He didn't wipe out Holyfield. But other than that, he beat everyone significant yes. Tyson defended the WBC belt 9 times, but only became linear champion after beating Spinks. He defended the lineair title twice after that, against Bruno and Williams. So it's 6 for Marciano and 2 for Tyson. Although Tyson beat more ranked contenders in his career than Marciano did, i think.
His run in the 80's was one of the best ever, no doubt. Those fighters are underrated due to how Tyson blasted many of them, a physical phenom and an ATG.
Prime motivated Tyson with Kevin Rooney in his corner, a full moon in the sky, an optimal red blood cell count, pre-prison, pre-Douglas, pre-Givens, post-Bonecrusher, 74 degrees outside but getting colder with a chance of rain is unstoppable
Like the originator of this thread, I have been watching a lot of "all-time great" fights lately - going back through the last 50 years or so. The fact is - he is right. If you take prime Tyson and put him against Marciano or anyone else, you can't even see them lasting 2 rounds with him. I am no huge Tyson fan. In fact I am a New Zealander and a Tua fan. But this guy is right. Prime Tyson absolutely destroys every ATG in my opinion - and with EASE for the most part. Just my opinion after watching many many fights. Kind regards, KIWI.
BTW - one of the saddest things in all boxing is that prime Tua never fought Tyson. What a WAR that would have been! KIWI
tyson was possibly the best version of a heavyweight fighter in history but not the greatest and f##ked his own career before he could build a legacy
I'm not particularly fond of Tyson. I'm not really fond of him at all, actually. And, I think any version of Tyson would probably have lost to Holyfield, or Lewis. Plus, I think Ali, Joe Louis, and possibly Sonny Liston could have beaten him, as well. But... His reign as heavyweight champion was damned impressive, and if he's not Top 10 (depends on the criteria one uses), then he's certainly Top 15. Great fighter at his best...and he would have been a challenge for any of the other great heavyweights.
Tyson made his 9 defenses in a 3 year span. Imagine how long it would take todays heavyweights to defend the title 9 times. Probably about 5 years.
atsch. Your conclusion is wrong. Tyson is so lucky because he is the only fighter in history to have the luxury to be considered passed his prime conveniantly before his first loss. MOst other boxers have their first loss and are then called exposed and hype jobs but tyson is "past his prime" and "in his prime is unbeatable". its a damn joke.
In the late 80's, Holyfield was coming on a heavyweight contender and beat some guys that Tyson also beat, like Thomas.
True dat...Mike had the right combination of speed,power and intensity to catch any heavweight. The only fighter...IMO...who had the best chance to beat him...albeit closely...is Muhammad Ali...the one who showed up for the first Liston fight...Tyson was gonna struggle to get to that Ali.Ali,at that stage,had probably the fastest hands of any heavyweigh ever...with combinations....and was just as fast with his feet..and had a chin to match. I could see Ali frustrating Tyson to a close UD.Ali's bragadocio would probably send Mike over the edge too...Probably punching Ali in the nuts or somethin' in frustration...leading to aDQ. Mike had the tools fo sho...Perhaps better than any heavyweight in his prime.