Mike Tyson - bully of bums?

The theory that Tyson won all his fights by intimidation has to be the stupidest theory in all of heavyweight boxing.

 

Is Klitschko's record better than Mike Tyson's?

 

Agree with most of your points but the fighters Wladimir Klitschko has beaten weren't as good as Anthony Joshua.
AJ is by far the best opponent Wlad ever had, but a lot of his opponents were on Joseph Parker level, his best win
is David Haye who was on the same level as Luis Ortiz in his prime, maybe a little bit better.

 

You are absolutely spot on and I have said basically the same thing for the past 20 years. The Mike Tyson of 1987-1988, the guy who knocked Michael Spinks out In 90 seconds could have fought any fighter from any era and been successful.

 

True. I think Joshua has the potential to be the next dominant champ. All the ingredient seems to be there.

 

A bully is someone like Vitali Klitscko. Using his size advantage to pick on smaller guys but then loses to the best guys he fought.

 

Tyson has such an interesting history. He was at his best during the mid to late 80's (Pre-DOuglas KO,) especially when he seemed very focused and career driven under the tutelage of Cus. It's unfortunate that during that period of time in the HW division, there was no real top tier fighters for him to be matched up against. HIs biggest name in the 80's was probably Holmes, who was several years past his prime and only came out of retirement for the payday. I don't count Spinks as he was a guy coming up in weight and really had no chance in that fight.

That Douglas fight was really brutal and Tyson took some kind of beating. I never thought he looked the same after that fight; his best performances post Douglas was probably against Razor Ruddock and Bruno. He just never looked like his usual menacing self after the Buster fight.

By the time he got out of prison, he wasn't shot but he was definitely past his prime. At that juncture, the HW talent pool was much better and he had the chance to finally meet up with Holyfield.

ANyway, I always wonder how the mid to late 80's version would've fared against the guys he lost to later on in his career. Lewis was still an amateur and Holyfield was campaiginign at the lighter weights.

 

When you are 6'7" pretty much anyone you fight is going to be smaller than you, genius.

 

the word bully being applied to a guy fresh out of high school against the biggest baddest men on the planet with several years experience over him and often four to five inches shorter than his opposition...

..is a word used by an idiot.


tysons problem wasnt his ability, he proved it time and again at the top level, it was his longevity and mindset. This is utterly crystal clear, I am not sure why anyone would question this, but trying to "big up calzaghe" is perhaps the worst and most misguided reason for this I could think of, mentioning no toni cliftons. I mean names.

 

Mike has a pretty decent resume.

 

Larry didn't have a huge belly.

He was in decent shape for that fight


Spinks wasn't tiny.

 

Thinking about it some more, I think he has a very good resume, especially if you consider the manner in which he won, and the fact that he was always at a size disadvantage.

Berbick
Tucker
Spinks
Holmes
Bruno
Ruddock

All of those wins were impressive.

 

Where as it wasn't the strongest era ever I don't think the guys Tyson beat in his first reign were exactly bums.
Guys like Tucker, Smith, Bruno, Thomas, Biggs and Berbick were more than respectable opposition.
Also that same Larry Holmes in the ensuing years was able to give Ray Mercer his first loss and take Holyfield the distance in a competitive world title fight.