ intervention)

Though Golota was destroyed by every elite who fought him except that guy .

9 title fights

winning a title again in the 90s ( unlike another guy who never regained an important title after losing his titles) is a whole lot better then what Bowe ''achieved '' in his carreer.

Bowe loses the Holyfield trilogy and he becomes irrelevant.


Bowe is the biggest waste of talent of his era.

Tyson got ALOT more out of his talent in three years then Bowe did in his entire carreer.

 

yet he only has 1 loss to a great who beat tyson 2X's..and many (not me) would say he did not even lose that fight to Holy...Yes tyson did dodge those listed and while he did fight ruddock it was only sfter already making him wait...But I don't want to bash tyson, but i don't see anything on his resume that stands out to me a more dramatic fashion...than a loss to douglas...is he in your top top 25???top 50???? 100??? The loss to Douglas is a bigger stain than anything else Bowe has and Bowe also has 2 wins over the Holyfield that Tyson feared for years and then was destroyed by.