Mike Tyson had a better title reign than Roberto Duran

This is the epitome of BoxRec scouting. You’re just staring at records and win-loss columns instead of actually looking at the fighters.

The thing you're ignoring is that Lightweight is a shark tank and Heavyweight is a kiddy pool. There are millions of 135lb men on Earth, while there’s maybe ten guys over 220lbs who can actually move their feet. To even get ranked in the top ten at LW, you need a level of skill and mastery that very few Heavyweights are even capable of. At HW, you just need to be big and have a pulse. That’s why guys like Bonecrusher or Tubbs, even though they were "top ten", were just stationary targets who wouldn't be top 50 in a division with actual depth.

You bring up Holmes and Spinks, but let's remember Holmes was 38, coming off a two-year layoff from his couch, and wasn't remotely prepared to fight. Spinks was a blown-up Light Heavyweight with shot knees who looked like he saw a ghost before the bell even rang. Neither of them comes close to a guy like Esteban De Jesus, who had more skill in his left big toe than Tyson’s entire resume combined.

Duran "struggled" because he was fighting guys who actually knew how to box. Tyson’s reign looks better on paper only because he was blasting dudes who didn't even know how to clinch or use a jab, yet were still somehow ranked. As soon as Tyson fought someone who wasn't scared and had a basic game plan (Douglas), he folded. Duran reigned for nearly a decade in the most competitive era of the deepest division in boxing history. It’s not even close.

 

I think both of them fought a fairly average set of challengers overall.
Duran won the title from a far superior fighter than Tyson did, and De Jesus would have been champ for a long time if not for Duran too.

 

Tyson's streak, roughly from Ferguson to Williams, is one of the best in boxing, certainly in the heavyweight division. It's hard to find anything as impressive... but in terms of his overall career, Duran is better!

 

You

Hush now!

 

It says Tubbs instead of Biggs. Also, a top ten comparison would give a better picture.

 

We just gonna pretend that Mike didn’t lose to his 42-1 underdog challenger?

Last I checked, Roberto handled his business when he fought massive underdogs.

So I’ll give Mr. Tyson a minus-10 for that one.

Roberto Duran’s lightweight reign >>>>>>>> Mike Tyson’s heavyweight reign.

Next time, include ALL the fights and all the facts.

 

You might want to check thr Kirkland Laing or Lawlor fight.

And I'm not sure if you're suggesting to skip the Ruddock fights, but those were a big deal.

 

You can't silence the truth!

 

Are you suggesting that the Laing and Ruddock fights fit into a discussion of their (initial) title reigns? Because neither Roberto nor Mike were champs when those fights happened, lol.

Duran very nearly killed Lampkin, put him in the hospital, so not sure what your point is there.

 

Mike himself would slap you for calling him greater than Duran. He'd laugh at you and tell you that he's nowhere close to Duran.

 

I meant Lawlor.

I'm suggesting that it makes more sense to compare Duran's run at 135 and 140 with Tyson's run until prison.

Not sure if Tokyo Douglas was actually worse than De Jesus either.

 

Tyson's title reign and overall resume of wins ARE underrated though. But Jesus Christ, you unnecessarily kill Mike's credentials putting him in this comparison.

 

You know, Lampkin is Scottish for "The kin of a lamp." I don't know if that changes your opinion or not but it certainly changes mine.

 

Flavor Flave also had a song about him.